Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

desertdudeshj wrote:Sorry didn't address this in my first post

event horizon wrote:DD has already said that he believed it was a cruise missile that struck the Pentagon even though the evidence clearly shows a plane struck it.

What evidence ?

Ask Icenic, he has already said he no longer believes a cruise missile struck the Pentagon due to the evidence.

I'll come in to address whether another plane struck the Pentagon after a plausible explanation is given for the cloaking abilities of two large aircraft.

That you believe flight 77 was now shot down is worrying since no one has shown evidence of flight 77's debris field. In fact, this is the first time I've heard truthers argue that flight 77 was actually shot down somewhere.

The Pa. flight also had no debris field from a mid-air explosion and the black box shows that the terrorists flew the plane into the ground as the passengers began kicking at the cockpit door.

Tomahawk missile theory is debunked here:

dubai-politics-talk/topic-t44501-75.html#p358567

First you need to learn, this is an open forum and people can comment.So if you start a ridiculous thread, then you have to expect ridiculous answers.

Just because it's an open forum doesn't mean you can just go ahead and throw baseless mockery my way. Also, I don't see how this is a ridiculous thread. It's a thread discussing a matter of major controversy. If you accept the official story of 9/11 doesn't mean those who don't are ridiculous. There is a HUGE database composed of documentaries, articles, and full websites discussing this issue, so I think it is only fair to acknowledge the fact that millions of people don't agree with the official story. I don't care whether you change your opinion or not, I really don't, I just want to dig deeper into the topic. You brought up Ahmadinejad and compared me to him, and even insinuated that I don't believe the holocaust happened, just because I don't believe that 9/11 was an attack by terrorists. And why did you choose me out of everyone else in this thread who shares my opinion?

I'll go into it with a little more detail and try just to state very simple stuff

First off the this is the actual picture, which is almost always shown zoomed up real close attempting to make it bigger than it actually is, as even the most ill informed have a rough idea how big comercial aircraft engines are.

http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photol ... do?id=4414

click on download orginal pic on the page to see it full size. See how small that is ? Around two feet in diameter.

This is the size of an actual 757 engine



Anybody see any problems with the picture of the turbo prop found at the pentagon and and the picture above ?

Now compare that to this, debri from a tomahawk



and similar engines from missiles, you can use the flowers and flowerpots in the back and fore ground for reference to size



Also this is the actual hole created by a 124 ft wide and 44 feet tall 757 in the side of the pentagon



Also notice the how low the hole is on the ground, just the ground floor, for it to be that low the plane had to be skiding on the belly of it's fuselage and it would still hit the middle of the first floor and leaving the grass lawn in front all dug up.


Not to mention the unheard of pilot skill required for a 757 to be brought in so low ! By Hani Hanjour a hopless pilot who could not control a single engined Cessena let alone a 757. Also why did'nt it fly into the first chance he had instead he flew by it, did a 270 degree, diving turn ending at the bottom of the pentagon wall. Is akin to driving a grey hound bus at 200kph doing a almost 360 turning perfect skid passing through a tunnel with inches of clearance on both sides on four flat tyres. I don't think even the stig could do that let alone some one who had just a few hours of driving lessons on a moped !

Not to mention according to the law of science it is impossible due to a phenoma called ground effect for an aircraft with that wingspan and the speed it was said to be comming in to fly that low, impossible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_effect_in_aircraft

This is the size of an actual 757 engine

What is shown is a component of the engine:

Also this is the actual hole created by a 124 ft wide and 44 feet tall 757 in the side of the pentagon

Actually, this is a better picture of the hole left in the Pentagon wall:

http://www.oilempire.us/oil-jpg/pent-ri ... nnouw0.jpg

Anyways, I'm interested in what cruise missile knocked down the several light poles that obstructed flight 77 on its path to the Pentagon.

melika969 wrote:

JoeTGF wrote:Kanelli

For someone that is always advocating sensible discussion on these forums and an open mind you have shown that your approach is the exact opposite. You have brought in the holocaust, ahmadinejad and just repeated that you are not interested in conspiracy, etc. Nobody is denying the holocaust here, nobody is denying 911 happened and that thousands died, nobody is frankly even talking about that.

nopes, that was me! not her! dont need to blame it on her.
Again, I think this Icenic guy brings up stuff like this: oh look everyone! I found some resources on the "internet"!!! 9/11 was not a terrorist attack!

Just like what Ahmadinejad does in real world. (2010 New York)

So the next question will be:who believes in Holocaust?
(As Ahmadinejad asked, well maybe our president wanna be will have other questions)

Apologies K - I didn't pay attention to who brought it up.

Mel - I don't agree on Icenic - I have seen his posts on other threads and he seems pretty level headed and probably the most open to people's arguments - for one he is the only one that has even moderated his opinion on this thread. I don't think its fair or accurate to say that he just pulled this out of the internet and if you believe he did than you are probably unaware that there exists a large number of people that doubt the media fed story on 911 along with. If you are thinking that this just comprises of cooks than you would be wrong again as there is a large following of distinguished people and itellectuals along with a lot of the families of people that lost their lives in 911 and therefore probably care about the truth more than anyone.

Also whats this "so the next question will be" rubbish about the Holocaust. Nobody has mentioned the holocaust or questioned whether it took place. What you are doing intentionally or otherwise with this statement is to pigeon hole people that doubt the 911 story along with people that doubt the holocaust occured. This is truly below the belt.

Not in a million years I'll ever buy the 11/9 lie
The US regime/politicians are guilty for many disastors in the world.

It is claimed that it was the turbo prop of the engine, as you can see even in you cut away of the RB 211 engine and the PW 2000 I posted and the even the smallest internal turbine fans are much much bigger.

And thanks for thr netter pic of the pentagon impact site, makes it even more clearer to guage how 757 possibly cannot be responsible for that.


I really haven't looked at the very minute and generaly small details with much attention, like the passport issue brought up by Shaf or the light pole issue brought up by you. But I will look into it now, but one thing did always bug me about those were there are absolutely no marks of any kind on the grass where most of the poles were found.

Also that a building with a miliion cctvs internally and externally can offer 5 downed light poles of a commercial jet hitting it as the only physical evidence is also kind of also hard to swallow.

Also personal specualtion. That Jet liners carry almost all fuel in the wings and hitting poles weighing over 200 pounds atleast 5 times as claimed would have certainly ruptured resulting in a fireball much before it impacted with the pentagon wall. Or atleast leave a trail of jet fuel across the flight path. After all the the concord crashed after a small piece of debri on the runway pierced one of its fuel tank.



Anyway this is just pure specualtion on my part

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxGB2YoG ... r_embedded

These are the fire fighters on the scene, on the day who have lost friends and comrades. Maybe they've lost the plot too ? Or maybe just starting to get it ?

Insulting? Think about all the witnesses who stated what they saw only for the conspiracy theorists to come along and accuse them of lying as part of a government conspiracy. That's pretty insulting.

Some of you seem pretty accepting of explanations of 9/11 that no decent scientist would ever accept using scientific method. Maybe that speaks to the level of science education and critical reasoning ability out there.

(But hey, I've been guilty of that myself with medical issues. Am trying to smarten up.)

What are the sources of the pictures? I like the one with the airplane and the pentagon - is that one in proper scale or do you just take the creator's word for it?

It is claimed that it was the turbo prop of the engine, as you can see even in you cut away of the RB 211 engine and the PW 2000 I posted and the even the smallest internal turbine fans are much much bigger.

No, it's claimed that what you see in the picture is either a turbine disk hub or compressor disk hub.

The two components are 27" and 25" in diameter, respectively. Which matches the approximate size of the engine component seen in the photo.

If you checked the image of the engine I posted, you can see the internal compartment of the engine where both are at.

And thanks for thr netter pic of the pentagon impact site, makes it even more clearer to guage how 757 possibly cannot be responsible for that.

Yes, a cruise missile is going to punch a ninety foot wide hole in the Pentagon wall.

We're going back to Silverstein level of stupidity now.

Standard practice of aircraft that trespass into military aerospace require identification, when they are not identified , fighters are sent out to check out the situation , if they are hostile they will be engaged , Now how can a civilian aircraft enter the aerospace above the pentagon ? with no one saying a word ? That's the part that stumps me the most ,

zubber wrote:Standard practice of aircraft that trespass into military aerospace require identification, when they are not identified , fighters are sent out to check out the situation , if they are hostile they will be engaged , Now how can a civilian aircraft enter the aerospace above the pentagon ? with no one saying a word ? That's the part that stumps me the most ,

Not quite accurate.

MATZ (Military Air Traffic Zones) are clearly marked on all air navigation charts however are not all active 24/7 depending when ATC is manned. Military exclusion zones are similarly only activated when in use and these are notified using NOTAMS to all civil operators. A MATZ is normally a round cylinder of airspace extending from ground level to 3500 feet agl and has a 'panhandle' extending in the directions of approach. The airspace under the panhandle is free.

Exclusion zones tend to be over or around live firing sites or centres of high activity, which also tend to be in pretty remote areas. The Pentagon is not a total exclusion zone and I believe it actually sits within the TMA (Terminal Maneuvering Area) of Dulles International and aircraft can be routed over it if needed by ATC, albeit at high level. A pilot diverting from a given heading within this area would be queried by ATC first and it would take some time to divert any military aircraft to investigate. Pilots often stray from an exact course as aircraft don't run on rails or, contrary to popular belief, are all equipped with modern automated navigation systems.

When inactive, military zones are under VFR (Visual Flight Rules) and civil aircraft are allowed access. The general rule of thumb for pilots transiting military airspace is known as the 'Fag Packet' rule: ie. Entering here could be harmful to your health!

I am sure a civil airline pilot will be able to give you the full rules. I am but a mere UK CAA PPL(B)



Knight

^^ I stand corrected .

Joe, thank you for you words.I have indeed done my best to moderate my opinion since this is a sensitive issue, although almost everyone who opposes me has mocked mine from the start. Maybe using "B.S." in the title of the thread was wrong of me, and for that I apologize.

no decent scientist would ever accept using scientific method.

What do you base that statement on? Are you speaking on behalf of all scientists out there?

-- Wed Dec 15, 2010 9:05 am --

Also, why are we so intent on blaming this on Muslim terrorists? They've never been know to have any experience in flight since they have no planes to begin with! I believe if this truly is the work of terrorists, then it is the Japanese with their Kamikaze pilots!!

(Just attempting to lighten up the mood, of accusations intended!)

As one now watching from the sidelines - this is a most interesting thread.

Both sides (and those now sitting on the fence) are giving their views and providing evidence for their views. Both sides have plausible interpretations of the evidence out there - and both sides have questions which they have no answers to (quite understandably).

I would only recommend that people think twice before launching ad hominem (personal) attacks - whether directly or veiled. It weakens your argument, so does you no favours. Play the ball my friends, play the ball.

Cheers,
Shafique

JoeTGF wrote:

melika969 wrote:

JoeTGF wrote:Kanelli

For someone that is always advocating sensible discussion on these forums and an open mind you have shown that your approach is the exact opposite. You have brought in the holocaust, ahmadinejad and just repeated that you are not interested in conspiracy, etc. Nobody is denying the holocaust here, nobody is denying 911 happened and that thousands died, nobody is frankly even talking about that.

nopes, that was me! not her! dont need to blame it on her.
Again, I think this Icenic guy brings up stuff like this: oh look everyone! I found some resources on the "internet"!!! 9/11 was not a terrorist attack!

Just like what Ahmadinejad does in real world. (2010 New York)

So the next question will be:who believes in Holocaust?
(As Ahmadinejad asked, well maybe our president wanna be will have other questions)

Apologies K - I didn't pay attention to who brought it up.

Mel - I don't agree on Icenic - I have seen his posts on other threads and he seems pretty level headed and probably the most open to people's arguments - for one he is the only one that has even moderated his opinion on this thread. I don't think its fair or accurate to say that he just pulled this out of the internet and if you believe he did than you are probably unaware that there exists a large number of people that doubt the media fed story on 911 along with. If you are thinking that this just comprises of cooks than you would be wrong again as there is a large following of distinguished people and itellectuals along with a lot of the families of people that lost their lives in 911 and therefore probably care about the truth more than anyone.

Also whats this "so the next question will be" rubbish about the Holocaust. Nobody has mentioned the holocaust or questioned whether it took place. What you are doing intentionally or otherwise with this statement is to pigeon hole people that doubt the 911 story along with people that doubt the holocaust occured. This is truly below the belt.

Still I think he pulled it out of the internet, based on his arguments.

I am 'indeed' aware of people who believes it was not a terrorist attack, one of them is Ahmadinejad!

"the next question will be" was a guess, as I said "maybe" or "maybe not", as they are people and they are books can "prove" holocaust didn't happen. And yes some of them doubt the 911 story as well, for example, Ahmadinejad!
you might see his posts moderate, I don't! so please stop tryin to make me think like you.

and K, I totally agree with you about insulting.

you might see his posts moderate, I don't!

Which one? Other than the reply to your mockery, that is.

I'll just sit back and let you experts explain your in-depth knowledge about US aviation, architecture, engineering, physics, US government, world politics etc. to educate us on how all aspects of 9/11 were a huge US government conspiracy.

symmetric wrote:Not in a million years I'll ever buy the 11/9 lie
The US regime/politicians are guilty for many disastors in the world.

Symmetric - can you share how/why you came to this conclusion? I support it but it interesting to find out why people stopped believing the initial media story.

shafique wrote:As one now watching from the sidelines - this is a most interesting thread.

Both sides (and those now sitting on the fence) are giving their views and providing evidence for their views. Both sides have plausible interpretations of the evidence out there - and both sides have questions which they have no answers to (quite understandably).

I would only recommend that people think twice before launching ad hominem (personal) attacks - whether directly or veiled. It weakens your argument, so does you no favours. Play the ball my friends, play the ball.

Shaf - could not agree more - nice to have a debate without personal attacks or people labelling those that doubt 911 as jew haters which is clearly not the case.

-- Wed Dec 15, 2010 11:34 am --

Mel -

I am not looking to change your mind and you are perfectly entitled to your opinion. I am just saying that I didn't see why Icenic came across as someone that has not looked a this in detail - in fairness anyone looking at this thread can clearly see that he doesn't lack information about the events. I don't want you to think like me but lets not label people that doubt 911 as holocaust deniers or anti-semetic because there is no correlation. By brining up the holocaust in the same post thats effectively what you are doing. Better to participate in a discussion about the topic itself.

J,
Now you are doing the labeling, Ahmadinejad is not a jew hater, he just can not believe Holocaust happened.

melika969 wrote:J,
Now you are doing the labeling, Ahmadinejad is not a jew hater, he just can not believe Holocaust happened.

I think Joe was refereing to my earlier remark about Zionist conspiracies and that the majority of DF forumers are anti-semites, when mentioning jew haters and anti-semites, not your post about Ahmadinejad.

desertdudeshj wrote:Not to mention according to the law of science it is impossible due to a phenoma called ground effect for an aircraft with that wingspan and the speed it was said to be comming in to fly that low, impossible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_effect_in_aircraft

> Low fly by 757 , Couple of 100 feet of the ground

-> Low flyby by supersonic aircraft ( irrelevant to this thread , but the Ground Effect Law has exceptions) -> S1CK VIDEO

JoeTGF wrote: lets not label people that doubt 911 as holocaust deniers or anti-semetic because there is no correlation.

There is quite a strong correlation.

Flying Dutchman wrote:

JoeTGF wrote: lets not label people that doubt 911 as holocaust deniers or anti-semetic because there is no correlation.

There is quite a strong correlation.

There exists no study that has been carried out on this phenomenon , therefore it is still a theory.

I think the comparison that denying the official events of 9/11 and denying the official events of the holocaust are similar - each has a huge volume of evidence supporting the official events but there are still those out there finding any scrap of info to turn into evidence of a conspiracy saying otherwise.

kanelli wrote:I think the comparison that denying the official events of 9/11 and denying the official events of the holocaust are similar

Similar in terms of the fact that conflicting information has given the rise to the need for further investigation

each has a huge volume of evidence supporting the official events

The evidence that exist are both For and Against , in terms of weightage they are more or less equal, this is why a consensus hasn't been reached, ie., open for debate

but there are still those out there finding any scrap of info to turn into evidence of a conspiracy saying otherwise.

The objective of investigating any matter that has no consensus , is to arrive at one, since it doesnt exist, it is open for interpretation/analysis/further investigation.

ps- Conspiracies come into being , when there is a lack of transparency .

kanelli wrote:I think the comparison that denying the official events of 9/11 and denying the official events of the holocaust are similar - each has a huge volume of evidence supporting the official events but there are still those out there finding any scrap of info to turn into evidence of a conspiracy saying otherwise.

Common Kanelli - you have to be kidding me right? The only similarity is that different people are denying different things. There is no affiliation between one group or the other - I very much doubt that the jewish contingent of 911truth.org are denying the holocaust occured nor do I think they are anti-semitic. The quest for finding out the truth behind 911 is unrelated to the jewish people or the iranian pres. We are just discussing the events and the anomolies of 911 - can't you see that?

zubber wrote:

desertdudeshj wrote:Not to mention according to the law of science it is impossible due to a phenoma called ground effect for an aircraft with that wingspan and the speed it was said to be comming in to fly that low, impossible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_effect_in_aircraft

> Low fly by 757 , Couple of 100 feet of the ground

-> Low flyby by supersonic aircraft ( irrelevant to this thread , but the Ground Effect Law has exceptions) -> S1CK VIDEO

There are a few fundamental problems with those videos.

The most significant of these effects is known as the wing in ground (WIG) effect, which refers to the reduction in drag experienced by an aircraft as it approaches a height approximately equal to the aircraft's wingspan above ground or other level surface, such as the sea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_effect_in_aircraft

Aswell as speed being a major factor, more the speed more the effect. NTSB released figures of the black box recording of the 757 say it was traveling at well over 400 knots ( much above that the actual maximum velocity of a 757 at almost ground level. See pilots for 911 truth. org for the detailed explanations why cruise speed at altitude and sea level vary greatly ) i.e wingspan of 757 roughly 120ft so around 60 ft at over 400 knots. Being so low as to clip light poles it is said to be much much lower.

The video of the 757 it is far from cruise speed, even to the untrained viewer it is eveident it is very slow almost landing approach speed. See how long the 757 is in the field of view at cruise speed it travels almost a mile a second, does that look like mile a second to you ? Also in the last little faster fly by it well above 60 ft. Do a rough mental reference if it pitched 90 degrees would the wing clip the ground ?

Also do you think even these maneuvers demostrated in the video be possible by a pilot like Hani Hanjour. Like said before somone who could not even fly a single engine Cessena properly. Not only that the NTSB released flight path says it flew past the pentagon turned around then flew past it again did a 230/60 ish degree decending turn leveled off at under 60 ft for a few miles accelerated to over 400 knots while flying NOE ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nap-of-the-earth ) and smashed at the first floor the pentagon.

This is what is called precsion flying and done in agile jet fighters and helicopters by very experienced pilots not back yard flying school flunkies.

JoeTGF, read my post again and don't confuse my point with melikas.

event horizon wrote:
Yes, a cruise missile is going to punch a ninety foot wide hole in the Pentagon wall.

This is a picture of the Rashid Hotel in Baghdad hit by a cruise missle during the first gulf war



Now compare it with the picture you yourself posted of the pentagon.

Also keep in mind, warheads on these things can be changed and fuses delayed according to the structure they are aimed at. A bunker buster for example has a delayed fuse, meaning the delepeted uranium tipped warhead will literaly burn a hole through walls, not punch through with momentum and will only exploded once it has breached the bunker and not explode on impact leaving the very small entrance hole while ripping everything inside. Thats just one example.

I can give you that it could be the compressor or the turbine disks, but still the fan blades of those are made of titanium ( very hard to melt or disintregrated and made to withstand anything from bird strikes to very large chunks of ice ) and there are two engines on a 757 nothing but a that survived ? Also the entire amount of werckage found at the pentagon and be put on the back of a small pick up ? No luggage pieces, no seats, landing gear other that few twisted but relatively small and unchared supposed pieces of the fuselage and one compressor or turbine and maybe a combustion outer case.