I think you people are forgetting something:
In the wreckage of the WTC Towers, they found wing and fuselage parts, after the planes exploded and fell hundreds of feet, mixing in with the rubble.
None have been reportedly found or seen at the Pentagon.
Also, the wings wouldnt have fit in that hole (a hole, btw, that WAS to small to have fit an entire plane of that size in), they would have shredded off upon impact if the plane buried itself in the building. This argument also applies to the tail section and rudder. In the footage of ANY other plane crash site you see, the tail section is almost always intact, or at least leaves very discernable pieces intact (as the tail section recieves the least amount of stress or impact from any head-on crash). NONE of these plane parts are seen in any of the footage.
As for the engines, does anyone know how dense the machinery inside a turbine engine is? Inch per inch, they are the heaviest part of any machine, yet there are no impact points by them, and the only "part" recovered from the site is a rotor plate, the flimsiest part of a turbine engine, that is far too small to have been an outer rotor part of a turbine from the plane they are saying crashed there. The odds of the engines being so totally destroyed as to be unrecognizable at a crash site yet leave an inner rotor intact is so infantesimile as to be accurately labeled as "impossible".
Yes, there is more to this story than the official report.
Yes, the WTC Towers were strong enough to withstand that impact, and the substructure was strong enough not to have completely caved in like it did.
Yes, the WTC Towers collapsed in freefall, without tumbling over to the side. No structure is built to allow such a fall from happening due to an accident.
This time, its not just my oppinion I am posting, nor is it supposition or theory, it is pure fact.
Xhar
In the wreckage of the WTC Towers, they found wing and fuselage parts, after the planes exploded and fell hundreds of feet, mixing in with the rubble.
None have been reportedly found or seen at the Pentagon.
Also, the wings wouldnt have fit in that hole (a hole, btw, that WAS to small to have fit an entire plane of that size in), they would have shredded off upon impact if the plane buried itself in the building. This argument also applies to the tail section and rudder. In the footage of ANY other plane crash site you see, the tail section is almost always intact, or at least leaves very discernable pieces intact (as the tail section recieves the least amount of stress or impact from any head-on crash). NONE of these plane parts are seen in any of the footage.
As for the engines, does anyone know how dense the machinery inside a turbine engine is? Inch per inch, they are the heaviest part of any machine, yet there are no impact points by them, and the only "part" recovered from the site is a rotor plate, the flimsiest part of a turbine engine, that is far too small to have been an outer rotor part of a turbine from the plane they are saying crashed there. The odds of the engines being so totally destroyed as to be unrecognizable at a crash site yet leave an inner rotor intact is so infantesimile as to be accurately labeled as "impossible".
Yes, there is more to this story than the official report.
Yes, the WTC Towers were strong enough to withstand that impact, and the substructure was strong enough not to have completely caved in like it did.
Yes, the WTC Towers collapsed in freefall, without tumbling over to the side. No structure is built to allow such a fall from happening due to an accident.
This time, its not just my oppinion I am posting, nor is it supposition or theory, it is pure fact.
Xhar