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 Experiments: The Force Behind the Motion

page: 14
50
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 09:06 AM
link   
a reply to: yesyesyes

As I recall the first people on the scene before the façade collapsed could barely find a hole, and that included 2 Capitol police guys that I think were helicopter pilots.

Also the Fox News guy stated clearly it didn't look like an airplane had struck there. Shades of Wally Miller.




posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

SMOKE



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: samkent

You clearly misunderstand. Whatever.

My point is you can't even prove the opposite as being any more likely.

Sure 1,000 people are in on it. "Impossible!"
Sure, 1 person with a remote control crashed all four planes himself, and launched a rocket at the pentagon. "Impossible!"

Either are equally likely, but I'll humor that your retarded assumption the people that picked up the trash must be connected because they're allowed to touch trash.

You can't #ing prove the people on the ground are connected by weighing the #ing odds alone. You need proof.

Just because 1-3 people can't execute a plane full of people doesn't mean that's what #ing happened. And that's generally another retarded assumption, because 1 person can easily execute a plane of people if he has an automatic weapon, and you don't need to haul # onto the lawn if you cause an explosion by yourself.



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 03:51 PM
link   
a reply to: imjack




Just because 1-3 people can't execute a plane full of people doesn't mean that's what #ing happened. And that's generally another retarded assumption, because 1 person can easily execute a plane of people if he has an automatic weapon, and you don't need to haul # onto the lawn if you cause an explosion by yourself.


So who rigged the planes ...?? These planes are not fly-by-wire. Would have required extensive modification to the
cockpit.

Again you fail.......



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 04:41 PM
link   
a reply to: imjack




because 1 person can easily execute a plane of people if he has an automatic weapon, and you don't need to haul # onto the lawn if you cause an explosion by yourself.

Is that 1 person also going to carry the bodies to a disposal site too?

You should lose the curse word attitude.
It comes across as childish.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 09:05 AM
link   
a reply to: firerescue

Does it really matter who "rigged the airplanes"? No, it doesn't. All that matters is that the airplane that struck the south tower was NOT UA175.

As observers, we know only that it was not a stock 767. It doesn't matter who modified them or where.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 09:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander




As observers, we know only that it was not a stock 767. It doesn't matter who modified them or where.

Yes it does matter.
It's one of small details that conspiracy believers like to harp on.
There were about 800 767's in existence in 2001.
Four planes can't just drop out of service for modification without many people noticing.
Plane spotters watch airports as a hobby. They log tail numbers.
If 4 commercial aircraft show up at some government hanger people are going to question it.

Conspiracy believers think that all the events that made 911 were done by secret conspirators in a vacuum and no one noticed and the conspirators were too stupid to grasp their part in it.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 01:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: firerescue

Does it really matter who "rigged the airplanes"? No, it doesn't. All that matters is that the airplane that struck the south tower was NOT UA175.

As observers, we know only that it was not a stock 767. It doesn't matter who modified them or where.



Not stock got proof



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
All that matters is that the airplane that struck the south tower was NOT UA175.


Oh no, the "pod people" are back....



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 05:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander




As observers, we know only that it was not a stock 767. It doesn't matter who modified them or where.


Not stock...?? So where did it come from..??

Does Boeing have some sekrit aircraft factory under Area 51 where they make 767 ??

Planes like this require a massive facility and thousands of people and suppliers of everything from jet engines to nut/bolts

It takes months to build an aircraft of this size. Not like go to PLANES 'R US and buy one off the rack

There are plane brokers which keep track of aircraft to buy/sell/lease If 4 757/767 drop off the face of the earth someone
would notice



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 07:03 PM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce




Oh no, the "pod people" are back....

These thing run in cycles.
Last week it was nukes.
Next week it will be holograms.



posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: wmd_2008

To become informed on that fact, you will have to visit Pilots For Truth, but I'm guessing you won't have any part of that.

The engine that flew off the airplane striking the South Tower ended up on a sidewalk blocks away, and pictures were taken of it. I'm hopeful you already know that.

Close analysis of that engine from the photographs show that engine to be and engine used on the 747 primarily, NOT a 767.

Therefore, whatever airplane struck the tower had unusual engines and was not a stock 767 as used by United. The presence of fairings at the wing root corroborate it was not a stock 767.

You may be in denial of the facts, but those are the facts.



posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: firerescue

Who said they dropped off the face of the earth? Perhaps you should stick to fires, eh?

The likely source of that airplane was a batch of 767s modified by Israeli companies for the tanker role back in the 90s. They were delivered to USAF. I think it was about 2 dozen modified aircraft.



posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander
post a picture a prove it!



posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 11:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Bull. The Air Force never had a 767 tanker until the KC-46 flew last year. Israel didn't modify any 767s until 2010, for their own use. The first 767 tanker didn't fly until after 9/11.

I have evidence for that. Where's yours to prove your claims?



posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 11:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

You realize that both the 767 and the 747 use the CF6 right? The core of the engine is the same, with changes made to the fan and other components for the different types.



posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 11:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander




The likely source of that airplane was a batch of 767s modified by Israeli companies for the tanker role back in the 90s. They were delivered to USAF. I think it was about 2 dozen modified aircraft.

It's stuff like this that keep the conspiracy believers afloat.
Without lies and misdirection the 911 conspiracy is just another Titanic.

Good work Zaphod58 .



posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Nice post.



posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 05:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Salander

You realize that both the 767 and the 747 use the CF6 right?


Obviously they did not! Silly truther conspiracy sites do not post that fact!
edit on 18-3-2016 by hellobruce because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 05:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Oh, and they also both use the RB211 as well, both up to the latest version, the 747-8.




top topics



 
50
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join