The hole in the Pentagon for sure didn't look like it was hiding a plane inside (suspicious in addition to how hard it would be to hit it at such a flat angle).
I've watched many videos supportive of the Pentagon being hit by a missile instead. Lets just call that "plausible" for the sake of argument.
The question then becomes: where /is/ the plane ? Did someone really manage to hijack a plane, fly it to an undisclosed location, murder everyone on board, dispose of their bodies without a trace, and then make the plane disappear even cleaner than MH370?
Why are you correcting me even though I didn't go any farther than saying "hard" lol. I didn't say impossible, but it's pretty close to impossible right? The story is that the "terrorists" only had training on a single engine Cessna and then to guide a big ass commercial plane and hit the building head-on like they were going through a front door as opposed to hitting it from above...
I know I'm no expert on looking at pictures of buildings damaged by planes flying into them from the side at ground level but I do think it's weird that supposedly the whole plane just went into the building, including the wings, and then wasn't visible. I guess the reasoning would be that the building wreckage crumbled around it to obscure the plane wreckage but to answer your question and just being honest, no the hole doesn't look big enough to me. And (I could be wrong especially about this next part) I just always thought the wings should've pretty much gotten sliced off and left on the outside of the building.
Sorry if I was too hard. The prevalence of urban myth about certain topics irritates me and I don't carry it off well. The trouble is, even though something may be "hard," that doesn't mean it didn't happen. It is even harder for a missile guidance system to pull off that collision. Think about that.
Of course the plane went into the building. Where else was it going to go? The structural columns sliced it up, but the rest was propelled into the interior, being shredded as it went. Same thing with the wings, which may have been wrapped back alongside the body. And, yes, the building wreckage would have slumped into the cavity created by the airplane intrusion, probably covering up the airplane wreckage. If you would only think through the collision process, it will become less mysterious.
The plane wreckage was mingled with the building wreckage. The victim identification process would not have been for the weak of stomach.
Heh yeah, if that's what happened then I imagine the victim identification would be the way Norm Macdonald so eloquently described plane crash victim identification to be like: "everyone is just 'stuff' at that point: yeah we got some stuff over here, throw some of that stuff into this bag and label it Johnson..." (paraphrasing, he said it way funnier).
The hole in the Pentagon for sure didn't look like it was hiding a plane inside (suspicious in addition to how hard it would be to hit it at such a flat angle).
And several people on-scene described what they saw in the immediate aftermath -- no airliner, and no suggestion that an airliner had ever been there.
For example:
https://www.twf.org/News/Y2005/0307-Pentagon.html
I've watched many videos supportive of the Pentagon being hit by a missile instead. Lets just call that "plausible" for the sake of argument.
The question then becomes: where /is/ the plane ? Did someone really manage to hijack a plane, fly it to an undisclosed location, murder everyone on board, dispose of their bodies without a trace, and then make the plane disappear even cleaner than MH370?
None of the pentagon videos address this.
"Hard" does not equal "impossible." As the facts have shown. How big a hole did you want? The one that happened was big enough for the fuselage.
"As the facts have shown" - I suggest you look at more facts than you apparently have, fren....
Why are you correcting me even though I didn't go any farther than saying "hard" lol. I didn't say impossible, but it's pretty close to impossible right? The story is that the "terrorists" only had training on a single engine Cessna and then to guide a big ass commercial plane and hit the building head-on like they were going through a front door as opposed to hitting it from above...
I know I'm no expert on looking at pictures of buildings damaged by planes flying into them from the side at ground level but I do think it's weird that supposedly the whole plane just went into the building, including the wings, and then wasn't visible. I guess the reasoning would be that the building wreckage crumbled around it to obscure the plane wreckage but to answer your question and just being honest, no the hole doesn't look big enough to me. And (I could be wrong especially about this next part) I just always thought the wings should've pretty much gotten sliced off and left on the outside of the building.
Sorry if I was too hard. The prevalence of urban myth about certain topics irritates me and I don't carry it off well. The trouble is, even though something may be "hard," that doesn't mean it didn't happen. It is even harder for a missile guidance system to pull off that collision. Think about that.
Of course the plane went into the building. Where else was it going to go? The structural columns sliced it up, but the rest was propelled into the interior, being shredded as it went. Same thing with the wings, which may have been wrapped back alongside the body. And, yes, the building wreckage would have slumped into the cavity created by the airplane intrusion, probably covering up the airplane wreckage. If you would only think through the collision process, it will become less mysterious.
The plane wreckage was mingled with the building wreckage. The victim identification process would not have been for the weak of stomach.
Heh yeah, if that's what happened then I imagine the victim identification would be the way Norm Macdonald so eloquently described plane crash victim identification to be like: "everyone is just 'stuff' at that point: yeah we got some stuff over here, throw some of that stuff into this bag and label it Johnson..." (paraphrasing, he said it way funnier).