It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

September 11, 2001: Interesting and Less Talked About 911 Info!

page: 6
89
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 07:28 PM
link   
a reply to: TruthNow88

So now they used a prototype that didn't fly until four years after 9/11? Japan was the first operator of the KC-767. They placed their order for them in 2001, and the first aircraft wasn't converted into a tanker until 2005.




posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 07:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I'm not making out 93 was in pieces I mean 103 sorry for the confusion. The reason I am comparing them is that they are two well known crash sites. My point is 103 came to earth in much smaller pieces than 93 yet 93 left a cartoon shaped cut out that doesn't look like it would accommodate nearly 130 ft of 757 wingspan.



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 07:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: WhereAreTheGoodguys
Simply one of the best put together pieces of evidence I have seen on this site and I have seen a lot of good stuff which fits right in with what has been posted

Thank you very much for putting this all together. If it gets deleted ... I'll never come here again


No prob! It's good to know my time isn't being wasted here! And hey, a little off topic here (somewhat) but I want to throw this out there as a "just in case" as I have been studying this crap for quite a while now and while researching Urban Shield in regards to the Boston Bombing, I used their past "drill hijacking" patterns to dissect the Urban Shield California drill (which was scheduled later that same year) months before it was set to officially run in Cali, and using that USC13 research done ahead of time and using their past drill hijack patterns as a base framework to follow, I was able to predict the LAX shooting more then 3 weeks prior to the "event" taking place, location (LAX), date range (End of Oct), and theme (Automatic Weapon Shooting). Its posted on the other to remain nameless conspiracy site for anyone who cares or thinks I am lying.

Anyways... my point is these false flag operations follow a very templates framework each time, so much so that sometimes their moves can be anticipated before hand. Well with that all said, in a few months time they have the perfect scenario setup to pull off another large false flag event, likely some time in May (May 1st aka May Day being most likely) in FEMA Region IX (Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, & the Pacific Islands), using the following official vs hijack drill overlaps...
Official exercise series = CCES15 vs Hijacked Exercise Series = NEP14
Official exercise event = NUWAIX15 vs Hijacked exercise event = NUWAIX14
Official CoG/COOP controller = Eagle Horizon 15 vs Hijacked CoG/COOP controller = Eagle Horizon 14
I have a more detailed post about wtf I am talking about in regards to all this, but lets just say this coming exercise series has a lot of red flags that are oh so familiar to some past false flag events... Hopefully I am wrong, but again just wanted to toss this out there for people to chew on in case something does actually go down in regards to this coming exercise series.



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 07:51 PM
link   
a reply to: sg1642

Pan Am was a much larger plane. Some of those pieces were bigger around that a 757 fuselage.

But that difference is why they're so different. Pan Am exploded in flight, throwing large parts at high speed that fell to earth impacting hard ground, at high speed. Flight 93 was intact at impact with soft ground.

An aircraft that hits at high speed, at a steep angle, on soft ground tends to bury itself before exploding.
edit on 2/14/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 08:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: nOraKat
I think the most interesting evidence is this random 'bystander witness'.

He said that the towers fell "mostly due to structural failure because the fire was just too intense".

How can he possibly know that after the towers just fell?

And why would he even say that? it sounds out of place.

It is recited and note the really bad acting where he is trying to express shock and empathy - watch!



That interview is super sketchy. He was introduced as a freelancer from Fox so that might explain the scripted speech. I don't know about the MIB thing, too easy to use to discredit any scrutiny about the interviewer who, I agree, was speaking something rehearsed.

"Mostly due to structural damage but also because the fire was so intense" not sure how he got a view of the "intensity" of the fires from his vantage point on a 43rd floor in near proximity.

Then the reporter predicts building 7 coming down due to damage but doesn't mention the Marriott hotel or the other more severely damaged buildings. Did people on the scene know about the different construction styles on the spot to know that WTC 7 was so much more likely to collapse than the other much more severely damaged structures?

What agency were then men in suits from?

Reporter "what is your roll here"

Black suit "Just standing by right now, I can't say what my roll is right now"

reporter "well... ugh...There's a lot of standing by"

a little weird. But it IS fox....



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 08:48 PM
link   
The prima facie evidence of conspiracy is the Transportation secretary’s evidence against the imp of darkness Dick Cheney in that underground base where he ordered NOT to shot down the incoming plane headed for the pentagon.

Then they deleted the transportation secretary’s testimony and change the timeline.

Case closed: Cheney should be indicted for murder of all the people in the pentagon and a genuine investigation of 911 should be forthwith!



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 08:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I can only imagine how frustrating this may be for you. You clearly have a very solid background on airplanes and such, yet you've got 20 different people with little to no knowledge of airplanes trying to argue points who are so steadfast in their beliefs that they are actually blinded by fact and reason. I completely agree with everything you've said, and find it baffling how people can buy into this absurd theory which has absolutely ZERO factual basis. It's like these people want so badly to believe 9/11 was a false flag, they will instantly buy into any theory that sounds complicated and contains complex lingo. Many of the valid points you've brought up have been swiftly side-stepped and ignored by these people, and I feel for you how annoying that must be.

The fact that they are pulling up a video of an interview in the moments after the building collapse, and attempting to discredit the validity of the interview by arbitrarily concluding that the interviewee is an actor is truly absurd. There is absolutely no factual basis for this. Additionally, questioning the picture of the Shanksville impact site because it doesn't show what they think it should look like. Ironically, they fail to understand that they have no expertise or proper background to assess what an impact site should look like. There are so many examples of plane crashes where wreckage is buried and completely unidentifiable as having ever been a plane. Lastly, if they actually did the proper research, they would discover that building 7 was actually suffering from immense structural instability throughout the day, which eventually lead to its collapse. They are somehow baffled how debris from Tower 1 could have caused this, despite videos that clearly show buckling and instability of the building.

One question I have, which I may have missed because I did not read through the entire absurd theory, is what happened to all of the passengers in this plane-swap fiasco?



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 08:57 PM
link   
The explosion of WTC6 is something new to me.
www.whale.to...



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 10:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

That seems very counter-intuitive to me... I can not imagine a plane burying itself beyond maybe a metre or 2. Could you substantiate his claim please.



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 10:23 PM
link   
a reply to: hmmmbeer

Not with links right now. There was an A-6 Intruder that hit the ground at near Mach 1, almost vertically, and was found over six feet into the ground. Some pices were found even deeper. The engines were compressed to roughly three feet long by the impact.
edit on 2/14/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 10:29 PM
link   
a reply to: warthog911 how many "man" is involved and in general they are people like you and me? my opinion it is a clone 1 billion of blue blood



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 10:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tusks
The explosion of WTC6 is something new to me.
www.whale.to...


When a webpage has such obvious lies that are easily disproved like:-

Do you know that the company in charge of security at the World Trade Center was directed by Marvin Bush, George Bush’s younger brother


Nothing that they say there should be considered accurate!



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 10:53 PM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater,
The explosion of WTC6 left an 8 story building with 2 craters 10 stories deep, with little rubble inside, that happened before the first tower fell. And the craters had no evidence of the high heat that still remained in the buildings that appeared to have had the nano-thermite burning to the structural steel.



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 11:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: TruthNow88
but instead was swapped-out with a (windowless) Prototype Boeing KC-767).


Just why did they "swap" the planes? When did they swap the passengers, crew and luggage? When did they load up the swapped plane with aircraft parts from the first plane, and why did no one notice 2 sets of undercarriage, wheels and engines etc. at the crash sites?



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 12:34 AM
link   
zaphod58 debunking is the reason why i do not post at ATS. It went from 911 drills to to everything else. Truthnow88 thank you for bringing out the truth.
Time is running short for the cabal which did this.
edit on 15-2-2015 by warthog911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 12:44 AM
link   
a reply to: warthog911

It wouldn't be debunked if it held up. This doesn't. Not the C-32 or the KC-767 theory.

If all you want is people to agree with you, then sorry, you are on the wrong board.



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 01:44 AM
link   
a reply to: warthog911

Tactical off topic programming ...rather than discuss the exercises....that zaphod knows happened...and correct pertinent info...it will be dissected..obliterated...and reposted regurgitated redeposited until thread is destroyed....but don't worry persistence does with persistence reap rewards....do not post thinking about being debunked...because if 9/11 was sooooooo easily debunked we would not still be "DISCUSSING" it 14 years later....yes there were exercises taking place that day...and it does seem that tragedies do follow "so called exercises" so don't up the ghost now....I do believe that it comes down to familiarising yourself with the locals...then once you know who your are working with...invite them in...embrace their comments...thank them profusely for their KIND words....agree to disagree....and move on...never worry if you are going to convince anyone ...just be happy presenting information....because presenting information...is itself DENYING ignorance.

Ignorance.......meaning....lack of knowledge....

So thank you for your awe inspiring knowledge on all things aircraft....but,I tend to think this thread is about the FACT the military exercises were coincedently...or maybe conveniently taking place on or about the time of 9/11.
edit on 012828p://f45Sunday by plube because: (no reason given)

edit on 012828p://f47Sunday by plube because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 01:55 AM
link   
a reply to: plube

Yes it's about the exercises, but then it throws out a theory that doesn't hold up.

September is usually when a number of exercises take place because its the end of the Fiscal Year. Any money left in the budget has to be burned, or they lose it in following budgets.

The thing is though the exercises didn't affect the FAA notification of the military. It also didn't affect the few alert aircraft that were on standby. The FAA notification was always the weak point in the chain.

Instead of immediate notification of NORAD, and then following their procedures, they had a checklist to follow and a chain to run up. That could take thirty minutes plus to get word to the military, and up to another 15 to get the alert aircraft airborne.
edit on 2/15/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 02:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

OK..I myself have over 6hrs of recordings from NORAD under foia...and there IMHO...mass confusion...even though the employees did their utmost best...but here is...hate to say it..YouTube... Which disagrees with their ability to cope.



Being informed of operational exercises...of similar nature...then switching to real world...would not be easy task...people are only human...and no one...not one single person can say how someone would react in a crisis....no matter how professional.



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 02:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

OK..I myself have over 60 hrs of recordings from NORAD under foia...and there is IMHO ...mass confusion...even though the employees did their utmost best...but here is...hate to say it..YouTube... Which disagrees with their ability to cope.



Being informed of operational exercises...of similar nature...then switching to real world...would not be easy task...people are only human...and no one...not one single person can say how someone would react in a crisis....no matter how professional.


edit on 032828p://f01Sunday by plube because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
89
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join