HEY, HARRY, WHAT HAPPENED TO THOSE TITANIUM ENGINES?

[Deleted]

 Folks,

      Harry raised a very important question about the recent news accounts relating to the Pentagon explosion on 9/11.

      Whatever happened to the passengers of Flight 77?

      I have a related question for Harold, Walt, and Daleko...

      Whatever happened to those Boeing 757-200 titanium engines?  Were they also vaporized in the crash?

     

Above is an image of the actual Flight 77, a Boeing 757-200, that hit the Pentagon. This picture was taken before it hit the Pentagon. As you all can see, the plane is real. This plane was painted in the AA colors. It also has two 757-200 engines under each wing. An aircraft engine was allegedly found in the wreckage at the Pentagon. Coincidence? This is the plane that flew from Dulles International airport and crashed into the Pentagon, therefore, it follows that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.


Here again we see clear evidence of the remains of Flight 77, where the fragile nose cone punched through ring C of the Pentagon. Stop for a moment and picture the nose cone (or the engine or something) of Flight 77 coming crashing out of this hole on that horrible, terrible, awful day when the Islamic terrorists attacked us. Can you see it? Of course you can.




One of my personal favorites. The above image is damning to the claims of all 9/11 conspiracy crackpots. Very clearly, we can identify a piece of aluminum hanging from the ceiling of the interior of the Pentagon. Flight 77 was made of aluminum. Conclusion? Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.


      

The 'piece de resistance'. Bold as life, what you are witnessing here with your very own eyes is part of the Rolls Royce engine of Flight 77. You see that circular shape with the small holes in it? That is part of a Rolls Royce 757 engine. If you don't believe me, compare with the photo below.



     

[oujour76]

Apr 3, 2017 13:44:09 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

 Folks,

      Harry raised a very important question about the recent news accounts relating to the Pentagon explosion on 9/11.

      Whatever happened to the passengers of Flight 77?

Still waiting for your answer.

[Deleted]

Apr 3, 2017 13:49:47 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Apr 3, 2017 13:44:09 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

 Folks,

      Harry raised a very important question about the recent news accounts relating to the Pentagon explosion on 9/11.

      Whatever happened to the passengers of Flight 77?

Still waiting for your answer.

Harry,

I have no idea what happened to those alleged "passengers."

Now, answer my question.   How about the airplane?

Where are those titanium jet engines?

[Deleted]

Wow!   That was fast! 

Walter just moved my new thread about this week's big news story (i.e., the release of a few 9/11 Pentagon photos) within a few minutes of my posting it!

(And, meanwhile, Walter didn't even answer my key science question about the photos.)

Way to go, Walter!

Nothing to see here, folks...move along... 

[oujour76]

Apr 3, 2017 13:54:13 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Apr 3, 2017 13:49:47 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Harry,

I have no idea what happened to those alleged "passengers."

Now, answer my question.   How about the airplane?

Where are those titanium jet engines?

Sorry. No sale. Those passengers had names, families, etc. What happened to them? You don't get to insinuate they didn't exist. Oh, let me guess. They're in Egypt with Mohammed Atta.

[Walter]

Apr 3, 2017 13:54:13 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Apr 3, 2017 13:49:47 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Harry,

I have no idea what happened to those alleged "passengers."

Now, answer my question.   How about the airplane?

Where are those titanium jet engines?

The other thread answered that question.

[Deleted]

Just got home from work, and had a chance to read LZ's post (and link) that, allegedly, shows a Boeing 757 engine turbine in the 9/11 wreckage at the Pentagon.

Walter, Daleko, Mutt, and other anti-truther trolls on the forum were celebrating like crazy today about this LZ post.

They thought the score in the 9/11 Pentagon debate was now Wunderlich 42 Cheeseballs 7.

Unfortunately, on further review, LZ, Daleko, Mutt, and Walter did not score a touchdown on the play.

The score remains Wunderlich 42 Cheeseballs 0.

Why?


Because the engine turbine in the photograph is not from a Boeing 757!! It's far too small to be a turbine from a six ton Boeing 757 Rolls Royce engine!

That has been proven conclusively by Christopher Bollyn. (I keep forgetting that Daleko never reads anything.)

Conversely, experts have positively identified a JT8D Turbo from a U.S. Air Force A-3 Sky Warrior cruise missile in the wreckage at the Pentagon!!








Ouch, Daleko !!! Your ejaculation today was premature !!

As the three videos I posted show-- it was, in fact, a missile that hit the Pentagon on 9/11!!

Wunderlich 42 Cheeseballs 0.



This piece of wreckage looks real, not planted!




But unfortunately, it is not from a Boeing 757! Too small.

Official reaction to this photo/part, was to claim it is a HoneyWell rotor from the rear 'APU' engine in a Boeing 757's tail-section.

But, after studying these high-resolution photos, HoneyWell, the manufacturers of the supposed APU engines, said:

"there is no way that is any part of a APU engine we manufacture"



www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_911_90.htm

[Deleted]

Geez... where did everybody go?  Walter?  LZ?  Daleko?  Harry?  Mutt? Fred?  Lee?
I thought this was a discussion forum...

The Mystery Engine Part in the Pentagon Photo

www.whale.to/b/bollyn03sept14a.html


by Christopher Bollyn

September 14, 2003

Official photographs taken at the 9-11 Pentagon crash site show what appears to be part of a small jet engine, but no one seems interested in identifying it. Due to the secrecy surrounding the 9-11 attack on the Pentagon and the lack of evidence that a large passenger jet smashed into the reinforced concrete and stone wall of the massive building, a host of conspiracy theories have cropped up. A photograph from the crash site could easily settle the debate, but no one seems to care.

A series of photographs taken by an official federal photographer at the Pentagon crash site show what appears to be an easily identifiable piece of a small-diameter turbofan engine. If the government wants to prove that a Boeing 757-200 crashed into the Pentagon, why is no one willing to identify which part from which engine this is?

The photographs show a part of a turbofan jet engine and were taken by Jocelyn Augustino, a photographer for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), at the Pentagon crash site on September 13, 2001. The round piece appears to be less than 3 feet in diameter and is propped up against what appears to be part of the engine housing and thick pieces of insulating material.

A Boeing 757 has two large engines, which are about 9 feet in diameter and 12 feet in length. A Pratt & Whitney PW2043 engine, used on some 757 aircraft, has a fan tip diameter of 78.5 inches. Nothing this large is to be seen in the FEMA photographs. The photo ID numbers are 4414 and 4415 and can be seen on-line: www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photolibrary/advancedsearch.do

The available evidence does not support the official version that a Boeing 757-200, with two large engines and massive landing gear, flew close to ground-level and smashed into the wall of the Pentagon. For example, passenger jet landing gear are heavy and durable, yet none were seen being removed from the Pentagon. On the other hand, military personnel were photographed removing from the crash site a large light-weight object shrouded by a blue tarp. What was under the tarp and why was it kept hidden?

Five photographs taken from a video camera on the grounds of the Pentagon show a small white object approaching the Pentagon and a massive explosion, yet no plane is seen. Conspiracy theorists ask: If a 155 foot-long, 60-ton Boeing 757 caused the explosion at the Pentagon, why does it not appear in the photographs? And where is the debris that would have resulted from its impact with the limestone clad concrete wall?

One of the eyewitnesses at the Pentagon told the Washington Post that the plane he saw was small: “Steve Patterson, who lives in PentagonCity, said it appeared to him that a commuter jet swooped over Arlington National Cemetery and headed for the Pentagon…

“He said the plane, which sounded like the high-pitched squeal of a fighter jet…appeared to hold about eight to 12 people.”

For those who say a smaller plane or unmanned drone, such as a Global Hawk, was involved in the Pentagon attack, identifying the engine part in the photo could prove what kind of aircraft hit the building. The Global Hawk is a singe-engine drone that uses a Rolls Royce Allison engine hand-built in Indianapolis, Indiana. The AE3007H engine has a diameter of 43.5 inches. The unmanned Global Hawk, using a satellite guidance system, is capable of landing within 12 inches of its programmed destination.

Because the Global Hawk is a surveillance drone, the engine is contained in a heavily insulated housing to be extremely quiet. This corresponds with eyewitness reports. I asked eyewitness Steve Riskus, who said he was within 100 feet of the aircraft, what he heard. He said he “did not recall hearing anything.” If a 757 or jet fighter flew at high speed 100 feet from an eyewitness the roar would be deafening.

I also contacted the U.S. Air Force, American Airlines, Rolls Royce in Indianapolis, and others to ask for help identifying the part, but no one is willing to discuss the photographs. In several cases the spokesmen were ready to provide a statement before even seeing the photos.

John W. Brown from Rolls Royce said, “It is not a part from any Rolls Royce engine that I’m familiar with, and certainly not the AE3007H made here in Indy.”

Capt. Roger Burdette (USAF) from Arnold AFB, Tenn., said: “After considering your request, I’ve decided that it’s not in our best interest here at Arnold to speculate about this unidentified part. My main concern is that if, as you suggested, two Global Hawks were missing, the Air Force would officially investigate the disappearances.”

Col. Alvina Mitchell, Air Force spokesman at the Pentagon, said, “There are many issues with photos,” suggesting they may not be authentic. For “legal reasons” she could not respond to any questions. Mitchell said questions regarding Global Hawk should be sent to Sue Baker at the Aeronautical Systems Center at Wright Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio, where the Global Hawk program is headquartered. Baker, however, was unable to answer any questions regarding the photos.

I then turned to the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) in Washington. FAS is known to have access to many scientists and data concerning U.S. military hardware. Josh Kellar at FAS, however, said the organization did not have any personnel who could identify the basic parts of a jet engine like the ones in the photo. In a written response, Kellar rejected the theory that anything other than a hijacked passenger jet hit the Pentagon: “I think the secrecy surrounding the 9-11 investigation and the enormous gravity of the attack itself have spawned a number of conspiracy theories, but there is a massive body of evidence that leaves no doubt as to what the actual cause of the devastation at the World Trade Center and Pentagon was: they were hit by hijacked passenger jets.”

But Josh at the FAS could not say what part of a 757 engine is seen in the photograph from the Pentagon.

[daleko]

Apr 4, 2017 13:58:50 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Geez... where did everybody go?  Walter?  LZ?  Daleko?  Harry?  Mutt? Fred?  Lee?
I thought this was a discussion forum...

Maybe it's you and your disingenuous posting style.  

[Deleted]

Apr 4, 2017 16:30:38 GMT -5 daleko said:

Apr 4, 2017 13:58:50 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Geez... where did everybody go?  Walter?  LZ?  Daleko?  Harry?  Mutt? Fred?  Lee?
I thought this was a discussion forum...

Maybe it's you and your disingenuous posting style.  

Disingenuous?  That's rich, coming from you, Dale.

On the contrary, I've been scrupulously honest.

If the truth be told, my chief interest in these 9/11 debates is to figure out what happened.

There's a great deal of disinformation out there.

[oujour76]

Apr 4, 2017 19:38:04 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Apr 4, 2017 16:30:38 GMT -5 daleko said:

Maybe it's you and your disingenuous posting style.  

Disingenuous?  That's rich, coming from you, Dale.

On the contrary, I've been scrupulously honest.

If the truth be told, my chief interest in these 9/11 debates is to figure out what happened.

[daleko]

Apr 4, 2017 19:38:04 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Apr 4, 2017 16:30:38 GMT -5 daleko said:

Maybe it's you and your disingenuous posting style.  

Disingenuous?  That's rich, coming from you, Dale.

On the contrary, I've been scrupulously honest.

If the truth be told, my chief interest in these 9/11 debates is to figure out what happened.

There's a great deal of disinformation out there.

Ya OK. Whatever you want to say. <shrug> BTW I'm not a Dale. Obviously you don't know what daleko means.

[Deleted]

Apr 4, 2017 22:08:37 GMT -5 daleko said:

Apr 4, 2017 19:38:04 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Disingenuous?  That's rich, coming from you, Dale.

On the contrary, I've been scrupulously honest.

If the truth be told, my chief interest in these 9/11 debates is to figure out what happened.

There's a great deal of disinformation out there.

Ya OK. Whatever you want to say. <shrug> BTW I'm not a Dale. Obviously you don't know what daleko means.

Harry's dead wrong, as usual. Not sure why he imagines that he knows better than I what my interests are.

As for "Daleko," what does it mean?

[daleko]

Apr 4, 2017 19:38:04 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

There's a great deal of disinformation out there.

No shit and you read most of it, then post that garbage here. Which one of the triplets posted this rely? NSA thinks there are three of you.

[oujour76]

Apr 4, 2017 22:13:03 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Harry's dead wrong, as usual. Not sure why he imagines that he knows better than I what my interests are.

LOL...physician, heal thyself.