Kevin's Watch

Anybody seen this yet?

www.pentagonstrike.co.uk/flash.htm#Main

Mods, feel free to move this to the appropriate forum in a few days (dunno if it goes better in the Tank or the X-Forum).

I watched it. Very freaky. I can make an argument that half of it is crap ... but only half.

Wayfriend wrote:... but only half.

Yeah, it's that half that's disturbing.

This seems to have been out for about 2 yrs?

Conspiracy Theories Flourish on the Internet

Signs of the Times "Pentagon Strike" Makes Waves In Washington

That was weird.

Just got it sent to me today. I don't usually keep up.

See, the funny thing is that I always did wonder why the destruction there was so minimal... but the idea that this is a conspiracy doesn't fly with me. I just want to know the physics behind the extent of the destruction... and where those damned wings went.

Many people saw a plane go down, so it's not as though a missile was flown. And I seem to recall an engineer discusssing what happened with the wings.

maybe the wings were really missiles.....

No. Many witnesses saw a plane come down, and there's evidence the left wing cut a swathe through the ground before the plane rammed the Pentagon. Because the wings contained fuel, and because the material is light, the explosion tore the wings apart.

There's a 9/11 Conspiracy thread in the X-Files place with this video in it somewhere.

Interesting video... always makes me depressed to watch it though.

If you look at this:

www.911inplanesite.com/

This is the investigation that the link you've put, Alynna, is based on. I was up near midnight toward the end of last year and this documentary came on. It was probably one of the most "bizarre" things I've ever seen. Takes a lot to convince me, but I have to say this guy had some very interesting points.

A summary of the program is on this page

www.911inplanesite.com/911synopsis.html

This story is bunk, as the people who made the thing plainly have no idea of what happens to an airframe under that kind of force. Basically the metal vaporises, which is why so little wreckage was found. I'll bet no aircraft parts were ever found at Ground Zero either.

For a demonstration of what happens to a plane that meets an immovable object at high speed, check out this video of a Phantom jet being flown on a rail into a concrete block. The only parts of the plane recovered were the wingtips, which missed the block and carried on going.

oh Nav...don't be so smug. it's not becoming.


video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-51375 ... ose+change



here...here's the longer better film regarding this and other 9/11 issues.

Nav wrote:For a demonstration of what happens to a plane that meets an immovable object at high speed, check out this video of a Phantom jet being flown on a rail into a concrete block. The only parts of the plane recovered were the wingtips, which missed the block and carried on going.

That was sweet. Dunno how the Pentagon's walls compare with that concrete, but now the physics makes more sense in my head. Thanks.

I've watched the first 20 minutes of that and I still think there's little that points to a conspiracy.

The documentation featuring with the WTC on it doesn't mean much; not only was it a symbolic building, but there had already been at least one attempt to blow it up at that point. Plus Al Qaeda chose those buildings because they knew the tress structure would be vulnerable to such an attack, so I'm sure the US Government were aware of that as well. It's quite a coincidence that the pilot had participated in the Pentagon exercise, but a lot of military pilots join commercial airlines after they leave the forces.

To compare the Pentagon crash with the Helios Airways one is ridiculous. There's a big difference between hitting a vertical, concrete surface and a hill at a 35 degree angle. The ground itself would absorbed much more energy and a lot would've been deflected up the hill, hence the presence of recognisable aircraft parts (notably the tail, which should've been the last part of the plane to strike the surface). Incidences of jets flying smack into buildings are very rare though, the Phantom video is the closest representation I've seen. The Government's claim that the airframe was vaporized by the fire is interesting though, as the impact itself would've done that before the fire had really started. The parts of the aircraft I would expect to find would be bits of the landing gear and some of the toughest engine parts. It's a bit odd that they only found one turbine, but there are plenty of ways the other could have been destroyed. I also assume that the scrap of fuselage they found at the Pentagon was a part that passed over the top of the building and would've been sheared off rather than ripped off by an explosion, depends where they found it though.

There are a few things about the 9/11 attacks that I have always thought were a odd though, namely that the WTC and Pentagon strikes would require exceptional flying on the part of the hijackers. Especially when we're led to believe that flight 93 crashed because the hijackers lost control whilst rolling the plane to subdue the passengers. There are some things about that day that are never going to quite stack up, but that's the nature of catastrophic events. Conspiracy theories always need to be met with a healthy amount of skepticism though, as it's all to easy to make rumours and half-facts seem compelling like that. I know we all like to bash the Bush administration, but if there were actually any substance to a conspiracy on this scale, surely the opposition would have the government impeached in a heartbeat?

Good points, sir.

we shall see what we shall see in the long run...time will tell.

i hope you are right Nav.

Me too; if I'm wrong then it really doesn't bear thinking about.

if you're wrong, we're up a sh*t creek without a paddle.

Well, if he's wrong, it's already happened anyway. You're no worse off than you are not knowing about it.

Me, I'm a cynic. I know how "handy" it is for something like that to happen to ailing or unpopular governments. Nothing like an enemy to make the doubters rally round.

*shrug*

I don't really think it was deliberate. Not really. But...I'm a cynic.

--A