superchunk said:
MrBubbles said:
superchunk said:
Batman...WTF? said:
superchunk said:
The only part that I really question is the Pentagon. A 747 just would've made a bigger mess. |
The plane blew up when it hit. The parts were scattered everywhere, meaning there was no real plane found, but I believe people were photographed next to the tail wing, if I remember correctly. If you're confused about why the Pentagon wasn't a bigger mess, it was the way it was built. It's all concrete and steel, low to the ground. So while the Twin Towers were built out of the same stuff, it was all on top of each other, and when the steel lost half of it's strength (since it does at the temperature plane fuel burns) the weight above became too much, making it collapse. The reason it looked like a bomb was because that's what happens when over a ton of concrete falls onto the floor. Rubble shoots out.
*Superchunk* I was merely addressing more rumors around the 9/11 attacks as well as answering your question.
|
You may be entirely right. However, the one part of those videos that made perfect sense is the physical damage on the building vs the size of a 747 and the complete lack of nearly any debris from a plane except one engine. That with the fact that the government seized all video footage of the 'crash' from all nearby locations and the only one to be show does not, in fact, show a plane clearly at all. It just is too vague for me to believe outright.
|
so you believe the attack on the trade centers was real...but the government coincidentally faked a plane flying into the pentagon on the same day?
|
Is it possible, sure. But, that would require the gov't to know that something was going so they could take advantage of it by shooting a missile at the Pentagon.
Is it probable, no. All I'm saying is if this were a court of law, I would have reasonable doubt in regards to the Pentagon.
|
Why would they do that though? Attack the head building of the American Army? It makes no since.
