Need help on a possible project... re: 9/11

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by ELVIS
Oh, you don't believe such a preposterious idea ??


..and can you please clarify "clairifing" for me ??

Jesus CHRIST. Are you going to correct peoples' grammar in every post (while ignoring the fact that you post no more than five words at a time, and often misspell and make errors of your own)? Is this the only Elvis flame technique now? God YOUR™ such a predictable tool...

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by frets5150
I'm not the one said all this shit it's the media they keep changing their stories I don't know what the fuck happened to that plane.But if you are the media you can't be makin fuckups like this it's only two # to remember 9 3 either it was the # or not.:D

"They?" The media, you mean 1000s of people in the media are in on this whole conspiracy too (despite breaking many anti-BCE stories such as the Plame-affair). Yeah, sounding more plausible all the time...


Maybe, just maybe, out of the chaos of that day, mistakes were made and facts were not checked in the rush to get out information and to scoop the competition?]

I guess all the ground crews that prepped the "inside job" attacks never talked either...

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by frets5150
Ok how about this picture of the plane what is on the bottom?Why did reporters say there were no windows on the plane. Some even said it was a twin engine cargo plane .And how about the flash just before both planes hitting the towers?Please tell me I would like to know Because I haven't heard it from the media yet.

It's called an "optical illusion." GOOGLE it.

This photo has been gone over with a fine-tooth comb, and it's just lighting.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by FORD
Elvis, why don't you watch Loose Change and see what the flight instructor who last flew with Hani Hanjour (alleged Pentagon pilot) had to say about the man's flying skills. Or serious lack thereof, as the case may be.

The most skilled pilots on the planet couldn't have manuevered a Boeing 757 into the Pentagon the way the BCE fairy tale says it happenned. An amateur fuckup like Hanjour would have crashed the plane in the middle of Highway 395 and never even made it to the building.

Yeah, never mind that the Pentagon is a huge target, and easily seen from the air. Maybe he aimed for the 395, and accidentally hit the Pentagon.

[Roy Munson]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
"They?" The media, you mean 1000s of people in the media are in on this whole conspiracy too (despite breaking many anti-BCE stories such as the Plame-affair). Yeah, sounding more plausible all the time...


Maybe, just maybe, out of the chaos of that day, mistakes were made and facts were not checked in the rush to get out information and to scoop the competition?]

I guess all the ground crews that prepped the "inside job" attacks never talked either...

Sometimes you make so much sense it gives me the heebie-jeebies.

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by ELVIS
It's thanks...


Thanks

Man am I glad you're hear to straighten everyone out and help them with their spelling.

[distortion9]

Originally posted by FORD
Says the laws of physics. It would be nearly impossible for even the most skilled pilot to maneuver a Boeing 757 into the ground floor of the Pentagon without totally fucking up the grounds in front of the building. And if the plane had hit the ground at 400 MPH, chances are it would have broken apart, leaving obvious huge chunks of 757 on the front lawn of the Pentagon.

Instead, the lawn was completely unscarred, as seen in the recent "pentalawn" thread in this forum.

Even in the much smaller AC3 Warrior air force jet, which matched the engine parts actually found inside the Pentagon, this would have been a complicated landing for even a skilled pilot. Thank God for "Global Hawk" technology, which, like the AC3 Warrior itself, was a product of the Raytheon Corproation. A defense contractor whose employees made up a large proportion of the alleged "flight 77" passenger manifest.

I watched "Loose Change" and have to admit that some of it is very interesting. Still though, a lot of the theories have holes in them and the guy is flat out reaching in other spots.

What I don't understand is why it's so hard to believe that a pilot could fly a plane into the ground floor? EVERY plane that lands, at some point, is 100, 50, 20, 10, 2 feet off the ground.

Also, how did a cruise missile pluck 5 seperate light posts out of the ground?

And...

If flight 93 wasn't hijacked and it wasn't shot down and it wasn't flown into a building.....what was it's purpose?

And....

According to "Loose Change"....

1. A U.S. Military Helicopter fired a rocket at Tower 1

2. A fake commercial airplane flew into Tower 2

3. Flight 93 wasn't shot down, it wasn't flown into the ground but, it was flown to Cleveland where it's passengers were ushered into a hanger and forced to make prank phone calls (surprised I didn't hear a Ba-Ba-Booey) and then were made to go away.

4. A cruise missile was fired into The Pentagon NOT an airplane because it's not possible for an airplane, at any time, to be between 100 and 1 foot from the ground....except during every single landing?

[frets5150]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
It's called an "optical illusion." GOOGLE it.



This photo has been gone over with a fine-tooth comb, and it's just lighting.

Sorry it was no optical illusion... lighting.LMMFAO.


It seems to me people pick and choose the questions I ask?
1 Where is all the wreckage on the pentegon lawn ?
2 Why were the Security cameras taken by the FBI from hotels and gas station

3 Why was building# 7 PULLED Admitted by larry silverstein.


Do a test take a 12 ounze bottle rocket lay it down on your lawn light it and tell me that it doesn't make any burn marks on your lawn

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by frets5150
Sorry it was no optical illusion... lighting.LMMFAO.

Really? I guess you're a photo specialist using advanced computer resolution software?

BTW, why would a 757 need to have a (USAF version) hump under it to be used on remote control? And what happened to the real flights that day then?

It seems to me people pick and choose the questions I ask?
1 Where is all the wreckage on the pentegon lawn ?

There are photographs of wreckage on the lawn. But since the aircraft was intact, like a missile, when it hit the hardened concrete bldg., most of it disintegrated on impact...

2 Why were the Security cameras taken by the FBI from hotels and gas station

I don't know. That's a good question. Perhaps it's "evidence" at this point?

Then again, why would dozens of FBI agents participate in a conspiracy when many have been "whistle-blowers" on far more mundane topics?

3 Why was building# 7 PULLED Admitted by larry silverstein.

I'd like to see the exact quote, in context, on that one...

Do a test take a 12 ounze bottle rocket lay it down on your lawn light it and tell me that it doesn't make any burn marks on your lawn

Why would that be relevant?

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by distortion9
I watched "Loose Change" and have to admit that some of it is very interesting. Still though, a lot of the theories have holes in them and the guy is flat out reaching in other spots.

What I don't understand is why it's so hard to believe that a pilot could fly a plane into the ground floor? EVERY plane that lands, at some point, is 100, 50, 20, 10, 2 feet off the ground.

Also, how did a cruise missile pluck 5 seperate light posts out of the ground?

And...

If flight 93 wasn't hijacked and it wasn't shot down and it wasn't flown into a building.....what was it's purpose?

And....

According to "Loose Change"....

1. A U.S. Military Helicopter fired a rocket at Tower 1

2. A fake commercial airplane flew into Tower 2

3. Flight 93 wasn't shot down, it wasn't flown into the ground but, it was flown to Cleveland where it's passengers were ushered into a hanger and forced to make prank phone calls (surprised I didn't hear a Ba-Ba-Booey) and then were made to go away.

4. A cruise missile was fired into The Pentagon NOT an airplane because it's not possible for an airplane, at any time, to be between 100 and 1 foot from the ground....except during every single landing?

Excellent post...

[FORD]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by distortion9
I watched "Loose Change" and have to admit that some of it is very interesting. Still though, a lot of the theories have holes in them and the guy is flat out reaching in other spots.

What I don't understand is why it's so hard to believe that a pilot could fly a plane into the ground floor? EVERY plane that lands, at some point, is 100, 50, 20, 10, 2 feet off the ground.

And most planes that land follow a proper descent procedure, gradually lowering their altitude and their speed before finally touching down on a long runway, which allows plenty of room for braking distance. And all of that is done by skilled pilots who are certified to fly the specific airliner. There are emergencies where a skilled pilot can shorten the landing procedures and attempt a riskier landing. Some are successful, and some aren't. Even with a professional pilot at the controls. Hani Hanjour wasn't capable of either one, according to professional flight instructors who flew with him.

Also, how did a cruise missile pluck 5 seperate light posts out of the ground?

Who knows? Minor detail though. And one that could easily be falsified. Actually, with the impact of a 757 hitting them at 400 MPH, the light posts should have been severed at the point of impact, not "plucked out of the ground"

And...

If flight 93 wasn't hijacked and it wasn't shot down and it wasn't flown into a building.....what was it's purpose?

The legend of Flight 93 was designed as the "Feel good" story of the day, with all the alleged patriotism and heroism of people who probably never existed at all. They're naming fucking high schools after this fictional character "Todd Beamer" for shit's sake. And his alleged wife, looking 8.5 months pregnant is suddenly on all the TV shows, and has a fucking BOOK published within a month?

Can we say Bull-FUCKING-Shit???

Cell phones were incapable of functioning at that altitude, yet our fictional hero supposedly had time to talk to his wife and mama while throwing big bad evil camel jockeys out of the cockpit. Give me a fucking break. It was the kind of story that a shell shocked nation wanted to embrace after watching at least one verified plane crashing into a building, and then two buildings collapsing. Nice story.....for a soap opera plot. But Luke Spencer and Robert Scorpio didn't prevail this time. The cockamamie crap story doesn't hold up.

[frets5150]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Really? I guess you're a photo specialist using advanced computer resolution software?

YES I am by the way .....

BTW, why would a 757 need to have a (USAF version) hump under it to be used on remote control? And what happened to the real flights that day then?

TO DUMP AS MUCH FUEL AS POSSABLE FOR THE MOST FIRE DAMAGE


There are photographs of wreckage on the lawn. But since the aircraftwas intact, like a missile, when it hit the hardened concrete bldg., most of it disintegrated on impact...

SHOW ME THE WRECKAGE...


I don't know. That's a good question. Perhaps it's "evidence" at this point?

Then again, why would dozens of FBI agents participate in a conspiracy when many have been "whistle-blowers" on far more mundane topics?

YEAH FOR EVIDENCE

THAT IT WAS NO PLANE THAT HIT THE PENTEGON...THAT'S WHY THEY TOOK THE FOOTAGE


I'd like to see the exact quote, in context, on that one...



Why would that be relevant?

:D

TO SHOW YOU THAT IF A LITTLE BOTTLE ROCKET CAN DAMAGE YOUR LAWN IMAGINE WHAT A PLANE SHOULD HAVE DONE

[frets5150]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by FORD

Originally posted by distortion9
I watched "Loose Change" and have to admit that some of it is very interesting. Still though, a lot of the theories have holes in them and the guy is flat out reaching in other spots.

What I don't understand is why it's so hard to believe that a pilot could fly a plane into the ground floor? EVERY plane that lands, at some point, is 100, 50, 20, 10, 2 feet off the ground.

And most planes that land follow a proper descent procedure, gradually lowering their altitude and their speed before finally touching down on a long runway, which allows plenty of room for braking distance. And all of that is done by skilled pilots who are certified to fly the specific airliner. There are emergencies where a skilled pilot can shorten the landing procedures and attempt a riskier landing. Some are successful, and some aren't. Even with a professional pilot at the controls. Hani Hanjour wasn't capable of either one, according to professional flight instructors who flew with him.

Also, how did a cruise missile pluck 5 seperate light posts out of the ground?

Who knows? Minor detail though. And one that could easily be falsified. Actually, with the impact of a 757 hitting them at 400 MPH, the light posts should have been severed at the point of impact, not "plucked out of the ground"

And...

If flight 93 wasn't hijacked and it wasn't shot down and it wasn't flown into a building.....what was it's purpose?

The legend of Flight 93 was designed as the "Feel good" story of the day, with all the alleged patriotism and heroism of people who probably never existed at all. They're naming fucking high schools after this fictional character "Todd Beamer" for shit's sake. And his alleged wife, looking 8.5 months pregnant is suddenly on all the TV shows, and has a fucking BOOK published within a month?

Can we say Bull-FUCKING-Shit???

Cell phones were incapable of functioning at that altitude, yet our fictional hero supposedly had time to talk to his wife and mama while throwing big bad evil camel jockeys out of the cockpit. Give me a fucking break. It was the kind of story that a shell shocked nation wanted to embrace after watching at least one verified plane crashing into a building, and then two buildings collapsing. Nice story.....for a soap opera plot. But Luke Spencer and Robert Scorpio didn't prevail this time. The cockamamie crap story doesn't hold up.

Well if the FBI would show the Footage that they stoled then we would once and for all find out the truth

But you guys say it's evidence? Evidence for what it's been 4 years and 6 months already

[distortion9]

Originally posted by FORD

Cell phones were incapable of functioning at that altitude, yet our fictional hero supposedly had time to talk to his wife and mama while throwing big bad evil camel jockeys out of the cockpit. Give me a fucking break. It was the kind of story that a shell shocked nation wanted to embrace after watching at least one verified plane crashing into a building, and then two buildings collapsing. Nice story.....for a soap opera plot. But Luke Spencer and Robert Scorpio didn't prevail this time. The cockamamie crap story doesn't hold up. [/B]

That's another thing that bothered me about "Loose Change".....

In his tape he said, "I'm calling from an AIRPHONE"....not cellphone.

[frets5150]

CNN reporter NO PLANE HIT PENTEGON LISTEN!!!

http://www.thewebfairy.com/911/pentagon/index.html

Ok now I am waiting for someone to say his voice was edited in