9/11 In Plane Site - Movie

[Dodgy]

ok, so they talk about these planes crashing into the buildings, state that there was no plane that crashed into the pentagon, but no1 seems to mention the people on these planes....even on a military plane theres gonna b pilots. :rolleyes:

So where the **** r the people, they dont just disappear and i doubt there families dont care enough to look for them...(they cant still b down the pub...)

and all that "theres a flash" when the plane hits the towers, i just find it hard to believe.

pah ne how, enough of this

[Starforge]

I think we're going to go in circles with this one, but on the topic of planes being piloted, what about radio controlled vehicles?

Anyway...

[LOC Veteran]

Don't need too, 'cuz most of American know this is fake.

Only foreign like you believe it true.. 'cuz you already hate Bush.

Uh, I'm an American and I HATE BUSH.

Kthxbye.

[2xSilverKnight]

Hey, 2xSilverKnight - nice use of verbage, you hapless twit!

Go check out this thread!!!

https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=210684

It's all been said before - and you're TWICE the asshat the rest of this site is for going balistic on this.

Run along, 2xSilverKnight and go play with your tinfoil hat.

BTW, you fscktard - I've already SEEN this ****-poor excuse for a "documentary" - and it's just a rehash of "bovine fecal excrement" that's been circulating for a few years now.

Looks like you need some "Mental Floss" :D :D :D :yes: :laugh: :laugh: :hump:

--ScottKin

god wtf you're the reatrdest person i ever seen here.

you want to believe all the crap the governement said

ok just go along

yeah a 15 feet hole when a 80 feet large plane supposed to hit the pentagon at 530 mph. ..

yeah sure thats so much true eh ? im bull****ing at you because youre so retarded when there so much evidence. and that people make me sick.

[ScottKin]

I think we're going to go in circles with this one, but on the topic of planes being piloted, what about radio controlled vehicles?

Anyway...

Starforge - you're really looking foolish here.

Stop before we have to hand you your own tinfoil hat. :wacko:

--ScottKin

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

Some commercial aircraft *do* have black noses where the radome/radar antenna is located. Some airlines chose to paint it, others don't.

Let me guess - that's where they had the "trigger" to fire the "missile"?

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :woot: :woot: :woot: :woot: :woot: :woot:

--ScottKin

lol God youre dumb... just leave this thread alone... if you choose not to believe us then whatever... you can mill around like the other sheep in the country... instead of bashing us, why dont you research a lot of stuff first, think about the facts being presented, then come back to this thread and try to debunk it.. i guarantee that you cant. i dare you to take up the challenge. but im expecting a reply of "i dont need to b/c i know im right and youre all crazy" :rolleyes:

[S.MULLA]

first post link is dead.. :(

someone please post a mirror?!?!

[arloj]

I think we're going to go in circles with this one, but on the topic of planes being piloted, what about radio controlled vehicles?

#1: No evidence

#2: What happened to all the passengers?

Again, it's a possibility, but anything is. BTW, I should introduce you to the invisible smurfs that live in my anal cavity. No really, they're there.... well, you have to at least admit it's a possibility, don't you? :D

Point being you can come up with possibilities all day long, but in the end it's just unsubstantiated theorizing...

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

ok, so they talk about these planes crashing into the buildings, state that there was no plane that crashed into the pentagon, but no1 seems to mention the people on these planes....even on a military plane theres gonna b pilots. :rolleyes:

So where the **** r the people, they dont just disappear and i doubt there families dont care enough to look for them...(they cant still b down the pub...)

and all that "theres a flash" when the plane hits the towers, i just find it hard to believe.

pah ne how, enough of this

again, you want to question (youre on the right track) and yet you dont look for the facts yourself. research, find the information and then rethink your stance.

[arloj]

come back to this thread and try to debunk it

I'll take this on... give me one 9/11 conspiracy statement to debunk, but also prevent your evidence to back up your side of the viewpoint. :shifty:

I can't say that I can find evidence to the contrary though. As I stated before, it's easy to ask questions (when you aren't an expert in the field), but hard or impossible to answer them (unless you are an expert in the field).

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

#1: No evidence

#2: What happened to all the passengers?

Again, it's a possibility, but anything is. BTW, I should introduce you to the invisible smurfs that live in my anal cavity. No really, they're there.... well, you have to at least admit it's a possibility, don't you? :D

Point being you can come up with possibilities all day long, but in the end it's just unsubstantiated theorizing...

can i say it somemore... research first then post.

[arloj]

can i say it somemore... research first then post.

Do you have any actual claims or evidence to present, or are you just going to present everybody who has an honest question or argument with "go look it up".

Do you mean go look it up on the internet? Okay, which of the billions of webpages, and the thousands of 9/11 conspiracy pages should I visit? Hm?

Take a stand, make an argument, rebutt one of OUR arguments, or STFU. Your ceaseless "go look it up" statements are getting tiring...

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

I'll take this on... give me one 9/11 conspiracy statement to debunk, but also prevent your evidence to back up your side of the viewpoint. :shifty:

I can't say that I can find evidence to the contrary though. As I stated before, it's easy to ask questions (when you aren't an expert in the field), but hard or impossible to answer them (unless you are an expert in the field).

ok... WTC7...how was it "pulled" in that same afternoon as the attacks? also, pulling entails a controlled demolition... well "terrorists" certainly didnt use controlled demolition techniques. explain.

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

Do you have any actual claims or evidence to present, or are you just going to present everybody who has an honest question or argument with "go look it up".

Do you mean go look it up on the internet? Okay, which of the billions of webpages, and the thousands of 9/11 conspiracy pages should I visit? Hm?

Take a stand, make an argument, rebutt one of OUR arguments, or STFU. Your ceaseless "go look it up" statements are getting tiring...

the reason i say that is b/c ive taken the time, many months, so research this for myself. i dont have time to sit here and type page upon page of facts from the many many websites ive read from.

[ScottKin]

god wtf you're the reatrdest person i ever seen here.

you want to believe all the crap the governement said

ok just go along

yeah a 15 feet hole when a 80 feet large plane supposed to hit the pentagon at 530 mph. ..

yeah sure thats so much true eh ? im bull****ing at you because youre so retarded when there so much evidence. and that people make me sick.

Ready for some cold, hard facts, 2xSilverKnight?

If an aircraft flying at 500+ mph hits an object like the Pentagon - immensely dense and designed to withstand shockwaves from the detonation of a nearby NUCLEAR DEVICE (aka target: White House, Capitol) - several things happen:

1) Structural compaction of said aircraft - the aircraft would *not* have extended into the Pentagon, but the shockwave from the impact would cause additional damage spread forward to the inner rings of the Pentagon.

2) Shearing of wings into impact site - the wings would not be laying there on the ground

3) Virtual disintegration of said aircraft - due to the structural integrity of the Pentagon, the plain was PULVERIZED when the section of the Pentagon was PULVERIZED.

4) Melting of most of the structural steel - Temperatures in the explosion were sufficient to melt most, if not all of the structural aluminium & steel of the aircraft.

5) Outward explosion of gasoline contained in aircraft's wings due to atomization/aerosol cloud from wing shearing and disintegration on impact. To see the kind of explosive effect I'm speaking about, please see this link about what is known as a "FAE Bomb" (FAE = Fuel Air Explosive):

Fuel/Air Explosive (FAE)

Enjoy your ignorance, 2xSilverKnight :hump:

--ScottKin

[arloj]

ok... WTC7...how was it "pulled" in that same afternoon as the attacks? also, pulling entails a controlled demolition... well "terrorists" certainly didnt use controlled demolition techniques. explain.

As I understand it, WTC7 was heavily damaged after the collapse the the two main towers, and to prevent it from causing more damage, they did I quick controlled demotion to bring it down. So, being that it's New York and buildings are brought down by demolition teams all the time, they called in a team and they did it?

Unless I am misreading the situation?

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

as i understand it, no one knows how the fires started in WTC7 started.. in fact it was further away from 1 and 2 than other buildings that had no damage at all... then the firefighters said they couldnt "contain the fire"... still, thats not a reason to demolish a building (ive never seen that happen where when a fire cant be contained so they just demolish it) on top of that it takes weeks to plan a demolition... they just dont go in there in throw around explosives and light er up... weeks. there was no reason to "pull" the building... and terrorists had nothing to do w/ it.

[arloj]

there was no reason to "pull" the building...

Hmmm... than it's a valid good question. So, do we have any actual answers?

[mzkhadir]

when pbs did a story on the same subject, they said that the fuel from the airplanes made it up to 1500 degrees (this could be higher, right now I am not sure) and made the steel buckle.

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

4) Melting of most of the structural steel - Temperatures in the explosion were sufficient to melt most, if not all of the structural aluminium & steel of the aircraft.

5) Outward explosion of gasoline contained in aircraft's wings due to atomization/aerosol cloud from wing shearing and disintegration on impact. To see the kind of explosive effect I'm speaking about, please see this link about what is known as a "FAE Bomb"

steel melts at 2700 degrees... fuel, including jet fuel does not burn that hot... only about 1800 degrees.

youre #5 points you in the direction that most of the fuel was immediately burned in the air and not left sitting inside the WTC buildings or pentagon to slowly burn.

[Dav5049915]

since that article had a lot of probablys in it, i'd like to add some more of my own probablys.

there was a rela flight 77, the military was tracking all flights around a certain area, they noted that flight 77 started making a turn back towards the east, some military jet shot it down over a very non populated area. someone probably realized that shooting down a commercial jet was a bad idea, so they fired a missle at the pentagon and said that it was flight 77.

what happened to all of the other cameras that would've been along flight 77s flightpath down to the pentagon? why hasn't the FBI released those tapes?

*stops adding fuel to the fire*

btw, with the black nosecone on the plane that hit the WTC, as someone else also mentioned, sometimes when an airline is doing maintinence to a jet, say a bird hit a nosecone, they will throw a different cone on the plane, (i've seen newer delta planes with old color nosecones as well as flat black).

and i have yet to watch the movie as i am at work and only downloading it at 40k :pinch:

[Marku$]

can someone post a mirror.

linkie is downie

[technics]

mirror please.. want to watch this

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

Hmmm... than it's a valid good question. So, do we have any actual answers?

from my conspiratorial POV it's believed that WTC7 was the headquarters and homing point for the planes and operations... afterall, there was a some-odd million dollar "control bunker" as it's called installed in that building only a few floors from the top... this is public knowledge... guilliani headed the operation and even had bomb proof glass placed on that floor. they needed to destroy the evidence so they had the building pulled.

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

since that article had a lot of probablys in it, i'd like to add some more of my own probablys.

there was a rela flight 77, the military was tracking all flights around a certain area, they noted that flight 77 started making a turn back towards the east, some military jet shot it down over a very non populated area. someone probably realized that shooting down a commercial jet was a bad idea, so they fired a missle at the pentagon and said that it was flight 77.

what happened to all of the other cameras that would've been along flight 77s flightpath down to the pentagon? why hasn't the FBI released those tapes?

*stops adding fuel to the fire*

btw, with the black nosecone on the plane that hit the WTC, as someone else also mentioned, sometimes when an airline is doing maintinence to a jet, say a bird hit a nosecone, they will throw a different cone on the plane, (i've seen newer delta planes with old color nosecones as well as flat black).

and i have yet to watch the movie as i am at work and only downloading it at 40k :pinch:

good job ;) a worthy contributer.