Miragememories

Jun 4 2008, 07:17 AM

SPreston

 

"No, WTC 5 is on the correct side. That piece was most likely planted there prior to 9-11. It is highly unlikely that piece of fuselage traveled through heavy structural steel walls at 545 mph. It would be badly gouged by the steel in a linear pattern along its horizontal axis and almost unrecognizable as a fuselage piece. How did a short light aluminum fuselage piece maintain the inertia after traveling through two strong exterior walls and multiple interior walls, to fly over a hundred yards through the open air to the roof of another building off to the side? It could not. It was planted like much of the other evidence of 9-11."

As much as I believe that 9/11 was an inside job, I'm unwilling to state something is a
fact just because it's a better fit with my belief.

That piece of fuselage may have been planted but there is nothing to support that claim.

It would seem quite possible for a piece to arrive there as a result of the original aircraft's destruction while passing through
WTC 2.

As part of the fuselage, it had the opportunity to follow any entrance and exit holes in the perimeter walls of WTC 2 that would have been punched out ahead of it by stronger heavier debris ie. the right engine and landing gear.

It's a relatively small section and lacks the weight and shape that would lead to an expectation of a continuous linear flight after exiting. Who knows what it's physical orientation was while passing through WTC 2. None of the debris on the WTC 5 roof looks badly gouged or scratched.

Once out in the open air, still traveling at a high rate of speed, having significant elevation and acted upon by updrafts and a light wind, it could easily have drifted a bit westerly and made it from it's 78th floor elevation to the roof of the 9 story WTC 5.

MM