Buy this product here: The Good The Bad The Ugly Trump And Biden Shirt, hoodie
Home page: Beutee Store
The Good The Bad The Ugly Trump And Biden Shirt, hoodie
For Cyteria: Bob, I have to disagree with you. Brad’s credibility isn’t at stake here. Rev. Griffin’s speech at Madison spelled out a strong case that the Bush administration at least knew about the 9/11 attack beforehand, if not complicit in it. As far as I know, Rev. Griffin’s argument has not been refuted.
The physical evidence and the testimony from engineering experts (including the Brigham Young professor) support Rev. Griffin. It isn’t enough to say, “I believe the government.” Not when that government has proven itself to be a liar on numerous occasions before and since 9/11.
COMMENT #150 [Permalink]… Ari said on 5/16/2006 @ 4:22 pm PT…
This is just one website that I found on the matter of Flight 77, within a minute or two of searching on Google. I can’t say I know much about the source, so I can’t 100% guarantee he’s not lying … But then again, where can you do that on the Internet?
The most important point the link makes is that there is no shortage of eyewitnesses who saw a plane flying very low towards the Pentagon that day (it’s a shame those eyewitnesses aren’t given more exposure to put to rest ridiculous theories). Just as telling is the claim that there have been no eyewitnesses who identified a missile … There were just people who likened the plane, metaphorically, to a missile as it neared its final trajectory.
Furthermore, if one were to look further into the damage done to the building, one would find that there is evidence of a collision of the wings with the lower floors of the building. I’m afraid I don’t have a link handy, but 5-10 minutes of searching should turn up a website with pictures of the lower floors (they do exist) showing significant external damage. Why did they not tear holes in the walls? Well, aircraft wings are not particularly bulky, and my guess is that they were constructed as a hollow shell, like the wind turbine blades I work with. While the wing is intact, is can bear heavy aerodynamic loads quite well. However, like a coke can with a dent on its side, an unusual impact, like against a steel-reinforced concrete structure, can leave it crumpled and shattered. The fuselage, however, can do significantly more damage because it consists of significantly more mass and has the hardest portion of the plane on its underside (in addition to producing an explosion from its stored fuel). The damage done to the Pentagon building, supposedly 16ft in diameter, would fit with the size of the fuselage … Roughly 12ft (trunk diameter of a 757 is 3.76 meters). Regarding the notion that more of the building should have fallen apart, and that 4 rings of the Pentagon would be too much for the plane to penetrate, I’ll just say that I don’t know the details of the Pentagon’s construction, and neither do you, and neither do your sources on the Internet … But to me as an engineer, it seems plenty plausible.