http://media.putfile.com/jet-into-concrete-barrier

This is not a video of the plane hitting the Pentagon on 9/11/01...this is a military test video of an F4 Phantom aircraft hitting a reinforced concrete wall at 500 mph...the purpose of the test was to test the strength of the reinforced concrete used to make the barriers that surround nuclear reactors...very interesting video...hopefully salisburyboy watches

8/9/2006 4:47:28 PM

dang thats an awesome video...where do you people find stuff like that?

8/9/2006 4:49:14 PM

[old]

8/9/2006 4:49:16 PM

^^email

old or not...it should debunk this common conspiracy theorist idea on 9/11 at the Pentagon:

Quote :

"If it is true that a Boeing airliner hit the Pentagon, what happened to all the parts of it???? Why do we not find more parts of it???? Where did all that mass GO???"

course its not like we found big pieces of airplane at ground zero either but there were 50 different camera angles that showed planes hitting the towers so nobody could really argue that planes did indeed hit the WTC

8/9/2006 4:52:07 PM

im impressed

8/9/2006 4:54:25 PM

pentagon != nuclear reactor.

8/9/2006 4:58:26 PM

plane = plane

reinforced concrete = reinforced concrete

8/9/2006 4:59:40 PM

id imagine it is reinforced though. it wouldnt vaporize the whole plane but it should fuck it up a bit.

8/9/2006 4:59:45 PM

why wouldnt it vaporize the whole plane?

you think when the govt builds a building with the high security and logistical importance of the pentagon they are going to shave pennies on cheap concrete?

8/9/2006 5:01:21 PM

50 years ago

today

8/9/2006 5:03:18 PM

The pentagon had just been reinforced

today

today

8/9/2006 5:04:03 PM

moveable reenforeced walls

pentago not moveable

8/9/2006 5:04:56 PM

i wish the soapbox were a tv channel i could turn on and watch you guys argue in person - armed with a computer hooked up to the internet

8/9/2006 5:05:55 PM

You're right, a nonmoveable wall is probably stronger

8/9/2006 5:07:49 PM

no you dipshit.

It's about absorbing impact

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 5:11 PM. Reason : .]

8/9/2006 5:11:35 PM

whatever you say salisburyboy

btw "today" is irrelevant

the video was not shot today or in this century for that matter

the F4 was in action during the late 60s and early 70s

I'm sure the Pentagon was reinforced in the last 30-40 years between then and the 9/11 attacks

8/9/2006 5:16:27 PM

Thats a model of a wall in the video

8/9/2006 5:25:21 PM

its always treetwista gaying up legitimate threads, never anyone else

8/9/2006 5:28:31 PM

Walls cant absorb impact man

8/9/2006 5:29:18 PM

Quote :

"the video was not shot today or in this century for that matter the F4 was in action during the late 60s and early 70s"

8/9/2006 5:31:48 PM

and actually just read that the plane first went into service on May 27, 1958

point being, they had concrete back when the video was shot decades and decades ago that could withstand a 500 mph impact from one of the heavier jets in US military history

8/9/2006 5:34:11 PM

damn, nutsmacker got pwnt by treetwista10

8/9/2006 5:36:23 PM

nothin new if you took off your biased glasses

8/9/2006 5:37:15 PM

no, you are usually just a troll
but i wont derail your thread so you can reply with whatever you want and i'll drop it

8/9/2006 5:38:55 PM

i only troll people who think they are climatologists from watching docudramas by politicans

but anyway...i wonder what salisburyboy's response would be to this video

8/9/2006 5:40:45 PM

^ Easy. that video was produced by the government back in the 1970s for the purpose of proving later on that planes can disappear.

That said, all we have is the announcer's word that nothing was left of the plane. We never see a shot well after the impact when the dust has cleared.

That also said, from an engineering standpoint it is not improbably to suspect that the whole plane would turn into dust in the impact shown in the video.

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 6:15 PM. Reason : .,.]

8/9/2006 6:14:50 PM

yes, this video was clearly made back in the 70s by the illuminati overlord as they anticipated some people would question whether or not a plane could vaporize on impact with a concrete wall

/salisburyboy

8/9/2006 6:55:56 PM

i looked through the pictures from inside the pentagon that were released a few weeks back

there were clear pictures of pieces of the fuselage, as well as burned bodies strapped into airline seats inside the pentagon

8/9/2006 7:36:32 PM

hahhaha how is this any less stupid than the missile hitting the pentagon.

THIS JUST IN.......PLANE TURNS TO DUST!

8/9/2006 7:51:41 PM

I like how a f4 phantom straped to the ground =s the impact force of a passenger aircraft

8/9/2006 8:01:32 PM

i like how you pluralized the equal sign

8/9/2006 8:11:10 PM

equalses

8/9/2006 8:18:11 PM

Good find

8/9/2006 11:18:51 PM

Quote :

"Concerning conspiracies and conspiracy theorists: I am greatly influenced by Machiavelli's writing on the subject in the Discourses. There, he presents the theory of why most conspiracies fail. Too many conspirators and someone will leak news of it beforehand. (As Benjamin Franklin says, three people can keep a secret if two of them are dead.) Too few conspirators and the chances of success are minimal. In modern times, with the media on the prowl, it is almost impossible to keep a secret. I happen to be a basketball fan, and during the recent playoffs the officiating was so bad that rumors were circulating about a referee conspiracy against the Mavericks, led by David Stern. To me, this is nearly impossible to imagine, because all it would take is one person to have compunctions and reveal a smidgen of this to the press, and suddenly the NBA would have zero credibility and the damage would be incredible. The Bush people being behind the 9/11 events is clearly impossible under the Machiavellian standard. Is it possible Cheney and company have had closed door meetings about oil in Iraq and how to get our greedy hands on it? Not only possible, but probable. But clearly, after reading the many books on the subject, the true motivation behind this was was to rewrite the politics of the Middle East and tie Bush's legacy to that. Overturning Saddam, as Bush Sr. knew, is the worst possible way to secure Iraqi oil. The potential for chaos in the area, for a power vacuum is far more likely than the possibility of creating a grateful ally. In such a matter, your powers of analysis and your research is what will guide you past all of the nonsense that is spewed on talk radio. I recently saw a documentary on PBS that completely, and I mean completely debunked the whole conspiracy notion that the moon landings were fake. The evidence for our landing on the moon was incontrovertible. At the end of the documentary, they showed the evidence to the main conspiracy theorists and it did not shake their beliefs. The point is that we live in times where rational thinking is drowned out by entertainment, seductive sound bites, hype and emotionalism. In this fog, all cows are gray. There is no point in trying to argue with the conspiracy theorists. They will believe what they want to believe. As the saying goes, people want to be deceived."

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 11:25 PM. Reason : http://www.powerseductionandwar.com/archives/bs_barometers_1.phtml]

8/9/2006 11:24:42 PM

passenger jets are much larger, and far less rigid than F4 phantoms.

the fuel capacity is much greater on the jetliner, and it was at full capacity

if the f4 disintegrates into bits on impact, then the jetliner would undoubtedly be completely vaporized in the fiery explosion of hundreds of pounds of jet fuel.

...

^ and thats a great article. clear and concise, and (IMO) spot on.



[Edited on August 10, 2006 at 12:30 AM. Reason : ]

8/10/2006 12:26:25 AM

pretty sweet video

8/10/2006 1:33:02 AM

treetwista didn't own anyone.

8/10/2006 4:12:50 AM

he smacked you around like a little girl

8/10/2006 8:09:35 AM

hahahaa
nutsmackr became the nutsmacked.

8/10/2006 8:32:22 AM

1) the wall in the video is SOLID concrete (no windows) While the pentagon is not solid

2) F4 full load weight Vs. 757 plus the amount of jet fuel makes a big difference

Quote :

"I'm sure the Pentagon was reinforced in the last 30-40 years between then and the 9/11 attacks"

Actually this was not the case. The pentagon construction began in 1941, and while I am sure the concrete was built solid and "reinforced" as was the standard in 1941, there is a large difference in the reinforment used in the concrete from the video.


for refrence here are 2 pictures of the pentagon from the hit






Also:

Quote :

"The major basis for these claims can be summed up thusly: "It's obvious that a crashing 757 wouldn't cause the kind of damage that is clearly visible in pictures of the Pentagon." The problem with this reasoning is fairly obvious: There is not a large body of data on what happens when you crash a 757 into a large concrete pentagon-shaped building. In fact, there's no data at all concerning what happens when you crash a 757 into a large concrete pentagon-shaped building except, presumably, the very pictures that the author is summarily dismissing. "

Having been in the pentagon, and working in there, and seeing the renovation work, it's not built like you think.

I would talk more but I need to get back to work

8/10/2006 8:41:07 AM

Quote :

"i looked through the pictures from inside the pentagon that were released a few weeks back there were clear pictures of pieces of the fuselage, as well as burned bodies strapped into airline seats inside the pentagon "

Where did you see these pics?

8/10/2006 8:41:52 AM

check it...

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html


I believe salis would call that post a "hit piece"

8/10/2006 8:47:05 AM

ha abovetopsecret.com

gg

8/10/2006 8:49:50 AM

haha...i know....just did a search for pictures....and that sho' did have a lot of them

8/10/2006 8:56:09 AM

holy shit what a complete debunk of all conspiracy theories. Well done whoever did that research.

8/10/2006 8:58:15 AM

no dude...no...

that was just a "hit piece" by some alien controlled, jewish cabal member zionist pig

the truth is spreading

8/10/2006 9:06:40 AM

if some dude posted that in here no one would read all the shit.

but thats alot of evidence.

8/10/2006 9:16:56 AM

the name of that website (abovetopsecret) is unfortunate,

because that article is just awesome.

thats the best research ive read on the 9/11 pentagon attack, and it just kills all the salisburyboy-type retard conspiracy theories

8/10/2006 11:21:07 AM

usually common sense kills salisburyboy-type retard conspiracy theories

but some people on here need it spelled out for them like 8 year olds

8/10/2006 11:22:11 AM

All the debate aside, thank you TreeTwista -- I saw that video years ago and I've been trying to find it ever since. Definitely a bad ass clip.

8/10/2006 11:36:26 AM