|
| Page 1, 2 |
Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77
|
Cholem Yesodeth
User ID: 214869
3/31/2007 8:05 PM
Report abusive post | Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77
| Quote |
Here is a photo of Flight 77 with tail number N644AA in flight:
[link to www.airliners.net] YNK%20%2F%20XYNK%29&ERDLTkt=HFN%20-%20Pnyvsbeavn&ktODMp=Wnahnel%2022%2C%201999&BP=1&WNEb25u=Erzv%20Qnyybg&xsIERvdWdsY=A644NN&MgTUQtODMgKE=Guvf%20nvepe nsg%20%28nf%20syvtug%2077%29%20jnf%20qryvorengryl%20penfurq%20vagb%20gur%20Cragntba%20ba%20Frcgrzore%2011%2C%202001%20nsgre%20orvat%20uvwnpxrq%20ol%20 greebevfgf.&YXMgTUQtODMgKERD=40413&NEb25uZWxs=2001-10-12%2000%3A00%3A00&ODJ9dvCE=&O89Dcjdg=24602%2F365&static=yes&width=1022&height=681&sok=JURER%20%2 0%28ert%20%3D%20%27A644NN%27%29%20%20BEQRE%20OL%20cubgb_vq%20QRFP&photo_nr=3&prev_id=0290718&next_id=0188155&size=L
Here are 12 other photos of Flight 77:
[link to www.airliners.net] ator=September11&disp_order=asc
They show that its fuselage was polished, bare metal right up to August, 2001. NOT painted.
Now look at the scraps found on the Pentagon lawn:
[link to media.popularmechanics.com]
and
[link to 77debris.batcave.net]
No doubt about it.
The background to the lettering is pale blue paint. NOT blue sky reflected in polished metal. PAINT. PERIOD.
Conclusion: unless the plane was painted between August 7, 2001 and September 11, 2001, the fragments on the lawn did not come from a plane with tail number N644AA, as clearly marked beneath the tail in the large photo. Therefore, it was NOT Flight 77.
QED |
|
wing-ed
User ID: 152412
3/31/2007 8:41 PM
 | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
Praise The Holy Of Holy :: You sure put your thread together nicely, the photos are very clear! I think your thread deserves some very close study.Thanks for listing it :: Praise The Lamb: Amen
Holy, holy,holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come.Praise the one who gives you peace beyond all understanding |
|
medusan
User ID: 214491
3/31/2007 8:46 PM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
Where did flight 77 go to then? |
|
Chuck
User ID: 85992
3/31/2007 8:49 PM
 | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
The background to the lettering is pale blue paint. NOT blue sky reflected in polished metal. PAINT. PERIOD.
Conclusion: unless the plane was painted between August 7, 2001 and September 11, 2001, the fragments on the lawn did not come from a plane with tail number N644AA, as clearly marked beneath the tail in the large photo. Therefore, it was NOT Flight 77.
QED Quoting: Cholem Yesodeth
Any debunkers going to attempt this one? I don't see anywhere where it goes from red to white to background color, which looks white to me and not pale blue, but anyways the background is definitely polished metal in the non-crashed pics.
“Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival.” - W. Edwards Deming
[link to survivalchuck.blogspot.com] |
|
Chuck
User ID: 85992
3/31/2007 8:53 PM
| | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
Where did flight 77 go to then? Quoting: medusan
This link has one explanation: [link to members.iinet.net.au]
I'm still not sure where. But because "I'm not sure where" doesn't mean I have to go with that Flight 77 hit the pentagon. It just means, I don't know.
“Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival.” - W. Edwards Deming
[link to survivalchuck.blogspot.com] |
|
mathetes
User ID: 160832
3/31/2007 9:06 PM
 | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
Where did flight 77 go to then?
This link has one explanation: [ link to members.iinet.net.au]
I'm still not sure where. But because "I'm not sure where" doesn't mean I have to go with that Flight 77 hit the pentagon. It just means, I don't know.
From your link: "10 months after I published, they finally got around to doctoring the database" Why do 911 deniers sound so much like another group of deniers that lurk around here? Everythings doctored! blah,blah
"The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God.
The command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory.
John Quincy Adams |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 117656
3/31/2007 9:15 PM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
Where did flight 77 go to then? Quoting: medusan
That question was raised by..a "hall-of-famer" I fish with...and a member of the SS with 25 years in the SS with 5 presidents (on the same yacht I was on) said...
..."The better question is, Where are the people ON the plane."
Just some Info...continue |
|
Chuck
User ID: 85992
3/31/2007 9:18 PM
| | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
From your link: "10 months after I published, they finally got around to doctoring the database" Why do 911 deniers sound so much like another group of deniers that lurk around here? Everythings doctored! blah,blah Quoting: mathetes
Just because they're are paranoid doesn't mean "they" aren't out to get them.
I have no idea. I don't try to go that route because I don't have evidence supporting a certain conclusion. But, there is evidence that that wasn't Flight 77 that hit the Pentagon. That's what those picture are.
“Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival.” - W. Edwards Deming
[link to survivalchuck.blogspot.com] |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 217013
3/31/2007 9:39 PM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
I augur ill.
Here is a link i found on google(Googlecache).
original side deleted by someone.
[link to 209.85.135.104] |
|
YiibiY
User ID: 196379
3/31/2007 10:22 PM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
Sorry go back to the drawing board. There is a huge ray of light shining off that scrap metal in the Pentagon. To say it is light blue could be true but only because of photography and aperture settings.
Half is shaded and half is light. Bad photograph. If that picture could show a different angle the blue would be darker.
I'm sure someone has a video of this wreckage. I would love to see this video. Hell I have a video just for my kids birthday! They have to have video of the footage.
I personally believe Flight 77 did hit the Pentagon. As to how it was able to fly that close, that far away and also plow right into the Pentagon (the part being upgraded at that) is a totally diferent story ..... |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 217103
3/31/2007 10:24 PM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
When they showed the pentagon on live tv, I didn't see any scraps. Then when they dumped sand and foam, they started bringing the pieces out.
Here is a photo of Flight 77 with tail number N644AA in flight:
[ link to www.airliners.net] YNK%20%2F%20XYNK%29&ERDLTkt=HFN%20-%20Pnyvsbeavn&ktODMp=Wnahnel%2022%2C%201999&BP=1&WNEb25u=Erzv%20Qnyybg&xsIERvdWdsY=A644NN&MgTUQtODMgKE=Guvf%20nvepe nsg%20%28nf%20syvtug%2077%29%20jnf%20qryvorengryl%20penfurq%20vagb%20gur%20Cragntba%20ba%20Frcgrzore%2011%2C%202001%20nsgre%20orvat%20uvwnpxrq%20ol%20 greebevfgf.&YXMgTUQtODMgKERD=40413&NEb25uZWxs=2001-10-12%2000%3A00%3A00&ODJ9dvCE=&O89Dcjdg=24602%2F365&static=yes&width=1022&height=681&sok=JURER%20%2 0%28ert%20%3D%20%27A644NN%27%29%20%20BEQRE%20OL%20cubgb_vq%20QRFP&photo_nr=3&prev_id=0290718&next_id=0188155&size=L
Here are 12 other photos of Flight 77:
[ link to www.airliners.net] ator=September11&disp_order=asc
They show that its fuselage was polished, bare metal right up to August, 2001. NOT painted.
Now look at the scraps found on the Pentagon lawn:
[ link to media.popularmechanics.com]
and
[ link to 77debris.batcave.net]
No doubt about it.
The background to the lettering is pale blue paint. NOT blue sky reflected in polished metal. PAINT. PERIOD.
Conclusion: unless the plane was painted between August 7, 2001 and September 11, 2001, the fragments on the lawn did not come from a plane with tail number N644AA, as clearly marked beneath the tail in the large photo. Therefore, it was NOT Flight 77.
QED |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 217281
3/31/2007 11:16 PM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
 |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 215228
3/31/2007 11:32 PM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
Here is a photo of Flight 77 with tail number N644AA in flight:
[ link to www.airliners.net] YNK%20%2F%20XYNK%29&ERDLTkt=HFN%20-%20Pnyvsbeavn&ktODMp=Wnahnel%2022%2C%201999&BP=1&WNEb25u=Erzv%20Qnyybg&xsIERvdWdsY=A644NN&MgTUQtODMgKE=Guvf%20nvepe nsg%20%28nf%20syvtug%2077%29%20jnf%20qryvorengryl%20penfurq%20vagb%20gur%20Cragntba%20ba%20Frcgrzore%2011%2C%202001%20nsgre%20orvat%20uvwnpxrq%20ol%20 greebevfgf.&YXMgTUQtODMgKERD=40413&NEb25uZWxs=2001-10-12%2000%3A00%3A00&ODJ9dvCE=&O89Dcjdg=24602%2F365&static=yes&width=1022&height=681&sok=JURER%20%2 0%28ert%20%3D%20%27A644NN%27%29%20%20BEQRE%20OL%20cubgb_vq%20QRFP&photo_nr=3&prev_id=0290718&next_id=0188155&size=L
Here are 12 other photos of Flight 77:
[ link to www.airliners.net] ator=September11&disp_order=asc
They show that its fuselage was polished, bare metal right up to August, 2001. NOT painted.
Now look at the scraps found on the Pentagon lawn:
[ link to media.popularmechanics.com]
and
[ link to 77debris.batcave.net]
No doubt about it.
The background to the lettering is pale blue paint. NOT blue sky reflected in polished metal. PAINT. PERIOD.
Conclusion: unless the plane was painted between August 7, 2001 and September 11, 2001, the fragments on the lawn did not come from a plane with tail number N644AA, as clearly marked beneath the tail in the large photo. Therefore, it was NOT Flight 77.
QED
Geez...how stupid can you be? Polished aluminum will reflect back color - it's not pale blue paint, but the reflection of color in a polished aluminum surface toward the camera.
That debris is definitely aircraft - and it's definitely polished aluminum (which doesn't stay bright and shiny very long). If you've ever been around airplanes, as much as I have you would realize that.
Flight 77 is a very sore subject with me - I lost a friend on that flight (one of the flight attendants). Another good friend of mine knew two flight attendants (husband and wife) and Capt. Burlingame. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 151551
3/31/2007 11:57 PM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
[link to www.youtube.com]
hijacking catastrophe |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 211537
4/1/2007 1:42 AM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
In 2002, I found a book at the public library by Thierry Meysson that disproved a 747 airplane hit the Pentagon. I wrote dozens of letters about this book and a few months later my explanations were part of another book.
This evidence is better yet. The situation is very bizarre because all protections for whistleblowers have been rescinded. So many people are gagged.
Unlike the Kennedy assassination, when no one had ever dreamed of psy ops, there are millions of people who know part of this story and they will talk when Cheney/Bush is defunct.
I hate the American people. Let me be clear on this. Americans turned fascist overnight. I could care less about Americans. They are dumber than dirt. They live in shitty towns and attend primitive schools. They have no clue that their immense wealth is spent on insane wars. They have no clue that their wealth is funding hellholes like Israel and pristine kingdoms like Dubai. Americans are so incredibly dumb they don't even know that all their newspapers and TV stations are garbage. America is over, and I could care less. I have not met one person in nine years of being on a watchlist that I would regard as worthy of citizenship. I have met only robots, braindead automatons, who would do anything for a buck.
I will damn all these robots to hell. I will name them them all and condemn them to death. They are all killer psychopaths who murdered me in secret. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 217319
4/1/2007 1:49 AM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
77 is a weird one
i don't want to believe in the switched planes and faked(?) deaths but something doesnt add up
it's interesting that all 4 planes were only at about 25% capacity. the kinds of people bunched together on flight 77 is interesting
--
Dong Lee, Ruben Ornedo, and Chad Keller all worked for Boeing. Lee also worked for the NSA. Stanley Hall, “the dean of electronic warfare,” (along with Peter Gay, David Kolvacin, and Kenneth Waldie on other flights), worked for Raytheon.
William Caswell was a particle physicist who worked for the Navy. His job was so classified that his family had no clue as to what he did and did not know why he was flying to California.
Charles Droz, LCDR USN Ret, was a software developer for EM solutions (manufacturer of Wide Area Networks).
Robert Penniger worked for BAE Systems, (”an industry leader in flight control systems”), whose Board is comprised of many from the intelligence community. BAE has apparently removed their Board of Directors page, but it list a “who’s who” of high level connections to the CIA, DARPA, and NSA. (See the appendix for a list of outside directors of BAE Systems that were not on Flight 77.)
Robert Ploger and his wife were added “late” to the original CNN passenger list. He is the son of Major General Robert R Ploger USA, Ret, another “flag” link. The other “late” addition was Sandra Teague, a physical therapist at Georgetown University Hospital.
John Sammartino and Leonard Taylor worked at Xontech (missile defense), another company connected to the intelligence community, also with ties to Boeing.
Vicki Yancey worked for Vreedenberg Corp, yet another company connected to the intelligence community. Her father describes her death as a “planned murder.” Her widower works for Northrup-Grumman.
Mary Jane Booth was in a position to know what was going on at Dulles Airport as secretary for American Airlines general manager.
John Yamnicky, 71, Capt USN Ret, was a defense contractor for Veridian who had done a number of “black ops,” according to his son. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 217319
4/1/2007 1:52 AM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
[link to www.osamawasframed.com]
Mr. Kovalcin of Raytheon 'had trouble sleeping two nights before his departure. "He woke me up at 3 a.m., and said 'I'm pacing the house. I can't sleep,' " she said. "I rubbed his head and tried to calm him down. He was very distressed, but had no idea what it was...... The morning he left home he had written a note for his family: "Rebecca, Marina and Mommy, I will miss everybody very much. See you Friday night." At the end he added, "I fed the dogs but not the fish."
* Lorraine Yamnicky Dixon, 3 September 2002, of her father: "I wonder often about the significance of the date ‘ 911 emergency’. I wonder why, for the first time, that he didn’t tell me that he was going on travel. I remember the frantic phone calls, as if it were this morning, and the answers that I never got. You want to know what life has been like? This is it. I feel guilty when I’m happy about something. I hear songs that he loved and sang to me, and then I laugh, and then I cry. Then I wonder if God knew. The weekend before he was killed, he and my mom stopped by unexpectedly. My mom said, “Well, Daddy wanted to see the grandchildren”. |
|
Chuck
User ID: 85992
4/1/2007 2:01 AM
| | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
Geez...how stupid can you be? Polished aluminum will reflect back color - it's not pale blue paint, but the reflection of color in a polished aluminum surface toward the camera.
That debris is definitely aircraft - and it's definitely polished aluminum (which doesn't stay bright and shiny very long). If you've ever been around airplanes, as much as I have you would realize that.
Flight 77 is a very sore subject with me - I lost a friend on that flight (one of the flight attendants). Another good friend of mine knew two flight attendants (husband and wife) and Capt. Burlingame. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 215228
As to the argument of the paint, I'll let others look at the pics and decide for themselves. But, I'll let you know that I think you are full of shit.
I do like the sympathy appeal though. Nice touch to an argument.
“Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival.” - W. Edwards Deming
[link to survivalchuck.blogspot.com] |
|
Cholem Yesodeth
User ID: 214869
4/1/2007 4:20 AM
| | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
The pieces of fuselage are CLEARLY covered in pale blue paint. A polished metallic surface would not have the matte look displayed by the fragments.
Anyone who does not see the obvious is either in self-denial or a self-conscious liar who bends reality and common sense in order not to lose face when confronted by evidence that contradicts what he wants to believe. Get used to it. You will have to eventually. It's only a matter of time when the lies of 9/11 become exposed PUBLICLY. It's already starting to happen....... |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 217376
4/1/2007 6:02 AM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
In 2002, I found a book at the public library by Thierry Meysson that disproved a 747 airplane hit the Pentagon. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 211537
Nobody says it was a 747!
A minor nitpick, sure, but if you can't keep that kind of fact straight... |
|
Shadow
User ID: 205416
4/1/2007 6:15 AM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
Here is a photo of Flight 77 with tail number N644AA in flight:
[ link to www.airliners.net] YNK%20%2F%20XYNK%29&ERDLTkt=HFN%20-%20Pnyvsbeavn&ktODMp=Wnahnel%2022%2C%201999&BP=1&WNEb25u=Erzv%20Qnyybg&xsIERvdWdsY=A644NN&MgTUQtODMgKE=Guvf%20nvepe nsg%20%28nf%20syvtug%2077%29%20jnf%20qryvorengryl%20penfurq%20vagb%20gur%20Cragntba%20ba%20Frcgrzore%2011%2C%202001%20nsgre%20orvat%20uvwnpxrq%20ol%20 greebevfgf.&YXMgTUQtODMgKERD=40413&NEb25uZWxs=2001-10-12%2000%3A00%3A00&ODJ9dvCE=&O89Dcjdg=24602%2F365&static=yes&width=1022&height=681&sok=JURER%20%2 0%28ert%20%3D%20%27A644NN%27%29%20%20BEQRE%20OL%20cubgb_vq%20QRFP&photo_nr=3&prev_id=0290718&next_id=0188155&size=L
That's a big plane.
Not much fuselage to be seen in this pic.
[link to www.serendipity.li]
Over the side and damn the barracuda |
|
ID2268
User ID: 2268
4/1/2007 6:18 AM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
sorry but, yet again, inconclusive.
debate would be pointless, all this and more has allready been thought of. |
|
Shadow
User ID: 205416
4/1/2007 6:21 AM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
sorry but, yet again, inconclusive. Quoting: ID2268
Perhaps. Even less conclusive that a 100 ton aircraft is in the wreckage.
Over the side and damn the barracuda |
|
ID2268
User ID: 2268
4/1/2007 6:46 AM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
IMO some form of flying bomb hit the pentagon, and i agree with the OP, it wasnt flight 77.
but, still, the finger points no where. |
|
Shadow
User ID: 205416
4/1/2007 6:56 AM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
[link to www.serendipity.li]
To scale drawing.
Over the side and damn the barracuda |
|
Typo Man
User ID: 211447
4/1/2007 8:29 AM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
Leaving aside the blue paint/light reflecting alloy. Anyone have an opinion as to which letter is represented on the wreckage?
[link to 77debris.batcave.net]
It seems that the red/white lettering would have to come from the word AMERICAN as that is the only part of the plane so painted. Compare the wreckage letter with an intact plane. Which part of which letter?
[link to www.airliners.net] |
|
Artist FKA HiRisque
User ID: 132352
4/1/2007 8:35 AM
 | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
The pieces of fuselage are CLEARLY covered in pale blue paint. A polished metallic surface would not have the matte look displayed by the fragments.
Anyone who does not see the obvious is either in self-denial or a self-conscious liar who bends reality and common sense in order not to lose face when confronted by evidence that contradicts what he wants to believe. Get used to it. You will have to eventually. It's only a matter of time when the lies of 9/11 become exposed PUBLICLY. It's already starting to happen....... Quoting: Cholem Yesodeth
I am a long time aviation enthusiast and have taken thousands of photographs of aircraft.
Your analysis is simply wrong!
That photograph clearly shows an aircraft fuselage fragment that is predominately bare polished aluminum with a small area that is red outlined with white, while the reverse side is finshed in zinc chromate which is a shade of green.
Looking at the area that faces the camera you will see that it is not in direct sunlight. You will notice that the portion that is white is extremely even in shade and tone. Then when you look at the area which YOU say is painted it is NOT even in shade and tone. You are looking at a reflection of the sky that even shows the clouds.
If you presented your theory in a court of law, and you had some professional photography analyists look at that photo, not only would they say you were dead wrong; they would have a hard time to keep from falling on the floor and laughing at you. |
|
Typo Man
User ID: 211447
4/1/2007 8:40 AM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
American
You can cross out A-eric-- fairly easily as they do not contain any section of letter even remotely like the letter on the wreckage. Remember to consider rotating the letters through 360 degrees.
So, out of m,a,n? I suggest. |
|
Typo Man
User ID: 211447
4/1/2007 8:48 AM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
You can also rule out it being the bottom of the letters as there is a dark blue stripe just beneath the letters.
Take note of the space to the right of the wreckage letter it would appear to be ten times the width of the white letter outline. |
|
Typo Man
User ID: 211447
4/1/2007 8:59 AM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
Note the rivets run both vertically and horizontally and only vertically and horizontally.
Note the curvature on the wreckage picture between the central two arrowed rivet lines. The lines are parallel showing that the curvature is not deformation of the fuselage.
Note the slight curvature of the white outline at the left of the debris pic. |
|
Typo Man
User ID: 211447
4/1/2007 9:09 AM | | Re: Photographic proof plane fragments on the Pentagon lawn did not come from Flight 77 | Quote |
Which direction was the wreckage travelling?
The torn segments suggest left to right?
It can only be left right up or down as a result of the rivet lines.
Remember on the other side of the plane the lettering runs in the opposite direction. |
|
| Page 1, 2 |
|
