[CTRL] Fwd: [cia-drugs] Pentagon wall laughably flimsy 911
-Caveat Lector- Dick Eastman (Grot), shown for what he is -- again. Peace, Om K To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om 2">---BeginMessage--- -Caveat Lector- Grot wrote: Please explain this - And supply one witness to the 757 after the Pentagon. Which way did the 757 turn? The Boeing overflew the Pentagon flying approximately west 14th Street Bridge is east of the Pentagon. The Pentagon is east of Columbia Pike, Navy Annex, VDOT, Sheraton Hotel. Earlier the plane had flown west over the White House and Georgetown. I think it passed east of the Pentagon and may have crossed the river over 14th Street Bridge, and you are confusing witness accounts and saying the plane flew over 14th Street Bridge twice. You're saying the Boeing flew west over DC twice. You have no witnesses who saw it fly over DC a second time. Your little loop over the river would have been noted as even more of a military style high-G turn than the only high-G turn that really happened, when the plane turned from flying north up I-95 in Virginia to flying west over the Capitol, White House, Watergate, Georgetown, then out of sight for a bit until it came up Columbia Pike. The only so-called high-G military style turn happened when the Boeing counted coup over the downtown area around the US Capitol and White House, continuing over Watergate and Georgetown, turning south over CIA HQ Langley, wrapping around south of Rosslyn and the convenient high rise building along the ridgeline followed by Courthouse Road, which crosses Columbia Pike. After completing the wide turn by passing east or south of that high rise on the ridge, it was a straight shot up Columbia Pike to the Pentagon. http://earth-citizens.net/pages-en/trj-appr.html These photos where you click on the checkboxes will show people that any witnesses who watched the Boeing between Courthouse Road and the Pentagon, then saw it disappear from view(there were some who said that), would have seen if the plane flew over the Pentagon. Actually it would have crashed due to already being at treetop height when you say it banked sharply, which would slip air, lose lift, and crash the plane. When the Boeing 707 was introduced with a barrel roll caught on film, still broadcast on TV documentaries, it appeared to lose several wingspan lengths of altitude during that roll. Think again. Our pilot here, Steve Wingate, assures us that jumbo jets lose lift drastically when their wings are tilted, and surely you remember that witnesses said the plane descended hundreds of feet not inches when it did the one and only high-G turn? Losing altitude was a function of tilting the wings to turn, not just of using flaps. -Bob Please let us stay on topic and be civil.-Home Page- www.cia-drugs.org OM Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om ---End Message---
[CTRL] Fwd: [cia-drugs] Pentagon wall laughably flimsy 911
-Caveat Lector- www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om ---BeginMessage--- -Caveat Lector- Dick, Wall details provided by me show that no DU penetrator or shaped charge or cruise missile or fighter jet were needed for the 5-10,000 gallons of jet fuel in the belly tank to punch the small hole shown in photos of the Pentagon west wall area hit by a Boeing 757 on September 11, 2001, as seen by many witnesses whose accounts you can find on the internet as DesMoulins has done and collected at his site--he is not solely author of all witness accounts and photos as this obfuscator "Grot" seems to allege in the following trifling attempt at "killing the messenger" to divert the numerous "messages" of each witness and photo brought to you by "messenger" DesMoulins and by so many others as to expose this transparent attempt at "killing a messenger" to distract from a "message" or "messages"-- Grot wrote: I think you are placing too much reliance on one investigator, Bob. Killing one messenger who to spike his message, a multitude of photos and witness accounts able to speak for themselves? You rely overly on pseudo-investigators Dick Eastman and Webfairy. I furnished DM with links to some photos and witnesses then used by DesMoulins on his site, but rather than rely overly on either of us, or posit a messenger-killing non sequitur about over reliance on one analyst, just look at the photos and listen to real people who were there. http://perso.wanadoo.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/pages-en/wr-eng.html http://perso.wanadoo.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/pages-en/trajectory.html http://perso.wanadoo.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/pages-en/dam-inside.html http://perso.wanadoo.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/english.html I know Mrs. Medina on Courthouse Road, Arlington, who saw the American Airlines Boeing 757 pass over her head as she stood at her kitchen sink. I knew Rodney Dickens who was on the plane. Mrs. Medina and the VDOT employees and the woman at the Sheraton Park hotel all concur in their accounts of an American Airlines Boeing 757 crashing into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. The VDOT and Sheraton Park witness accounts are widely available on the internet. The two Rolls Royce turbofan engine parts are from a turbofan compressor, according to a Pratt and Whitney spokesman. You are trifling to whine for a Rolls Royce spokesperson. American Airlines 757's have Rolls Royce engines and other 757's have PW turbofans, but so what? You're trifling. Look at the diagrams and photos of that model of Rolls Royce engine instead of relying overly on Dick Eastman and Webfairy. I was able to find a Pratt and Whitney jet engine spokesman who gave his opinion that this photo http://www.sitbot.net/im/pentagon_plane_part.jpg is that of a jet engine compressor part(though the engines on the Pentagon plane were Rolls-Royce, not PW, that seemed to be a fairly authoritative answer about a generic type of turbofan part). Jean-Pierre Desmoulins has found other distinctive Rolls-Royce parts in Pentagon crash photos. Some Boeing 757's have PW engines but American Airlines 757's have Rolls-Royce engines. Look at this site if you would like to be reassured that a real plane crashed into the Pentagon 9/11/2001. Desmoulins has found many eyewitness accounts which confirm with what my two on site witnesses said consistent with explosions in addition to the initial plane crash. That sounds like script fulfilment which we also saw at WTC911 and OKCbomb. -Bob Grot wrote: Bob, So you are saying that the building was strong, except at the infills around the new windows. No, the construction is post-and-beam. There are strong posts but between them only flimsy material(bricks, facade stone, and windows)--the "building" was not strong. The original hole details match up with the photo and diagram I showed you of what was behind the windows and facade stone. A couple of pieces of
[CTRL] Fwd: [cia-drugs] Pentagon wall laughably flimsy 911
-Caveat Lector- www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om ---BeginMessage--- -Caveat Lector- Grot wrote: Bob, So you are saying that the building was strong, except at the infills around the new windows. No, the construction is post-and-beam. There are strong posts but between them only flimsy material(bricks, facade stone, and windows)--the "building" was not strong. The original hole details match up with the photo and diagram I showed you of what was behind the windows and facade stone. A couple of pieces of steel remain in the hole. ..what about the floor of the second level Read witness accounts on desmoulins' site at links I gave, you will find one account of the floor up there cracking and being displaced vertically along an expansion joint. It fell down later. -- given the low hanging engines Again, look through desmoulin's site and you will see two engine compressor parts, a compressor wheel and a ring with holes in it. One engine is as good as two. Then the witness accounts fill in for you, it was an American Airlines Boeing 757 with Rolls Royce turbofan engines. . And why should the building collapse after the fires in that part of thewedge are out -- and came down over portions where the plane did not hit, given the 55 degree angle hit at the entry point? Having ruled out whatzits/missile/fighter by listening to witnesses who saw the Boeing 757 pass within feet of them, at VDOT traffic center, Sheraton Hotel, and apartment on Courthouse Road next to Columbia Pike, then find engine and other parts in photos. We can wonder if there were script-fulfilment demolitions at the crash site but we do not find evidence of such like at OKCbomb Murrah, police radio transcripts from OKC and witness accounts of mercury fulminate cannisters with military olive drab containers carried out of the building and photos showing damage beyond undamaged area(proof cutter charges placed behind undamaged area to cut posts and beams). Don't bury us with this architecture and history trivia unless you are going to do something with it. Looking at the trees, ignoring the forest? Killing the messenger, ignoring specifics, recycling the same old dead-end non sequitur diversions? The wall was weak so a shaped charge or DU penetrator was not necessary, only the mass of fuel in the belly tank was needed to punch a hole. There are American Airlines Boeing 757 parts strewn around. Many witnesses saw a Boeing 757. It was a Boeing 757, whether guided by hijackers or computer, whether augmented by script-fulfilment demolitions on site or not. -Bob - Original Message - From: Bob To: undisclosed-recipients: Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 1:20 PM Subject: [cia-drugs] Pentagon wall laughably flimsy 911 "The facade stones, 5 feet long, 2 feet wide and half-a-foot thick, each weighed about 600 pounds." Standing on edge like dominos, push and they tip over. "the Pentagon[wall] was constructed with a thin limestone facade over a brick infill...non-structural brick infill walls"!!! "Merely replacing existing windows with blast-resistant ones anchored to the existing brick infill would not be a workable solution. The newer WINDOWS would direct blast pressures to the window support connections at the [non-structural brick] infill [wall]. The tensile and shear loads [on window glass!] would overwhelm the existing brick infill walls"! The mass of kerosene in the plane belly tank punched through that brick infill and removed two blast windows, whether the windows actually cracked or not. The only pre-911 reinforcement of the wall, not the windows, was to put a butterfly net behind the brick to catch 911 denialists, whatzits, imaginary DU penetrators and cruise missiles with shaped charges, and pieces of blast debris from "a reasonably forceful blast from any close point along the Pentagon's surrounding
