Author Topic: Where' the Boeing.....? (Read 4847 times)

big medicine · « **Reply #30 on:** June 20, 2005, 03:56:19 PM »

When I was stationed at the Marine Corps Mountain Warfare Training Center in the Sierra Nevadas there was a F-18 that went down. Since no trace of the plane was found there were all kinds of rumors about the pilot skipping the country and selling the plane to the Russians ect ect. It made me sick to my stomach to hear all that. There were countless hours of searches and nothing was found. Then about two years after the loss what was left of it was found. It hit a mountain top at god knows how fast. There isnt much left of an aircraft when it hits a solid object. Your talking about a beer can wraped around a flimsy frame. Part of one of the engines was found over 2 miles away. So did the twin towers really get hit by planes or was it staged and faked film footage to doop the unsuspecting public? One of my patients was on an aircraft carrier ( he told me before but I have forgotten which one ) that picked up one of the Apollo craft. I believe him.

SAWgunner · « **Reply #31 on:** June 20, 2005, 04:38:02 PM »

You have no reason not to believe him, because he did pick them up, but that dosen't mean that he wasn't tricked also. Do any of you understand how much we deceive the rest of the world on a daily basis just to make the world go round? All of these men that were part of that program are/were honorable and probably very good men, but that does not make them invincible to deception. Remember all of the Army guys out in the desert that were told that "It isn't harmful be seriously close to an atomic explosion..." , or remember the testing of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) on unsuspecting individuals by the Central Intelligence Agency during the early sixties (project MK-ULTRA) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MKULTRA ...as I recall several of the sicentists involved in the project were given the drug without their knowledge (and one comitted suicide while under the influence, which prompted a congressional hearing about the doings of the CIA (on the same note, the government had to pay his widow money). None of this is a huge secret, gentlemen, it is all out there for the reading.

SAWgunner

ironglow · « **Reply #32 on:** June 20, 2005, 04:59:37 PM »

Well shucks !
I heard that the moon is made of green cheese anyway...

As far as the other conspiracies...planes that don't demolish hardened buildings, ..our government faking the twin towers attack on 9/11 and all those other dastardly , underhanded tricks the Republican/ Conservatives are accused of......they MUST be true !!!

After all; ...Micheal Moore said they were...

seriously...concerning the moon landing...I'm with Big medicine on that one...I'll take his word ahead of the rumor mongers..

Let's face it guys, there is a sizeable segment of our citizenship that ddo their best to try to run down their own home country..

I truly believe there are many liberals that would like to see us withdraw from Iraq...theywould just as soon see fifty million Iraqis go back under tyranny...
...just so they and their French buddies can say " I told you so "

When some of our troops are killed there , they can hardly conceal their glee...

Then we have senators like DIP Durbin...doing his best to give aid and comfort to the enemy, while he calls our troops the equivqlent of the Gestapo that ran Hitler's death camps...

I see his actions as dispicable and beneath the dignity of the lowest of our citizens....say nothing about a senator... but he apparently has no shame...

IntrepidWizard · « **Reply #33 on:** June 20, 2005, 05:15:31 PM »

WE ARE IN THE RIGHT WAR,AT THE RIGHT TIME,IN THE RIGHT PLACE, WITH THE RIGHT PEOPLE FOR THE RIGHT REASON.PERIOD

SAWgunner · « **Reply #34 on:** June 20, 2005, 05:46:34 PM »

Quote from: IntrepidWizard

WE ARE IN THE RIGHT WAR,AT THE RIGHT TIME,IN THE RIGHT PLACE, WITH THE RIGHT PEOPLE FOR THE RIGHT REASON.PERIOD

Agreed.

SAWgunner

unspellable · « **Reply #35 on:** June 21, 2005, 02:47:19 AM »

On one of the Apollo missions the guys placed a corner reflector on the surface of the moon. Any body who wants to go to the effort can bounce a radio wave off of it and prove it's there. This is common knowledge in the amatuer radio community.

You cannot see the lander fron Earth with a telescope because the Earth's atmosphere blurs the image and limts resolution to about twenty feet. Viewing the lander with a telscope would have to be done from orbit so as to eliminate the atmosphere from the sight line.

As for the damage at the Pentegon I have seen very detailed and very believable explanations of the dynamics of the crash which covered all the points raised by the doubters. The problem is, I can't remeber where I found it.

magooch · « **Reply #36 on:** June 21, 2005, 04:10:56 AM »

Dip Durbin--how appropriate. I like it, Ironglow. These guys just can't contain themselves. They are really good at exposing their true colors.

Brett · « **Reply #37 on:** June 21, 2005, 05:36:02 AM »

The Discovery Channel program Myth Busters did a segment on the moon landing which ansered many of the questions the sceptics bring up. They were convinced that the moon landing really took place. Oh, maybe they too were payed off by the Government. :eek: :roll:

IntrepidWizard · « **Reply #38 on:** June 21, 2005, 05:45:57 AM »

Folks love conspiracy and if one does not exist will make one up,when most answers are straitforward and simple.

SAWgunner · « **Reply #39 on:** June 21, 2005, 08:49:14 AM »

Woo Weee!!! it is getting hot in here. Man, I don't remember making this a personal vendetta, but if you insist. If you will notice the avatar next to my name is the Military Intelligence isignia for hte U.S. Army. Having been involved in the intelligence community for a better part of a decade, I am pretty sure that I am one of the few in here knowledgable enough to speak on the matter of government cover-ups and lies.

Quiz time,

1. Why is it that us in the Intel Community are referred to as spooks?

2. Why would you give someone in this community TOP Secret/SCI clearances if there are no secrets?

People, I never said that an aircraft did not hit the Pentagon, I am just asking thayou look beyond the obvious. I am positive that an aircraft hit the building, as a matter of fact. But someone messed up and tried to tell me that the governement dosen't cover up things and dosen't lie. Please, this is where i have to draw the line and throw the ignorance flag.

SAWgunner

mamerch · « **Reply #40 on:** June 21, 2005, 09:13:44 AM »

because the general public is under the impression that IC folks are all spies do the old sneak and peek, when in reality this is far from the truth. There are literally tens of thousands of military and civilians in the US IC who aren't spooks. All they do is look at pictures, listen to dit's and dah's, translate voice and written languages and other nitnoid crap. Only one in probably 5000 have any "spook" at all to there job...

SAWgunner · « **Reply #41 on:** June 23, 2005, 05:43:49 AM »

Quote from: mamerch

because the general public is under the impression that IC folks are all spies do the old sneak and peek, when in reality this is far from the truth. There are literally tens of thousands of military and civilians in the US IC who aren't spooks. All they do is look at pictures, listen to dit's and dah's, translate voice and written languages and other nitnoid crap. Only one in probably 5000 have any "spook" at all to there job...

You hit the nail right on the head, but I am willing to bet that One in 5000 is probably a little conservative.

Num_1_Dad · « **Reply #42 on:** June 25, 2005, 02:31:26 AM »

Quote from: mamerch

The whole thing about the plane hitting the Pentagon is crap. It happened.
Wings in airplanes are made of aluminum not steel. The walls of the Pentagon are thick. Not just brick. The section that was hit had just been rebuilt specifically to withstand an attack. It had been "hardened" as we say.

mamerch

Not arguing, just stating my opinion:
How, if the building is "hardened" did a hole get punched thru, and that far in? If heard "engine", but there where 2 on the plane, correct? So why only 1 hole?

Num_1_Dad · « **Reply #43 on:** June 25, 2005, 02:33:07 AM »

Quote from: IntrepidWizard

http://www.wanttoknow.info/9-11cover-up10pg

Nice link, very interesting.

Have you seen this one?:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/quickindex/

IntrepidWizard · « **Reply #44 on:** June 25, 2005, 04:44:32 AM »

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/pentagon_photos_911.html

IntrepidWizard · « **Reply #45 on:** June 25, 2005, 04:52:58 AM »

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/pentagon_photos_911.html

Graybeard · « **Reply #46 on:** June 25, 2005, 11:01:18 AM »

My, my, just which and how many of these "eye witness" accounts are we to believe? They contradict each other all over the place. Either someone is lying or grossly mistaken in what they saw. Which? I have no clue.

But reading them only reenforces my opinion we've not heard the TRUTH yet. Until someone can explain the lack of even a scratch from the wings and tail section to me I've got to believe a passenger jet didn't make the hole in the above photo. The accounts are so different in their descriptions of the events I have to wonder how much someone paid them to make those up. Fit right in with Mother Goose me thinks.

I still wonder if a plane was headed to the Pentagon but was shot down by missles from USAF jets and one of the missles that missed hit the Pentagon and made the hole before the remains of the jet fell to earth in the general area. Seems as plausible to me as the mixture of conflicting stores I read from the "eye witnesses.

I dunno. I've just not seen anything convincing or read it yet to tell me the official story is truthful. I'm hard headed and hard to convince when all evidence I see says it's not truthful.

IntrepidWizard · « **Reply #47 on:** June 25, 2005, 12:06:51 PM »

Where did the plane crash without anybody seeing it,also from the film you see fuel burning.

powderman · « **Reply #48 on:** June 25, 2005, 04:34:40 PM »

Guess I missed the after the fact pictures. I'd like to see some close up pics taken after the crash. POWDERMAN. :? :? :? :?

Taff · « **Reply #49 on:** June 25, 2005, 09:46:39 PM »

Great thread if you like conspiracys, but if the USAF shot it down why would they not admit it, as it was after the towers were hit :twisted: . The wings are not actually the strongest part of a plane it is the superstructure that its attached to. As for the reason why the planes were not shot down is simply, who ever thought this could happen ? imagine the outcry if they shot it down and it turned out that they were planing to hijack it and go to Cuba for instance. It is easy to sit here in hindsight and pass comment on government decisions but if you haven't had to chose between who lives and dies you should think hard. How many planes each day lose contact with ground control or deviate off course ? most airlines have a problem even just after take off, at Manchester Airport they ask planes to stay within a three mile corridor only about 70% achieve it, should we shoot the rest down.
As for men on the moon I know its true because i,ve seen the stargate.

magooch · « **Reply #50 on:** June 26, 2005, 03:58:21 AM »

Anyone who doubts that a commercial airliner hit the Pentagon should have a conversation with Ted Olsen about it.

Graybeard · « **Reply #51 on:** June 26, 2005, 04:25:48 AM »

Quote

Anyone who doubts that a commercial airliner hit the Pentagon should have a conversation with Ted Olsen about it.

I'm sure there are several thousand or at least several hundred Ted Olsen's in the US. Which one? Who is he?

IntrepidWizard · « **Reply #52 on:** June 26, 2005, 07:26:07 AM »

If you want a potential conspiracy go to Flight 800

powderman · « **Reply #53 on:** June 27, 2005, 08:48:12 AM »

No doubt the steel was super heated, thus softening the girders, or beams. That in itself was a factor, but think of the weight of all of the floors above where the planes hit adding to the stress of the weakened steel. I doubt that holding up hundreds of tons and extreme heat were considered in the stress tests, maybe they were, just don't know. The lower the planes hit, the quicker they would have fallen from the extra weight of additional floors. Thank God they didn't hit any lower than they did. I can still see those Godless subhumans dancing with glee in the streets as they heard the news of the deaths of almost 3,000 innocent Americans. POWDERMAN. :x :x :x :x :x :x

Major · « **Reply #54 on:** June 27, 2005, 11:28:42 AM »

I have been gone for quite a while so I have missed most of this thread. While I have not carefully read this whole thread I did scan it and I will say this.

I was a design engineer for Boeing for 34 years. I know how those planes are built and they are intended to carry structural loads in only a few directions. Any other loading and they will crumble like a cracked eggshell. It doesnÂ’t take much to crumble a jet and there isnÂ’t enough mass there to damage a steel reinforced concrete building. The damage to the Pentagon was from the fire and the engines impacting the building and not much else. The heat from that fire weakened the buildings steel support structure so it could no longer carry the load from the floors above and that is what did the most damage. The same thing with the twin towers, if it wasnÂ’t for the fire they would still be standing too.

As for there not being Â“tonsÂ” of aluminum debris, consider this. Aluminum will burn at a little over 600 degrees while the jet fuel burns at about 1400 degrees or more. You all should be able to figure that one out.

I have seen (and held) steel parts recovered in the Pentagon from that plane that was sent to Boeing for analysis. I know those parts were from the stated plane because all major parts have serial numbers and are tracked by Boeing and the FAA to make sure that counterfeit parts are not used on those planes. I checked which plane these part and serial numbers came from myself and I know they were from the stated Â‘MissingÂ” plane.

It never ceases to amaze me how people that donÂ’t have the facts are always ready and able to come up with conspiracy theories at the drop of a hat. As for those pictures, there isnÂ’t enough detail to tell if they are doctored or not but it doesnÂ’t really matter. I know for a fact that when I hold a part in my hands and I can check those serial numbers that I know where that part came from.

I have verified parts from the plane that went down in Pennsylvania, the one from the Pentagon and both of the planes from the twin towers before I retired from Boeing. There is no conspiracy theory there guys. :roll: All the planes, or should I say parts of those planes, have been verified in all instances.

magooch · « **Reply #55 on:** June 28, 2005, 02:54:35 AM »

There goes that conspiracy. Of course, the doubters will not be swayed with facts. And Bill, the Ted Olsen I referred to was the Solicitor General and his wife Barbra was on that plane that hit the Pentagon.

Graybeard · « **Reply #56 on:** June 28, 2005, 04:16:12 AM »

Quote

There goes that conspiracy. Of course, the doubters will not be swayed with facts.

That really proves little if anything. I don't really know Major well enough to say he isn't truthful so won't. BUT all it proves is that the planes did come from together to apart and that some pieces of them were taken back to Boeing for testing. Nothing more. I have no doubt the two hit the towers nor that one crashed in PA. I'm not even saying I absolutely do not believe one hit the Pentagon. I'm just saying the photographic evidence tells me it did not.

IntrepidWizard · « **Reply #57 on:** June 28, 2005, 04:38:30 AM »

If one is going to judge something of the Magnitude of this tradgedy on on photo and through the other evidence I don't want to be judged on a jury of 12 by that person.

Taff · « **Reply #58 on:** June 28, 2005, 11:04:58 AM »

TM7 Roll on parinoia, The TWT designed to withstand a 707 colision surely this would only be the top ? who would expect one to hit the middle. why would anybody lie about the amount of fuel on board, it would not take much effort to find out how full they were ask the guy who fuelled them up or is he in on it as well. Explosives to bring down the Towers
I can see it now
President- how can we start a war in Affganistan
Adviser - lets blow up the twin towers and the pentagon and blame it on some Saudis and then we can invade. (they look similar)
President - Thats a great idea we can kill loads of our own people, invade a country that has nothing we want apart from body bags for our young men
Mind you you could try and persuade me that the planes were abducted by aliens and my whole life is just a dream

IntrepidWizard · « **Reply #59 on:** June 28, 2005, 12:49:23 PM »

Dear Taff,as you can see we have some members that need to be sent to the Colonies----do you have a recommendation?