only that is some people believe that hijackers flew airliners into buildings. however the physical reality that is the FACTS point to something very different and the magnitude of the scam scares the crap out of so many people that we now have tremendous inertia for an idea that simply doesn't work because of the fundamental physical laws that govern the behavior of physical objects.
No, argument from FACTS, you never once addressed the air resistance issue, and it is a very significant factor.
Given 8X air resistance, my question to you is: how can it be shown that the aircraft attained the alleged speed? The power to propel the aircraft would be lacking, and also the very distinct possibility that if the aircraft were sent into a "power dive" it would not be controllable and break apart before having a chance to crash into the tower.
You're assuming facts not in evidence yet..Suppose it did 'break apart'?,what would happen to the people below in the streets?
If the government is hiding this information, what else do you suppose they're hiding? http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2014/4136pr_conf_slam_obm_9_11.html http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/classified-pages-911-report-may-implicate-key-u-s-ally/ - - - Updated - - - The planes would have likely broken apart before reaching New York.
I'd agree about the airliners not being able to keep together for that last few min of the trip to the towers. Just a note of skepticism here, the "28pages" of something, valuable data, INFORMATION .... whatever, its a huge load of DRAMA, and at long last when something is released, it will be in support of the suicidal hijackers fiasco and serve to re-enforce the idea that hijacked airliners were used as weapons. The public is being PLAYED! AMERICA needs to wake up and tell the Donkey & Elephant WE THE PEOPLE disown U! We want no part of your games! We want CHANGE and the real change will NOT come from the oval office, REAL change ( change U can believe in!) comes from the grass roots level!
Part 1, at about 1:28:20. Enjoy. [video]http://www.luogocomune.net/site/modules/sections/index.php?op=viewarticle&artid=167[/video]
Verifies that they weren't going at top speed until they powered up to run at the towers. Still does not provide evidence that the planes would be uncontrollable at the speed they were traveling.
Tests done by pilots and aviation experts prove that it would have been. Especially for amateur pilots. http://http://pilotsfor911truth.org/wtc_speed
No,thank you... - - - Updated - - - How would they know?...Not a ONE has tried it,it flies in the rule of safe flying
For the benefit of the "peanut gallery" Please note that in the previous post, "No, thank you" most probably refers to a refusal to examine the evidence. ( correct me if I'm wrong here ). Note also that in the case of "how would they know" I submit that the hijackers had absolutely no way of knowing if an airliner would be controllable, or break apart or whatever would happen at speed far in excess of the standard operating speeds of said aircraft. Why gamble on not being able to complete the mission as planned? and given the out of control issue, if the hijackers managed to accelerate the aircraft to such a speed and then found it uncontrollable, the airliner could just as easily end up in the river near the towers having done no damage at all to anything in lower Manhattan. on yet another note, the hijackers had NO way of knowing the exact nature of the wall at the Pentagon and the probability of penetration, maybe the new blast resistant wall could not be penetrated at all(?) so therefore, the other options were to dive the airliner into the roof, or fly it into the front door of the Pentagon. Question gets to be, WHY that specific location for the hit?
Ok, if you're going to ignore the things I post because somehow they're beneath you, then we're both wasting our time. I have no interest in arguing with someone who does this: Or maybe it's because you can't think of your usual BS answer.
Everything in your post is speculation. How do you know that Hanjour wasn't trying to hit the roof and fell short of his mark because he couldn't control the aircraft?
The radar operators who saw the maneuver described it as something they would expect a military pilot to execute, if the hijacker "pilot" was fighting for control, would the path have looked like it did? The real question here is why did the perpetrator(s) choose to murder the people in the accounting office where the hit happened.
Prove that Hanjour knew that where he hit was an accounting office. You are speculating without considering evidence.
I'm NOT ignoring them,we've been over this same stuff ad nauseam with every newly minted truther that comes in here,and it gets old when they come in here posting links to youtube,that would take HOURS to watch....Your arguments aren't that compelling..
So if the Arab radicals had no intelligence at all about the PENTAGON, the only excuse you can provide in support of the hit being were it was being that the hijacker had only marginal control ( if that .... ) and the aircraft just happened to end up where it did. Just from a statistical perspective, if anyone is actually having serious trouble controlling an aircraft, the odds of it striking anyplace over a large area around the pentagon are about even, therefore, actually striking the Pentagon is at best a 50/50 proposition, and then there is the factor of penetration of the wall, this was a blast resistant wall made for our military HQ, why should an airliner be capable of not only punching through it, but penetrating completely such that only minimal aircraft bits remained outside ( that is < 1% of the mass of the airliner )? Evidence for there having been any airliner at all at the PENTAGON, is slim to none.......
Wrong,there are pictures of wreckage inside the pentagon,there are news reports of people picking up pieces outside on the lawn,and there is a report of one person holding a piece with a boeing part numbaer...It's your contention that there was 'no plane' that is slim to none