73
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] GaveUp@hexbear.net 19 points 1 year ago

No photographic or video footage of a plane wreck near the site. All nearby footage confiscated except for this extremely grainy, 2 FPS video that the state released themselves (THAT STILL CLEARLY SHOWS A MISSILE)

CNN reports that no evidence of a plane crash near the Pentagon was found

Claimed flight path to the Pentagon has direct contradictions to the damage done

[-] Dolores@hexbear.net 53 points 1 year ago

THAT STILL CLEARLY SHOWS A MISSILE

it shows a collection of white pixels roughly dildo-shaped, a characteristic shared by aircraft & missiles. i don't find this very compelling, or a guy expecting to find giant airplane pieces & not. if it directly hit, wouldn't the debris be inside the building? and on fire?

the expectations of a "normal" plane crash with lots of identifiable debris rests on how the vast majority of planes don't crash directly into solid objects, except the ground, which is easier to contrast from a building.

[-] nat_turner_overdrive@hexbear.net 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The big issue with that is the hole isn't wide enough to account for wings, and there's no wing or engine wreckage on the lawn. So where did the wings go?

anyway I think that's the part that raises the biggest questions for me

[-] Dolores@hexbear.net 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

turned to ribbons by the concrete? planes are light and flamable shrug-outta-hecks where are the wings in this crash? most they found was like a 2 meter span of a wingtip

[-] nat_turner_overdrive@hexbear.net 17 points 1 year ago

To be fair, that seems to be a very muddy crash site, they're using an excavator to dig in some of the shots. The Pentagon lawn is basically bare, and I really can't imagine that jet engines wouldn't leave behind some kind of damage to the exterior wall and at least a bit of wreckage.

[-] Sephitard9001@hexbear.net 9 points 1 year ago

On the WTC, the impact of the wings is clearly visible on the building. There is literally no indication whatsoever the Pentagon was hit by a winged aircraft.

[-] Dolores@hexbear.net 34 points 1 year ago

they're different buildings. there isnt a huge corpus of airliner impacts in the side of building-holes to reasonably assume all kinds of buildings would leave wing-marks

[-] HumanBehaviorByBjork@hexbear.net 10 points 1 year ago

people talking about it like planes just crash every day and every knows what multiple different kinds of crashes "should" look like. like just say you're going off vibes and leave it there.

[-] Sphere@hexbear.net 4 points 1 year ago

From reading other parts of this thread, as it happens, I just found out that said corpus is larger than you might think

[-] Dolores@hexbear.net 7 points 1 year ago

weird how the bomber did the no-wing hole while the tiny SR20 made one more plane-shaped.

[-] cosecantphi@hexbear.net 18 points 1 year ago

The outer walls of the WTC buildings were pretty much mostly glass, right? Whereas the Pentagon is supposed to be fortified.

this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2023
73 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13447 readers
846 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Vaush posts go in the_dunk_tank

Dunk posts in general go in the_dunk_tank, not here

Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from the_dunk_tank

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS