Hi ShilohCat,
Unlike our RWE sycophants on the thread, I actually have made quite a study of this incident. Here's a complementary website to the asile.org page:
govsux.com
But wait, there's more.....
govsux.com
And did you realize that the missile that hit the Pentagon was aimed right at Don Rumsfeld's desk but miraculously took a 270 degree, high speed, high G's detour in order to hit the least populated portion of the Pentagon, an area that was undergoing renovations and held absolutely none of the JCS or civilian brass? Amazing but true.
My opinion? Air launched cruise missile impacted the Pentagon as Flight 77 cruised at low altitude out to sea and on to a secret CIA landing field on a secure island in the so-called "Bermuda Triangle". Such private islands exist, some of which have been used by drug traffickers as way stations for light aircraft.
Here's some more interesting websites discussing the Flight 77/Pentagon story with a great deal of skepticism regarding the "official" story.
thepowerhour.com
asile.org
SNIP:
Contradictions
The official version is complex and contradicts itself, so read on carefully.
To justify the absence of Boeing debris, the authorities explained that the aircraft was pulverized when it impacted with such a highly reinforced building as the Pentagon.
To explain the disappearance of the aircraft's more resistant components, like the engines or brakes, we were told that the aircraft melted (with the exception of one landing light and its black boxes).
To justify the absence of 100 tons of melted metal, experts attempted to show that the fire exceeded 2500 °C, leading to the evaporation of parts of the aircraft (but not of the building itself or, clearly, of the landing light or black boxes).
To justify the presence of the hole, officials now state that it was caused by the nose of the aircraft, which, despite the rigors of the crash, continued careering through the three buildings.
The aircraft thus disintegrated on contact with the Pentagon, melted inside the building, evaporated at 2500° C and still penetrated two other buildings via a hole 2 ½ yards in diameter. Questions need to be asked of Pentagon experts here. The official version has its own holes that need filling.
END SNIP
**********************
And in describing the damage to the three outer rings of the Pentagon structure, the damage is completely consistent with the use of a deleted uranium tipped cruise missile, and completely inconsistent with the impact of a Boeing 757.
Quote:
"An aircraft would have demolished the building rather than penetrate the walls. The question is: What type of device would have been capable of producing such damage? One possible answer is a missile. Missiles have heads that are much stronger than aircraft noses. They are made from depleted uranium and are designed for penetration. Depleted uranium is an extremely dense metal that friction heats up, increasing its penetrative capacities. Such missiles are particularly used to enter bunkers. An aircraft crashes and breaks apart whereas a missile of this type will penetrate its target.
"Fire fighters attest to having seen part of a plane that they identify, albeit with difficulty, as an aircraft nose. The nose of an aircraft, however, would not survive such an accident. The three buildings could not have been penetrated by the nose of a Boeing. However, a missile head made of depleted uranium could well have been capable of such damage."
End quote
asile.org
navytimes.com
armytimes.com |
