[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Are you STILL on this tirade about the Pentagon Lanny?

I will continue to question the “official story” as long as there are so many holes in the logic. How many more lies and inconsistencies do you have to be exposed to before you begin to question the events that have unfolded in the past six years?

Have you looked at this compilation of evidence and still have an ability to believe that the

US hsot a missile at its own military headquarters??

That compilation of evidence that has been debunked in that same thread by people who have military and FAA crash scene investigation experience.

Size of 757 matches the initial size of hole in the building - somewhere between 13 and 16 feet (757 is 13 feet wide/high)

Yup, the fuselage of the plane is close to those dimensions, but what about those big heavy things on the wings that hang 30 feet off center of the aircraft? Where is the damage from the engines? Going by your theory, the engines some how got sucked into the same hole the fuselage made. What’s ironic is that the engines are what make the majority of the damage, as they are made of the most indestructible materials in a plane (outside of the black boxes). The fuselage should have crumpled like a beer can as it hit the reinforced concrete structure of the Pentagon, not managed to continue on to create a perfectly formed circular blast hole in the “C” ring of the building. The engines should have created the greatest damage, not the nose of the fuselage.

http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/ArticlesMeyer3March2006.html

And speaking of the black boxes, how comes the black boxes were not recovered? They are designed to survive 3400 Gs of force and temperatures in the thousands of degrees, but they did not survive the impact?

Rims found in building match those of a 757

And if the Smithsonian had been hit they would have found remnants of the Apollo lander. That wouldn’t mean that Neil Armstrong attacked the building. That wing of the Pentagon had been under renovation for months and access was restricted. Who knows what could have been planted in that building. As well, the rims have been identified as possibly being from numerous different aircraft.

Small turbine engine outside is an APU

That’s incorrect. That part was identified as not being part of any Boeing product. Dis can even back this up as he knows the 757 airframe extremely well.

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?read=37640

Same engine has been clearly stated to not match a Global Hawk engine

That’s great! Who said a Global Hawk hit the Pentagon? If they were going to remotely fly a vehicle into the Pentagon, a 757 would be just as easy to use as a Global Hawk to do the job. But neither vehicle is capable of creating the damage the Pentagon sustained.

Blue seats from 757 laying on ground in photos
Part of "American" fuselage logo visible in more than 1 photo

Which some how were not there when the original media showed up on the scene and began filming. These pieces only showed up when the media was moved well back from the scene and the site secured. They are the “magic parts” that weren’t there one minute, but appeared while the first responders from the media were escorted from the scene.

Engine parts photographed inside match a Rolls-Royce RB211

That is still open to debate. There are as many people who refute that claim as support it.

Large deisel generator in front of building hit by a large heavy object
Large deisel engine outside is spun towards the building - could not be result of bomb blast or missile explosion

This information is misleading. The damage and movement of the generator could very easily have been created by the explosion. The movement of the generator away or towards the Pentagon is dependent on the axis of which it moved. This is a red herring that is supposed to be accepted as fact, when in reality it holds no proof one way or another.

Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner
Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner hit the Pentagon

Multiple eye-witnesses say they did NOT see and airliner and did NOT seen an airliner hit the Pentagon. This testimony was ignored by the 9/11 Commission because it did not fit with their “official” explanation. Funny how that happened.

60+ bodies, matching the passenger list and flight crew roster identified and returned to families from Pentagon wreckage

Months after the fact. Since you decided to broach this subject matter, how come not a single arab hijacker was found in the wreckage? How come they weren’t on the flight manifest? If all of these bodies were recovered, how come the body of a single hijacker was recovered? It doesn’t fit.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/..._evidence.html

Oh, the irony of you using a conspiracy theory web site to try and support your argument. That made me laugh out loud, in a good way btw (you've turned to the darkside?).

I guess you missed the part where much of what this guy said was debunked by people with military and FAA crash scene investigation experience?

Also a very comprehensive report on the Pentagon's building performance.

http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03/PDF/b03017.pdf

Comprehensive bunk. I work with NIST documents every day and they are long on structure and short on content. The NIST reports, along with the 9/11 Commission report, have both been shredded by those who should be supporting them, academia. The academics are coming out of the wood work to crucify these reports for the shoddy methods they used and the poor findings they came to. They have been identified as documents that were written with a purpose, not documents that outlined findings. The story was already written and what ever evidence could be found to support their cause was inserted. Anything that contradicted their story was omitted.