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.

 

9/11 Bombshell: Methodical Deception -- Rebekah Roth

page: 8
135
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 12:33 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409



The technology is there imo




In evidence given to the enquiry, Captain Kent Hill (retd.) of the US Air Force, and friend of Chic Burlingame, the pilot of the plane that crashed into the Pentagon, stated that the US had on several occasions flown an unmanned aircraft, similar in size to a Boeing 737, across the Pacific from Edwards Air Force base in California to South Australia. According to Hill it had flown on a pre programmed flight path under the control of a pilot in an outside station.


www.propagandamatrix.com...




posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 12:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958



This will back up their technical papers of demolition.


In order to support the demo charge theories, you have to provide evidence that such explosions occurred, but in the videos, there are no demo explosions as WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 collapsed.

In addition, seismic monitors in the local area did not detect demo explosions as those buildings collapsed and demolition experts on other projects have stated that they did not hear demo explosions at ground zero.

Not many people are aware that the WTC Towers had suffered from previous explosions that had nothing to do with explosives with the exception of the 1993 WTC1 bombing.

In July 1992, there was an explosion and fire at the World Trade Center and another explosion occurred near the World Trade Center in February 1993. I might add that manhole explosions in New York City are quite common, and that is why I have stated for the record that the sound of explosions does not automatically translate into demo explosives as responsible.

I would like to add that such explosions continued to occur even after the collapse of the WTC buildings, which obviously, were not the result of demo explosives.

In an NBC news report at the time, firefighters were reporting exploding gas lines. The playback of that televised report was replayed last year on TV.
edit on 13-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 12:35 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

Yup, what informer1958 said.


IMAGE: ‘Battle of the Atlantic’ – The Royal Air Force Consolidated B-24 Liberator. The RAF operated most of the first production of the B-24’s when they were completed. During Operation Aphrodite some were converted to be used in manned/unmanned missions (Photo airspacemag.com).


21stcenturywire.com...



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 12:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

No investigation??? Well how convenient ! I never knew that

Having now watched the entire video it has proven a very scary watch. Scary insofar as the fact that any allegedly civilsed western Government could even attempt to pull something like this off and the total disregard for people and willingness to sacrifice them means to me that nothing is now beyond their lack of moral compass. This from human beings no different to the ones they sacrificed except for their status/jobs

It strikes me that any event of this nature and magnitude however brilliantly planned out in theory, cannot possibly account for advances in technology years down the line which can out them, and that is where it comes unstuck. I'm sure at the time this was all planned those in charge believed in foolproof and had every angle covered and at that time it probably was...but not now



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 12:40 AM
link   
a reply to: FlySolo

That was doing wartime conditions, and I have modified many aircraft during the Vietnam conflict in Vietnam, Thailand, and at Hill AFB, but you have to understand that the B-24 bomber is not a B-757 nor a B-767 of a major airline. That is a big difference.

So I will reiterate, that there was no way that any of the 9/11 aircraft could have been modified to fly under remote control and not reveal those involved. As I have said before, the FDR data proved that none of the 9/11 aircraft were flown under remote control.

BTW, I like the photos of that B-24. I have a close relationship with the pilots who flew escort for the B-17 and the B-24 bombers.
edit on 13-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 12:44 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409


In order to support the demo charge theories, you have to provide evidence that such explosions occurred, but in the videos, there are no demo explosions as WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 collapsed.


The hard cold fact is many credible eyewitness went on record claiming they saw, they heard, and some where in the explosions and survived. Some of the eyewitness went on record saying they witness flashes going around the WTC as they were exploding and yes that included NYC Firemen.

So i don't know where you get your information from and I hope not 911 Myths, because that website has been debunked to death by real experts.
edit on 13-9-2015 by Informer1958 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 12:45 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409


Are you aware that much technology is available in the private sector years to decades before commercial use ?

Boeing Honeywell Uninterruptible Autopilot

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Forget commercial planes and think black budget hardware for a second.
edit on 13-9-2015 by DarthFazer because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-9-2015 by DarthFazer because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 12:47 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409


FDR data proved that none of the 9/11 aircraft were flown under remote contro


Do you have evidence to back up this claim?



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 12:47 AM
link   
what was the other tower, the one that had a vertical hole right down the middle of the inside? was it building 6?



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 12:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958



The hard cold fact is many credible eyewitness went on record claiming they saw, they heard, and some where in the explosions and survived.


There were those who heard explosions in the basement and were blasted by high velocity air, but it was later determined that the explosions they heard were from elevators crashing onto the floor after their cables were cut.



The Elevator Man's Tale

We heard the explosion and within a matter of seconds after that impact, I heard – and as well as everybody else heard – this noise, this increasing sound of wind. And it was getting louder and louder. It was like a bomb, not quite the sound of a bomb coming down from a bomber. It was a sound of wind increasing, a whistling sound, increasing in sound.

What we heard was 6 and 7 car free-falling from the 107th floor and they impacted the basement at B-2 Level. And that’s the explosion that filled the lobby within a matter of two or three seconds, engulfed the lobby in dust, smoke.

www.thrnewmed...ember...

edit on 13-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 12:52 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409



There were those who heard explosions in the basement and were blasted by high velocity air, but it was later determined that the explosions they heard were from elevators crashing onto the floor after their cables were cut.


Who determined it was not explosions in the basement, 911 Myths? Sorry to many credible eyewitness confirmed otherwise.


+2 more 
posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 12:53 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

You sure are putting a lot of effort repeating the same things that we've all heard many times before. Like this afternoon in another thread. Beating a dead horse with the no explosions thing. It's been 14 years and the people who put as much effort as you into repeating lies have begun to fade away. But not you! Still going strong I see. Where others have come to terms with their cognitive dissonance, you have not. Or will not. Perhaps you don't have cognitive dissonance at all but have been telling the narrative for so long it's become your reality.

You're beating a dead horse. We all know there were explosions.


+5 more 
posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 12:54 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

Kind of hard to determine it was hot air when the buildings have been destroyed and the evidence shipped off to China for scap. More money was spent on investigating Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky than 9-11.

And it shows
edit on 13-9-2015 by DarthFazer because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 12:57 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409




That was doing wartime conditions, and I have modified many aircraft during the Vietnam conflict in Vietnam, Thailand, and at Hill AFB, but you have to understand that the B-24 bomber is not a B-757 nor a B-767 of a major airline. That is a big difference.


Right. And fiber optics was already on the moon but only been commercially available at the turn of the century. If they could remotely control a boeing then....well...

And yes, very cool pic



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 12:58 AM
link   
a reply to: DarthFazer

I believe it was 6 million to investigate Bill Clinton, and only 3 million spent on the 911 investigations, although I could be wrong.



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 01:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958



Do you have evidence to back up this claim?


Yes. Let's begin with American 77 and notice that American 77 is flying on autopilot, which was disengaged on multipe occasions, which was an indication that it was not being flown by remote control.

Notice that when the autopilot is disengaged, Hani has a problem maintaining proper altitude, but then again, there was no reason for him to abide by the rules in controlled airspace since he was on a one-way trip.

Pressure Altitude Flight Data for American 77

Now, let's take a look at United 175 and notice that the hijacker fails to maintain a constant altitude after he disengages the autopilot, which is another indication that the aircraft is not being flown under remote control.

Pressure Altitude Data for United 175

Now, American 11.

Flight Profile for American 11

Those are not proper flight profiles of aircraft flown under remote control in controlled airspace.


edit on 13-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 01:10 AM
link   
a reply to: FlySolo



Right. And fiber optics was already on the moon but only been commercially available at the turn of the century. If they could remotely control a boeing then....well...


You should have added that the B-24 did not have the glass cockpit of a B-767 in those days.



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 01:12 AM
link   
a reply to: DarthFazer



Are you aware that much technology is available in the private sector years to decades before commercial use ?

Boeing Honeywell Uninterruptible Autopilot


Of course I was aware and was also aware of the Norden bombsight as well, but I will say it once again, there was no way the government could have modified a B-767 or a B-757 and not get caught.



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 01:19 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409


Not get caught ? Who is there to catch them when the highest office in the land is behind it ? Oh and I mean not even the POTUS , as we know the POTUS does not even run the country he is just there for PR as a figurehead. So whos to stop the ptb from threatening whistle blowers in to silence ? Its been done before.

Whos to stop them ?


Nobody

edit on 13-9-2015 by DarthFazer because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 01:25 AM
link   
a reply to: DarthFazer



Not get caught ? Who is there to catch them when the highest office in the land is behind it ?


In a land full of investigative reporters looking for a sensational story to further their careers. Let's not forget the reporters involved in breaking of the Watergate scandal that brought down Nixon and his administration.
edit on 13-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
135
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join