"So where is the plane?" - Crash flap follow up
geoff@geoffmetcalf.com - wrote:

My column last week, "So where is the plane?"
sparked an unbelievable storm of response. I am
physically unable to respond to the thousands of
e-mails individually, but hopefully this column will
cover most of the bases.

Go here for full story:
http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?id=149495&article=21061

Re: So where is the plane? - geoff@geoffmetcalf.com
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26777

========================================================================
Subject: Flight 77 -

From: Ed Toner captained@comcast.net

Ret TWA Feb. after 30 years.
ATP B-707, 720, 727, 747, 757, 767 & L-1011.

To: apfn@apfn.org
http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?id=149495&article=21027

I really don't have all the answers to this Flt. 77 thing, but based on what
I have seen on several web sites of conspiratol nature, I believe in general
that the question of the aircraft not hitting the Pentagon is foolish.

The lack of aircraft wreckage - How long AFTER the crash/explosion were
these photo's taken? Are there no photo's taken immediately after the crash?
Are there no photo's of the wreckage being carted away? Were there no human
remains to be found, particularly of PAZ seated in the rear of the aircraft?

On the lack of a photo of a B-767 A/C just before the strike - Were there no
eye-witness's who saw this stupendous event/explosion? I would think that
there were many. How about sky-cams, security cameras, guards, passerby's
etc.? Have none come foreward?

Personally, I am surprised by the amount of damage caused by this A/C.
Mostly aluminum, crashing into reinforced concrete devestated the area where
it hit. How, I wonder. I am not a structural engineer however, and perhaps
this IS possible. Jet fuel is not particularly volatile, and I would not
expect an explosion, yet there appears that there was one. We should be
looking for an answer to this.

I am not at all against conspiracy theories and investigations. In fact I am
very much interested in these things. For instance, I am quite convinced
that TWA 800 was not blown up by her own fuel tank. I took a personal
interest in this one because it is the very A/C that I flew in Sept. 1972
for my B-747 ATP Rating . Many believe it was a missle, but I suspect that a
bomb was more likely. The nose section seperated from the rest of the
fuselage at the same frame that PAA did over Lockerbie.

I'll add more if you like, after you examine my comments here, and respond.

Ed Toner - captained@comcast.net - 3/19/02

ATP B-707, 720, 727, 747, 757, 767 & L-1011.

Ret TWA Feb. 1987 after 30 years.

=========================================================================
"Dick Eastman" - eastman@compwrx.com - wrote:

[snip]
Look again at http://www.criticalthrash.com/terror/P1010016.JPG

Bosankoe has cropped this shot to the important piece. [I will mail it to
anyone who asks for the Bosankoe enlargement in the subject section). This
is the entry point of the impact. Notice the small yellow pillar with the 4
wooden posts. This pillar gives you a scale for the size of the fire hole
and therefore the size of the plane/missile that hit the Pentagon. At the
maximum this hole is no more than 3m (10ft), and that's being generous. The
glow of the fire just show the intensity of heat inside. The only mercy in
this is the speed at which the personnel inside would have died and most
would have been knocked unconcious by the blast.

>
> Patrick: The plane hit the ground first, then slid into the building. If
> the landing wheels were not down and locked, the full height of the plane
> would extend upwards into the second floor of the building, which is what
> happened.

[How absurd.  If the bottom half of the plane flew through the ground floor
and the top have plowed through the floor of the second story then we would
have had a sheared mess  -- the top portion would not have proceded more
than a few yards and the bottom would have gone much further.  But if the
plane did have to travel horizontally through and across the floor then the
"mountain side" wreckage would be the expected result.  But it is not there.
It did not happen.  What really happened is that a fighter jet fired a
missile ahead of its own impact.

First observe from the security video released by the Defense Department,
how the attacking jet approached horizontally at first-floor level. (note
also that this is a fighter jet and that it is firing a missile that leaves
a white trail.)

http://www.bosankoe.btinternet.co.uk/pentagon.gif

Now look at these scenes taken from the street straight across the lawn from
the explosion :

http://www.criticalthrash.com/terror/P1010015.JPG

How did the plane get past these street lamp posts?

http://www.criticalthrash.com/terror/P1010016.JPG 

Boeing 757 could not have passed between these lamposts as the Defense
Department security video shows that the attacking plane, flying in
horizontally at first-floor level obviously did.

http://www.criticalthrash.com/terror/P1010017.JPG

--DE]

> Question No 3
>
> The photograph above shows the lawn in front of the damaged building.
> You'll remember that the aircraft only hit the ground floor of the
> Pentagon's first ring. Can you find debris of a Boeing 757-200 in this
> photograph?
>
> Paul: : Yet another leading question ("you'll remember..."), but one
> looking in the wrong place anyway. At 250 mph, the plane did not stop at
> the outside of the building. Security camera photos and eyewitness accounts
> from many credible people, including AP reporter Dave Winslow, agree that
> the plane completely disappeared into the building. If you've seen photos
> of airline crashes after the fire is out, they often look more like
> landfill sites than anything recognizable as having been an airplane.

There is only one security camera photo  and that is what I present above --
there is  talk of a security video taken from a nearby gas station, but that
is reported to have been taken by the FBI and not released.  Yet Paul speaks
with the implication that he is taking this data into account, isn't he?
(Go look above and see that he does.)  This means that the FBI has given him
what it has not given the news media.  Or else, he is blowing smoke and
talking beyond what he has really investigated.  This discredits this joker
right here for me.  --DE]
>
> But since the question more literally asks for a photo showing airliner
> debris on the lawn, here's one. Here's another.

Those are not recognizable as pieces of a Boeing 757.
[snip]
"Dick Eastman" - eastman@compwrx.com
==========================================================================

Flight 77 ----
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/flight77.htm

Where is flight 77 ?
http://www.criticalthrash.com/terror

PACIFICATION OF PENTAGON
http://www.geocities.com/s911surprise3b/american_airlines_flight_77/

FLIGHT 77: SHOW ME THE PLANE!
http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?id=149495&article=21060

Click here for a blow-up of what the mainstream media claims is a large
passenger plane preparing to smash into the Pentagon.
http://www.infowars.com/pentagon%20page/index.htm
http://www.infowars.com/pentagon%20page/photos.html#blowup

911 - TERROR IN AMERICAN - PARTS 1 - 4
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/WTC.htm

WHO'S TRULY BEHIND THE ATTACK ON AMERICA?
http://www.ecologynews.com/cuenews43.html

HIGH-RISE EVACUATION EXPERT QUESTIONS 9.11 DEATH TOLL
by  William Thomas
Eamonn O'Brien shakes his head. "There is no way only 3,300 people died if
those buildings have been fully occupied," he says.
http://www3.bc.sympatico.ca/Willthomas/Evac%20Expert/evac.htm

The NWO will be defeated from forces within
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/nwo_defeated.htm

After you read this you may think twice about flying!
http://www.tmgnow.com/repository/cosmology/airline.htm

The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield
the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences
of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all
of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy
of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth becomes the greatest enemy
of the State. – Dr. Joseph M. Goebbels
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26777

Lying to the public is all right, says Washington's chief lawyer
By Mark Helm, in Washington
http://www.smh.com.au/news/0203/20/world/world10.html

`In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.'
http://disc.server.com/Indices/149495.html