The Missing tail Section of Flight 77 - Democratic Underground

seatnineb

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jun-18-06 03:31 PM
Original message

The Missing tail Section of Flight 77

Check out this excellent analysis by Killtown regarding the all elusive tail section of Flight 77:

June 17, 2006
Flight 77's Missing Tail Section

The best smoking gun that no 757 hit the Pentagon.

This is how the official story has Flight 77 flying into the Pentagon

(Pentagon Building Performance Report - 3.7 SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT, PDF)

Notice it's fuselage strikes between the 1st and 2nd floors and it's vertical tail (or stabilizer/rudder) extends above the 3rd floor and it's right horizontal stabilizer should have contacted the wall between the 1st and 2nd story windows:

A Boeing 757's tail section is HUGE and should have either left a gash in the wall if it partially entered, or left a very noticeable mark on it if it sheered off and crumpled against it before bouncing off, or from being obliterated into a million pieces from hitting the recently retrofitted wall at a blistering speed of 530 mph. However, you can clearly see that none of that happened:

More here:

http://killtown.blogspot.com/2006/06/flight-77s-missing-tail-section.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Bolo Boffin

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jun-18-06 04:17 PM
Response to Original message

1. Perhaps it's on the other side of the island... n/t

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DoYouEverWonder

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jun-18-06 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #1

2. It's probably wherever that 2nd engine ended up

From what I recall, they only admitted to finding one engine at the Pentagon. Since the plane didn't break up before hitting the building, where did the 2nd engine go?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Americus

(279 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jun-18-06 04:44 PM
Response to Original message

3. As if it's needed, here's another example of a tail section crash survivor

http://www.suntimes.com/photos/galleries/realchicago/1970s/13.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

StealthyDragon

(102 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jun-18-06 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #3

4. It amazes me how many people

Edited on Sun Jun-18-06 04:57 PM by StealthyDragon

will do everything in their power to ignore the obvious.

The missing vertical stabilizer mark is one of the keys to exposing the government lie. I'm happy to see that Killtown finally caught on to this point.

The question is.......what lie did they sell Congress?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

spooked911

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jun-18-06 06:06 PM
Response to Original message

5. IMHO, the most convincing argument that flight 77 didn't hit the Pentagon

is Nila Savadegan's analysis of the ground effect. Basically, a large plane like a Boeing 757 CANNOT go 500+ mph only inches off the ground.

But the lack of damage from the tail section is certainly another clue to the fact that no 757 hit the Pentagon.

Plus, the fact that flight 77 never took off according to the BTS database...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

bushatbooker

(227 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jun-22-06 01:47 PM
Response to Original message

6. Pro-757 supporters will stay away from this thread

because it shoots down there theory that a 757 hit the Pentagon.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Wed May 15th 2024, 07:42 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.