AggiEE said:

---

And a whole host of information here from pilots that question 9/11

https://911pilots.org/

---

From that link:

Quote:

---

An example of this is given by the purported profile flown by alleged Muslim hijacker Hani Hanjour who supposedly piloted American Airlines flight 77 that allegedly struck the Pentagon on 9/11. The aircraft was reported to have conducted a descending and accelerating 330 degree corkscrew turn from 7000 feet west of the Pentagon to arrive precisely at ground level without striking the surface to hit the Office of Naval Intelligence at nearly 500 miles per hour with military precision on his first attempt. This maneuver was replicated in a flight simulator.

---

Sounds like someone was able to replicate the maneuver.

Oh, and the guy who runs the site was retired from flying medically and spent time in a mental institution.

I did something very similar as a dumbass high school kid in my brother's new Charger. If I had meant to do it, it would have been slick as snot but in reality it was all luck and the wherewithal to play it cool.

schmellba99 said:

---

I have never argued, and frankly nobody on this thread or any other thread has ever argued, that the government is lily white and pure as the driven snow. Quit trying to make that argument because it simply is nothing more than trying to change the subject or move the goalposts so you can find some "gotcha!" moment that you think actually validates your beyond skewed view of a sequence of events.

What has been argued, and backed up with facts, data and everything else - is that your dumbass belief that no investigations were done until years later and that the WTC towers physically could not have collapsed the way they did and that the Pentagon wasn't hit with a 757 is pure, utter, complete stupidity and garbage. I'm sorry if those words hurt your feelings....but them's the facts brosephus.

Like you said though - absolutely nothing will change your mind, because you are so far gone from reality that you cannot comprehend anything other than your little fantasy world. I honestly feel sorry for people that cannot accept factual, logical and rational data presented to them because it doesn't line up with whatever make believe fairy dust world they live in and will spend hours trying to prove something that doesn't exist, wile flat out ignoring anything that doesn't align with their little unicorn world dreams and telling everybody that they just can't see it because they are big government lemmings.

---

it's actually chilling that such people exist in a modern industrialized country in the 21st century.

"just because an apple falls from a tree doesn't mean there is gravity!! how do you know the tree wasn't created by the government just to fool the citizens!!"

LMCane said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

I have never argued, and frankly nobody on this thread or any other thread has ever argued, that the government is lily white and pure as the driven snow. Quit trying to make that argument because it simply is nothing more than trying to change the subject or move the goalposts so you can find some "gotcha!" moment that you think actually validates your beyond skewed view of a sequence of events.

What has been argued, and backed up with facts, data and everything else - is that your dumbass belief that no investigations were done until years later and that the WTC towers physically could not have collapsed the way they did and that the Pentagon wasn't hit with a 757 is pure, utter, complete stupidity and garbage. I'm sorry if those words hurt your feelings....but them's the facts brosephus.

Like you said though - absolutely nothing will change your mind, because you are so far gone from reality that you cannot comprehend anything other than your little fantasy world. I honestly feel sorry for people that cannot accept factual, logical and rational data presented to them because it doesn't line up with whatever make believe fairy dust world they live in and will spend hours trying to prove something that doesn't exist, wile flat out ignoring anything that doesn't align with their little unicorn world dreams and telling everybody that they just can't see it because they are big government lemmings.

---

it's actually chilling that such people exist in a modern industrialized country in the 21st century.

"just because an apple falls from a tree doesn't mean there is gravity!! how do you know the tree wasn't created by the government just to fool the citizens!!"

---

That's silly. Of course the government didn't create trees. But ask yourself this: who detached the apple from the tree?

CanyonAg77 said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

And a whole host of information here from pilots that question 9/11

https://911pilots.org/

---

From that link:

Quote:

---

An example of this is given by the purported profile flown by alleged Muslim hijacker Hani Hanjour who supposedly piloted American Airlines flight 77 that allegedly struck the Pentagon on 9/11. The aircraft was reported to have conducted a descending and accelerating 330 degree corkscrew turn from 7000 feet west of the Pentagon to arrive precisely at ground level without striking the surface to hit the Office of Naval Intelligence at nearly 500 miles per hour with military precision on his first attempt. This maneuver was replicated in a flight simulator.

---

Sounds like someone was able to replicate the maneuver.

Oh, and the guy who runs the site was retired from flying medically and spent time in a mental institution.

---

Jesus, talk about selective quoting. You should work for the mainstream media with that nonsense

Did you bother to read the section that came immediately after?

Quote:

---

This maneuver was replicated in a flight simulator. Highly experienced pilots could not perform this maneuver on successive attempts without crashing and yet, according to the official narrative, Hani Hanjour accomplished this amazing aerial feat on the first attempt with minimal aircraft experience training in light Cessna aircraft having only a few hundred hours of total flight time.

---

That "amazing aerial feat" was significantly less challenging than hitting the WTC, where they went two for two. This guy even did it on his first attempt! Most people need two or three crashes to crash.

Congrats on finding some smooth brained pilots to share your disability.

AggiEE said:

---

Quote:

---

This maneuver was replicated in a flight simulator. Highly experienced pilots could not perform this maneuver on successive attempts without crashing and yet, according to the official narrative, Hani Hanjour accomplished this amazing aerial feat on the first attempt with minimal aircraft experience training in light Cessna aircraft having only a few hundred hours of total flight time.

---

---

Can you stop with this rediculous talking point? It doesn't matter if his training was in a light Cessna. He also spent time in simulators. Once the plane was in the air all the hard work was complete. All he had to do was make minor adjustments (things he would have learned in a basic Cessna) on his way to crashing the plane. He had enough training to obtain a FAA commercial pilot's certificate. He spent time in similators and did a couple scouting flights over DC prior to 9/11.

There was nothing spectacular about his maneuver. Have you watched the recration of the flight path from the data recorder? it was a big sweeping circle to lose altitude and setup for the final crash into the Pentagon., It took him a few mintures to turn and lose altitude.


The problem with your pilot skeptic is he is trying to replicate something he believes was a precise maneuver that was planed prior to execution. When in reality it was a killer trying to lose altitude before tyring to crash the aircraft into the Pentagon.

Also, you still haven't provided what a 757 is supposed to look like after crashing into a concrete building. Please provide your evidance.

Sorry if I see a complete lack of credibility from a website that claims there were no muslim hijackers.

It is laughably bad and should not be taken seriously.

Satellite of Love said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

Quote:

---

This maneuver was replicated in a flight simulator. Highly experienced pilots could not perform this maneuver on successive attempts without crashing and yet, according to the official narrative, Hani Hanjour accomplished this amazing aerial feat on the first attempt with minimal aircraft experience training in light Cessna aircraft having only a few hundred hours of total flight time.

---

---

Can you stop with this rediculous talking point? It doesn't matter if his training was in a light Cessna. He also spent time in simulators. Once the plane was in the air all the hard work was complete. All he had to do was make minor adjustments (things he would have learned in a basic Cessna) on his way to crashing the plane. He had enough training to obtain a FAA commercial pilot's certificate. He spent time in similators and did a couple scouting flights over DC prior to 9/11.

There was nothing spectacular about his maneuver. Have you watched the recration of the flight path from the data recorder? it was a big sweeping circle to lose altitude and setup for the final crash into the Pentagon., It took him a few mintures to turn and lose altitude.


The problem with your pilot skeptic is he is trying to replicate something he believes was a precise maneuver that was planed prior to execution. When in reality it was a killer trying to lose altitude before tyring to crash the aircraft into the Pentagon.

Also, you still haven't provided what a 757 is supposed to look like after crashing into a concrete building. Please provide your evidance.

---

THIS.

So you admit that some made it and some crashed the scenario?

chickencoupe16 said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

Yes, they did manage to hit only the side face of the building, with an incredible maneuver that highly experienced pilots could not replicate in a simulator

---

What exactly was that maneuver?

---

He made a large circle and lost atititude in the process. The truthers make this out to be something that it isn't. I posted the recreated flight path from the flight recorder data. It takes him several minutes to do a 360 degree turn to setup flying at the pentagon at a few thousand feet.

A larger view of "the maneuver"

Flight data recorder! Oh you rubes actually believe that!?

The Japanese had the best pilots in the world in WWII because many of of their barely trained kamikaze pilots were able to hit maneuvering ships at sea, an amazing aerial feat. Many of them accomplished this on their VERY FIRST kamikaze mission!

Satellite of Love said:

---

chickencoupe16 said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

Yes, they did manage to hit only the side face of the building, with an incredible maneuver that highly experienced pilots could not replicate in a simulator

---

What exactly was that maneuver?

---

He made a large circle and lost atititude in the process. The truthers make this out to be something that it isn't. I posted the recreated flight path from the flight recorder data. It takes him several minutes to do a 360 degree turn to setup flying at the pentagon at a few thousand feet.

A larger view of "the maneuver"

---

What that also nicely shows is there is no long banking approach that would necessarily give time for bystanders to notice the plane descending and rushing toward the west wall. It just isn't surprising that almost none (if any) caught it on some digital camera. (Again, unlike the age of cell phones, they don't have a cam to just whip out---even if in their car or in reach by chance)

Aside: Canyon, ignore prior query on previous page. The last two posts have very well answered it.

Satellite of Love said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

Quote:

---

This maneuver was replicated in a flight simulator. Highly experienced pilots could not perform this maneuver on successive attempts without crashing and yet, according to the official narrative, Hani Hanjour accomplished this amazing aerial feat on the first attempt with minimal aircraft experience training in light Cessna aircraft having only a few hundred hours of total flight time.

---

---

Can you stop with this rediculous talking point? It doesn't matter if his training was in a light Cessna. He also spent time in simulators. Once the plane was in the air all the hard work was complete. All he had to do was make minor adjustments (things he would have learned in a basic Cessna) on his way to crashing the plane. He had enough training to obtain a FAA commercial pilot's certificate. He spent time in similators and did a couple scouting flights over DC prior to 9/11.

There was nothing spectacular about his maneuver. Have you watched the recration of the flight path from the data recorder? it was a big sweeping circle to lose altitude and setup for the final crash into the Pentagon., It took him a few mintures to turn and lose altitude.


The problem with your pilot skeptic is he is trying to replicate something he believes was a precise maneuver that was planed prior to execution. When in reality it was a killer trying to lose altitude before tyring to crash the aircraft into the Pentagon.

Also, you still haven't provided what a 757 is supposed to look like after crashing into a concrete building. Please provide your evidance.

---

HAVE YOU watched anything I've posted?

No, you haven't.

Please do before writing something completely ignorant of the facts surrounding why that maneuver was impossible to perform for even highly experienced pilots

I've flown a cessna exactly once, but what stunned me is how easy it was. Instructor just gave me a one sentence explanation of what to do when we were at about 5000 ft and i landed the ****ing thing.

Now, the cessna is probably a lot easier than a jet, and as long as you're aiming down and losing altitude it a;l,ost cant stall, but i am not going to buy that it was super difficult to hit the ****ing pentagon.

cbr said:

---

I've flown a cessna exactly once, but what stunned me is how easy it was. Instructor just gave me a one sentence explanation of what to do when we were at about 5000 ft and i landed the ****ing thing.

Now, the cessna is probably a lot easier than a jet, and as long as you're aiming down and losing altitude it a;l,ost cant stall, but i am not going to buy that it was super difficult to hit the ****ing pentagon.

---

''I'm still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon; he could not fly at all," said an ex-employee of a flight school attended by Hani Hanjour, alleged hijacker and pilot of Flight 77 on 9/11

The guy had an FAA Commercial Pilot Certificate. I guess the FAA and their examiners and applications people need to also be put on the list of co-conspirators.

AggiEE said:

---

cbr said:

---

I've flown a cessna exactly once, but what stunned me is how easy it was. Instructor just gave me a one sentence explanation of what to do when we were at about 5000 ft and i landed the ****ing thing.

Now, the cessna is probably a lot easier than a jet, and as long as you're aiming down and losing altitude it a;l,ost cant stall, but i am not going to buy that it was super difficult to hit the ****ing pentagon.

---

''I'm still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon; he could not fly at all," said an ex-employee of a flight school attended by Hani Hanjour, alleged hijacker and pilot of Flight 77 on 9/11

---

Hanjour had a commercial pilots license.

New World Ag said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

cbr said:

---

I've flown a cessna exactly once, but what stunned me is how easy it was. Instructor just gave me a one sentence explanation of what to do when we were at about 5000 ft and i landed the ****ing thing.

Now, the cessna is probably a lot easier than a jet, and as long as you're aiming down and losing altitude it a;l,ost cant stall, but i am not going to buy that it was super difficult to hit the ****ing pentagon.

---

''I'm still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon; he could not fly at all," said an ex-employee of a flight school attended by Hani Hanjour, alleged hijacker and pilot of Flight 77 on 9/11

---

Hanjour had a commercial pilots license.

---

And who gives out the licenses!? The GOVERNMENT! It all fits!!

New World Ag said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

cbr said:

---

I've flown a cessna exactly once, but what stunned me is how easy it was. Instructor just gave me a one sentence explanation of what to do when we were at about 5000 ft and i landed the ****ing thing.

Now, the cessna is probably a lot easier than a jet, and as long as you're aiming down and losing altitude it a;l,ost cant stall, but i am not going to buy that it was super difficult to hit the ****ing pentagon.

---

''I'm still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon; he could not fly at all," said an ex-employee of a flight school attended by Hani Hanjour, alleged hijacker and pilot of Flight 77 on 9/11

---

Hanjour had a commercial pilots license.

---

Did he fly a 757 before?

Satellite of Love said:

---

A larger view of "the maneuver"

---

HOLY CRAP!

CHUCK YEAGAR AND BOB HOOVER FLYING TOGETHER COULDN'T PULL THAT OFF IN A MILLION YEARS!!!!!

IT'S LIKE WATCHING A THUNDERBIRDS AIR SHOW!!!!!

AggiEE said:

---

New World Ag said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

cbr said:

---

I've flown a cessna exactly once, but what stunned me is how easy it was. Instructor just gave me a one sentence explanation of what to do when we were at about 5000 ft and i landed the ****ing thing.

Now, the cessna is probably a lot easier than a jet, and as long as you're aiming down and losing altitude it a;l,ost cant stall, but i am not going to buy that it was super difficult to hit the ****ing pentagon.

---

''I'm still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon; he could not fly at all," said an ex-employee of a flight school attended by Hani Hanjour, alleged hijacker and pilot of Flight 77 on 9/11

---

Hanjour had a commercial pilots license.

---

Did he fly a 757 before?

---

No, and it didn't matter. I have 14 hours instruction in single engine Pipers and could maneuver and crash a passenger jet given enough study time.

http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/pilots.html

Commander Ralph Kolstad, U.S. Navy (ret) Retired commercial airline captain with 27 years experience. Aircraft flown: Boeing 727, 757 and 767, McDonnell Douglas MD-80, and Fokker F-100. Retired fighter pilot. Former Air Combat Instructor, U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School (Topgun). 20-year Navy career. Aircraft flown: McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom, Douglas A-4 Skyhawk, and Grumman F-14 Tomcat. 23,000+ total hours flown.
Statement to this website 8/20/07: "I started questioning the Sept 11, 2001 "story" only days after the event. It just didn't make any sense to me. How could a steel and concrete building collapse after being hit by a Boeing 767? Didn't the engineers design it to withstand a direct hit from a Boeing 707, approximately the same size and weight of the 767? The evidence just didn't add up. ...

At the Pentagon, the pilot of the Boeing 757 did quite a feat of flying. I have 6,000 hours of flight time in Boeing 757's and 767's and could not have flown it the way the flight path was described.

I was also a Navy fighter pilot and Air Combat Instructor, U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School and have experience flying low altitude, high speed aircraft. I could not have done what these beginners did. Something stinks to high heaven!

Where is the damage to the wall of the Pentagon from the wings? Where are the big pieces that always break away in an accident? Where is all the luggage? Where are the miles and miles of wire, cable, and lines that are part and parcel of any large aircraft? Where are the steel engine parts? Where is the steel landing gear? Where is the tail section that would have broken into large pieces?

I also personally knew American Airlines Captain "Chick" Burlingame, who was the captain of Flight 77 which allegedly hit the Pentagon, and I know he would not have given up his airplane to crazies!

And at the Shanksville Pennsylvania impact site, where is any of the wreckage?!!! Of all the pictures I have seen, there is only a hole! Where is any piece of a crashed airplane? Why was the area cordoned off, and no inspection allowed by the normal accident personnel? Where is any evidence at all?

When one starts using his own mind, and not what one was told, there is very little to believe in the official "story". ...

AggiEE said:

---

Did he fly a 757 before

---

Irrelevant.

Commercial pilot means at least 250 hours in the air.

The Air Force puts new pilots in a turbine aircraft when they have 25 hours.

They are flying pure jets by 125 hours.

They are flying fighters by 235 hours.

The hard thing about flying is getting it in the air, and landing it. Your training is more focused on emergency procedures, unusual situations, and takeoffs and landings.

Once it's up and trimmed for flight, it's pretty damn easy for almost anyone to make basic maneuvers, such as the one to hit the Pentagon.

New World Ag said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

New World Ag said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

cbr said:

---

I've flown a cessna exactly once, but what stunned me is how easy it was. Instructor just gave me a one sentence explanation of what to do when we were at about 5000 ft and i landed the ****ing thing.

Now, the cessna is probably a lot easier than a jet, and as long as you're aiming down and losing altitude it a;l,ost cant stall, but i am not going to buy that it was super difficult to hit the ****ing pentagon.

---

''I'm still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon; he could not fly at all," said an ex-employee of a flight school attended by Hani Hanjour, alleged hijacker and pilot of Flight 77 on 9/11

---

Hanjour had a commercial pilots license.

---

Did he fly a 757 before?

---

No, and it didn't matter. I have 14 hours instruction in single engine Pipers and could maneuver and crash a passenger jet given enough study time.

---

Yet the pilots I have quoted who flew a 757 claim the maneuvers at those speeds were impossible

AggiEE said:

---

http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/pilots.html

Commander Ralph Kolstad, U.S. Navy (ret) Retired commercial airline captain with 27 years experience. Aircraft flown: Boeing 727, 757 and 767, McDonnell Douglas MD-80, and Fokker F-100. Retired fighter pilot. Former Air Combat Instructor, U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School (Topgun). 20-year Navy career. Aircraft flown: McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom, Douglas A-4 Skyhawk, and Grumman F-14 Tomcat. 23,000+ total hours flown.
Statement to this website 8/20/07: "I started questioning the Sept 11, 2001 "story" only days after the event. It just didn't make any sense to me. How could a steel and concrete building collapse after being hit by a Boeing 767? Didn't the engineers design it to withstand a direct hit from a Boeing 707, approximately the same size and weight of the 767? The evidence just didn't add up. ...

At the Pentagon, the pilot of the Boeing 757 did quite a feat of flying. I have 6,000 hours of flight time in Boeing 757's and 767's and could not have flown it the way the flight path was described.

I was also a Navy fighter pilot and Air Combat Instructor, U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School and have experience flying low altitude, high speed aircraft. I could not have done what these beginners did. Something stinks to high heaven!

Where is the damage to the wall of the Pentagon from the wings? Where are the big pieces that always break away in an accident? Where is all the luggage? Where are the miles and miles of wire, cable, and lines that are part and parcel of any large aircraft? Where are the steel engine parts? Where is the steel landing gear? Where is the tail section that would have broken into large pieces?

I also personally knew American Airlines Captain "Chick" Burlingame, who was the captain of Flight 77 which allegedly hit the Pentagon, and I know he would not have given up his airplane to crazies!

And at the Shanksville Pennsylvania impact site, where is any of the wreckage?!!! Of all the pictures I have seen, there is only a hole! Where is any piece of a crashed airplane? Why was the area cordoned off, and no inspection allowed by the normal accident personnel? Where is any evidence at all?

When one starts using his own mind, and not what one was told, there is very little to believe in the official "story". ...

---

This has been answered. This is just embarrassing.

AggiEE said:

---

New World Ag said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

New World Ag said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

cbr said:

---

I've flown a cessna exactly once, but what stunned me is how easy it was. Instructor just gave me a one sentence explanation of what to do when we were at about 5000 ft and i landed the ****ing thing.

Now, the cessna is probably a lot easier than a jet, and as long as you're aiming down and losing altitude it a;l,ost cant stall, but i am not going to buy that it was super difficult to hit the ****ing pentagon.

---

''I'm still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon; he could not fly at all," said an ex-employee of a flight school attended by Hani Hanjour, alleged hijacker and pilot of Flight 77 on 9/11

---

Hanjour had a commercial pilots license.

---

Did he fly a 757 before?

---

No, and it didn't matter. I have 14 hours instruction in single engine Pipers and could maneuver and crash a passenger jet given enough study time.

---

Yet the pilots I have quoted who flew a 757 claim the maneuvers at those speeds were impossible

---

So what happened?

CanyonAg77 said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

Did he fly a 757 before

---

Irrelevant.

Commercial pilot means at least 250 hours in the air.

The Air Force puts new pilots in a turbine aircraft when they have 25 hours.

They are flying pure jets by 125 hours.

They are flying fighters by 235 hours.

The hard thing about flying is getting it in the air, and landing it. Your training is more focused on emergency procedures, unusual situations, and takeoffs and landings.

Once it's up and trimmed for flight, it's pretty damn easy for almost anyone to make basic maneuvers, such as the one to hit the Pentagon.

---

Not irrelevant.

Commanding a 757 with those maneuvers and speeds requires significant training

These weren't "basic" maneuvers

Gee - I wonder if he crashed?

redcrayon said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/pilots.html

Commander Ralph Kolstad, U.S. Navy (ret) Retired commercial airline captain with 27 years experience. Aircraft flown: Boeing 727, 757 and 767, McDonnell Douglas MD-80, and Fokker F-100. Retired fighter pilot. Former Air Combat Instructor, U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School (Topgun). 20-year Navy career. Aircraft flown: McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom, Douglas A-4 Skyhawk, and Grumman F-14 Tomcat. 23,000+ total hours flown.
Statement to this website 8/20/07: "I started questioning the Sept 11, 2001 "story" only days after the event. It just didn't make any sense to me. How could a steel and concrete building collapse after being hit by a Boeing 767? Didn't the engineers design it to withstand a direct hit from a Boeing 707, approximately the same size and weight of the 767? The evidence just didn't add up. ...

At the Pentagon, the pilot of the Boeing 757 did quite a feat of flying. I have 6,000 hours of flight time in Boeing 757's and 767's and could not have flown it the way the flight path was described.

I was also a Navy fighter pilot and Air Combat Instructor, U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School and have experience flying low altitude, high speed aircraft. I could not have done what these beginners did. Something stinks to high heaven!

Where is the damage to the wall of the Pentagon from the wings? Where are the big pieces that always break away in an accident? Where is all the luggage? Where are the miles and miles of wire, cable, and lines that are part and parcel of any large aircraft? Where are the steel engine parts? Where is the steel landing gear? Where is the tail section that would have broken into large pieces?

I also personally knew American Airlines Captain "Chick" Burlingame, who was the captain of Flight 77 which allegedly hit the Pentagon, and I know he would not have given up his airplane to crazies!

And at the Shanksville Pennsylvania impact site, where is any of the wreckage?!!! Of all the pictures I have seen, there is only a hole! Where is any piece of a crashed airplane? Why was the area cordoned off, and no inspection allowed by the normal accident personnel? Where is any evidence at all?

When one starts using his own mind, and not what one was told, there is very little to believe in the official "story". ...

---

This has been answered. This is just embarrassing.

---

Oh it has?

A supposed terrorist with minimal fight training who is quoted as not being able to fly at all, successfully hijacked a 757 and performed tight maneuvers at high speeds, managing to hit the pentagon on its face

Meanwhile I have multiple pilots claim it was impossible, even some that tried to replicate it in a sim?

You guys believing in your lunatic government conspiracies involving barely trained middle eastern patsies

AggiEE said:

---

cbr said:

---

I've flown a cessna exactly once, but what stunned me is how easy it was. Instructor just gave me a one sentence explanation of what to do when we were at about 5000 ft and i landed the ****ing thing.

Now, the cessna is probably a lot easier than a jet, and as long as you're aiming down and losing altitude it a;l,ost cant stall, but i am not going to buy that it was super difficult to hit the ****ing pentagon.

---

''I'm still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon; he could not fly at all," said an ex-employee of a flight school attended by Hani Hanjour, alleged hijacker and pilot of Flight 77 on 9/11

---

Well that settles it. One guy thought he was bad at flying so that definitely outweighs the hundreds of eye witnesses who saw it live and the mountains of physical evidence from the site. Must have been a giant multilevel conspiracy and the people on the plane were killed off site and their remains were quickly Fedexed to the crash site with the rest of the planted evidence.

Quote:

---

How could a steel and concrete building collapse after being hit by a Boeing 767? Didn't the engineers design it to withstand a direct hit from a Boeing 707, approximately the same size and weight of the 767?

---

767 max weight is about 150% that of a 707

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

cbr said:

---

I've flown a cessna exactly once, but what stunned me is how easy it was. Instructor just gave me a one sentence explanation of what to do when we were at about 5000 ft and i landed the ****ing thing.

Now, the cessna is probably a lot easier than a jet, and as long as you're aiming down and losing altitude it a;l,ost cant stall, but i am not going to buy that it was super difficult to hit the ****ing pentagon.

---

''I'm still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon; he could not fly at all," said an ex-employee of a flight school attended by Hani Hanjour, alleged hijacker and pilot of Flight 77 on 9/11

---

Well that settles it. One guy thought he was bad at flying so that definitely outweighs the hundreds of eye witnesses who saw it live and the mountains of physical evidence from the site. Must have been a giant multilevel conspiracy and the people on the plane were killed off site and their remains were quickly Fedexed to the crash site with the rest of the planted evidence.

---

What hundreds of eye witnesses saw Hanjour fly 757 into the pentagon?

Quote:

---

Commanding a 757 with those maneuvers and speeds requires significant training

These weren't "basic" maneuvers

---

A descending 360 degree turn that takes 2 minutes to complete?