Way OT, but VERY Interesting!

Mike,

The thing I wonder about is why they've never, as far as I know, released any video or pictures of the plane hitting the Pentagon. Lots of pictures of the Twin Towers being hit have been ciculated, but none of the Pentagon. It can't be said there wasn't any video or pics. I mean we're talking about one of the most protected buildings in the World. There's has to be tons of video surveillance of that building from all angles, day, night, 24/7 & 365...366 on leap years. Show me a pic, somebody.

Something after the big bang? This doesn't show anything of value to this discussion.

I've tried this in both IE and mozilla. neither will load and play it.

I see nothing of the kind in the photos. I see an explosion. I don't see an aircraft turning completely into dust and vapor. A photo of what's left would be needed for that.

How? what would grate a ductile material into confetti? I have found one photo online of a piece of aircraft that bounced off, as I stated should happen to at least some of it.

I would expect a fair amount of this type of sizable material or larger that wasn't in the fire. Also, even in the heart of the fire, components such as significant parts of the engines should be present. More photos:

Physics does not support the entire plane turning into vapor and dust.

I've see it elsewhere.

haven't seen anything to support that via the poles. What bothers me, wrt width is:

looking at the building, There should be some wing material thatdid not enter the building. I think I see some plane material on the far left of: the yellow truck, just poking into view.

CNN has a complete record of _all_ witnesses?

I took it in it's usual usenet meaning, a tactic of debate.

It should be released to explain inconsistancies. Government hiding stuff leads to people filling in the blanks.

No! Dennis

03 GT Black

You gotta think of the source for most of that documentation....the government! Whether it be city, county, or federal, the preponderance of the video documentation is owned by the government and was filmed by government cameras on government property. Of course we the common public don't have access to it. It's technically evidence for an ongoing investigation (and war). Evidence of a crime is not normally paraded about for everyone to see, it's protected and harbored against the "day of judgment" that will be coming for the bastards responsible. And for my soap box- Anyone out there who REALLY thinks that Kerry is gonna pursue this war to completion is an uninformed moron. A "more sensitive war on terror". WTF is he talking about. I never heard of a "sensitive" war. War is us killing more of them than they kill of us, until they give up! Just ask any veteran or AD Member of the DOD!

Of course it does. It shows what happens to an aircraft when hitting a hardened structure. Granted, it's not a plane hitting the Pentagon but there is some similarities between them. It shows that an airplane can be pulverized in a high speed collision.

I remember that 60 Minutes or 20/20 did a segment on this experiment several years ago. The video doesn't show the debris but they did on that program. Most people wouldn't have been able to tell it was debris from a jet crash. It looked like it went through a car shredder. It stuck in my mind because the concrete block was hardly damaged.

This picture doesn't support a conspiracy theory.

I have no doubts that parts of the engine, among other parts, were found in larger pieces in the building. Especially those pieces that escaped the fire. All the pictures on the page you linked further disproves a conspiracy theory.

I never said it did turn to completely to dust. Most of it went into the building and probably melted in the fire. Do you see that the pictures in the web pages you linked help to disprove this conspiracy theory?

A missle or jetfighter wouldn't take out several light poles, if any. Once again this doesn't support anything other than a large airliner hitting the building.

Honestly, trying to draw any conclusions from these two pictures would be a stretch. The first one was obviously taken well after the crash and it's likely any large pieces would have been removed by then. The second has so much fire retardent sprayed around that you can't identify much of anything.

I doubt it but they have several and they are just one news organization. Are they part of the conspiracy too?

The cameras in question are the military's and it doesn't surprise me that they haven't released video. They are also being sensitive to the families that lost loved ones in the crash. Really, this conspiracy theory is "off the charts" crazy. I guess some people would have to be standing in the widow that the nose of the plane flew through before they would believe it was a 757.

Far be it for me to second guess what level of force they should have used. They might not have known with 100% surity that they were in the house. I don't have any issues with them being killed. I also don't think many Iraqis did either. The one thing that blows a big gaping hole in this conspiracy theory is that Saddam was captured ALIVE. Now why would we kill his sons and leave him alive? Why are so many in the infamous deck of playing cards still alive? The nice thing about conspiracy theories is they evidently don't have to be consistent, logical or be supported by any credible evidence.

Don't get me started on the WMD issue. I can't prove they had them any more than you can prove they didn't have them. I guess we're even. For me personally, I never cared if he had stockpiles of WMD's when we attacked. He had them before we invaded because he used them. He could also whip up a fresh batch any time he wanted. We know he had the capability. I am convinced that sooner or later he would become a major threat to this country either directly or indirectly. It will take

10-20 years before the end of this story is written. Only then will we know if this war was worth fighting.

snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote in news:WVQZc.227814$8_6.170482@attbi_s04:

My brother told me it's all embroiled in legal red tape due to the lawsuits. Billions of dollars are at stake.

Joe Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC

Maybe some day I will tell you about the*Patriots Win the Super Bowl* conspiracy theory.

Don Manning

You have a picture of an explosion. Not what's left afterwards.

I've seen a melted and rehardened blob of aluminium alloy mixed in with the dirt and rocks at a crash site that had been cleaned up and graded with earth moving equipment and could still tell it came from an aircraft. So I am not your average bear... (chared carbon fiber emmbedded in it was a dead give away)

ARG! I am trying to DISCUSS THIS and support my view that airplane bits should be out on the lawn, should have survived the fire, etc, not to support a conspiracy theory! We are back at the elvis comment.

To discuss this, requires searching things out. My belief is that there should be airplane parts out on the lawn. This photo *GASP* shows an airplane part on the lawn, supporting my view. That's why I mention it.

Ahh... so now you agree that that pieces should have survived. Thusly if our government didn't keep everything it could secret alot of problems in this regard could be avoided.

I am not supporting a conspiracy theory. I am looking into something. I have a view that states, if aircraft of that size, parts should be on the lawn, and should have survived. So I have sought out proof of that, that's what's in the pictures linked to. If you are going to keep doing this, there's no point to it.

Your whole line has been everything gone, nothing indentifiable. Should I go back and quote you? That the photos in the flash presentation are exactly what one would expect, nothing on the lawn, the whole plane in the building and no surprise nothing being being found. That's the line you took against the flash presentation. That the photos were normal. My view is that they aren't normal. And I found out why, creative people taking what they wanted and deleting what didn't fit their view.

Three strikes. You're out.

You can't discuss this without labeling, without this line of thinking that because I disagree with you, I must believe the whole thing. I only believe that there should be parts on the lawn and parts that survived. Those pictures prove what I believe. Which means the flash presentation is as manipulitive as a michael moore movie.

Now THAT I might believe.

[Snipped]

Kinda odd that a no chance team called "The Patriots" wins the Super Bowl right after 9/11 don't ya think?

Don Manning

I question the circumstances of anything used as an excuse to reduce our liberty. I believe they require close examination because we cannot just trust our government. I am undecided if there is something more behind the events of 11-sep-2001. I'll examine various ideas. The flash presentation in this thread is clearly misrepresenting the situation.

I believe the premise, that if it's a jet liner there should be parts on the lawn. The presentation falsely claims there were no pieces on the lawn.