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.

 

Remote viewing the 911 attacks

page: 19
42
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 24 2016 @ 11:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Doctor Smith




He didn't bring facts to the table so they killed him. Yeah right.

So what proof did he bring to the 911 table ?
All I see is he is selling books based on his theory.
Sounds like all the other 911 hucksters.




posted on Apr, 25 2016 @ 05:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Doctor Smith

originally posted by: MrBig2430

originally posted by: DutchMasterChief
a reply to: wmd_2008

No I was just refering to the Pentagon in particular, since this involved the most complicated maneuver. Why don't you respond to that instead of using a decoy argument.



Why would a slow, 30 second+ descending turn be considered extraordinary?


If you really want to know, You'll have to listen to an expert that has flown those planes as "captain" professionally.




I've researched this and have several differing opinions.

Some pilots say a slow descending turn is impossible.

Some pilots say that a slow descending turn, with wild and violent inputs demonstrate poor control and is indicative of the struggle that the terrorist pilots had with that simple maneuver. But agree that it would be entirely possible.

The terrorist pilot's trainer says that he would be able to do it.

Who should I believe?



posted on Apr, 25 2016 @ 05:56 PM
link   
a reply to: MrBig2430


Who should I believe


You pose that question as if it were something innocuous. You should do your own investigation and come to a conclusion on your own.

Then come share that conclusion with us and we will talk about it! That's how all this is supposed to work.



posted on Apr, 25 2016 @ 06:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
If you really want to know, You'll have to listen to an expert that has flown those planes as "captain" professionally.


So he is claiming the plane was a hologram? Or remote controlled? Or was flown by a very good pilot, who committed suicide?



posted on Apr, 25 2016 @ 07:07 PM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

Maybe somebody remote viewed a holographic plane into existence with their mind. And then subsequently conjured up holograms of the 3000 people that died that day.

Perfectly feasible, right?



posted on Apr, 25 2016 @ 09:02 PM
link   
a reply to: MrBig2430

Hani Hanjour (Pilot of America 77 which hit Pentagon) had taken class in jet simulator at JET TECH in Feb 2001

Instructor had signed off as completing section on "Tight Turns"

Nothing was noted for taxiing or landing........
edit on 25-4-2016 by firerescue because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2016 @ 06:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: MrBig2430

Hani Hanjour (Pilot of America 77 which hit Pentagon) had taken class in jet simulator at JET TECH in Feb 2001

Instructor had signed off as completing section on "Tight Turns"

Nothing was noted for taxiing or landing........


The only simulator that Hani Hanjour was known to gave trained on was the 737 simulator. An aircraft with a totally different cockpit than the 757. he is alleged to have piloted on 911. If anything his training would have confused him. Look at this video at 58 minutes.

Man! It's looking more and more like a missile hit the Pentagon. The wings would have popped off on at least one of those planes. The facts start at about 50 minutes into the video. The whole video is worth a watch.






edit on 3-6-2016 by Doctor Smith because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-6-2016 by Doctor Smith because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2016 @ 08:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
Man! It's looking more and more like a missile hit the Pentagon.


How do you explain the 757 wheels found in the wreckage at the Pentagon?
How do you explain the 757 undercarriage found in the wreckage at the Pentagon?
How do you explain the 757 engines found in the wreckage at the Pentagon?
How do you explain the DNA from the bodies of passengers and crew of Flight 77 found at the Pentagon?
How do you explain the damage done to the Pentagon of a 757 sized aircraft done to the Pentagon?

Or do you just hand wave these facts away as they totally destroy your silly conspiracy theory!



posted on Jun, 3 2016 @ 10:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
Man! It's looking more and more like a missile hit the Pentagon.


How do you explain the 757 wheels found in the wreckage at the Pentagon?
How do you explain the 757 undercarriage found in the wreckage at the Pentagon?
How do you explain the 757 engines found in the wreckage at the Pentagon?
How do you explain the DNA from the bodies of passengers and crew of Flight 77 found at the Pentagon?
How do you explain the damage done to the Pentagon of a 757 sized aircraft done to the Pentagon?

Or do you just hand wave these facts away as they totally destroy your silly conspiracy theory!


All that stuff doesn't seem to match exactly and I don't see any serial numbers. The serial numbers on the flight recorders are withheld for some reason for the first time ever. And that doesn't rule out remote controlled planes.



posted on Jun, 3 2016 @ 10:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
All that stuff doesn't seem to match exactly


Yes it does actually.... but funny how you want to ignore that!


And that doesn't rule out remote controlled planes.


So exactly how were the planes modified with no one noticing?



posted on Jun, 4 2016 @ 12:09 AM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce



So exactly how were the planes modified with no one noticing?


Modified? They've probably been in the planes all along. Straight from Boeing's manufacturing plants. Pilots don't even know about them.

On December 4th of 2006, it was announced that Boeing had won a patent on an uninterruptible autopilot system for use in commercial aircraft. This was the first public acknowledgment by Boeing about the existence of such an autopilot system.

“The “uninterruptible” autopilot would be activated – either by pilots, by onboard sensors, or even remotely via radio or satellite links by government agencies like the Central Intelligence Agency, if terrorists attempt to gain control of a flight deck.”

Uninterruptible flight control
Uninterruptible flight control



posted on Jun, 4 2016 @ 12:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Doctor Smith

You literally went from

Man! It's looking more and more like a missile hit the Pentagon.

To

And that doesn't rule out remote controlled planes.

With a single post between them.

You've flopped and changed your story/theory based on the tiniest things, while ignoring the bigger things that prove you wrong.

And this is why you are funny and not taken seriously.



posted on Jun, 4 2016 @ 12:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
Modified? They've probably been in the planes all along. Straight from Boeing's manufacturing plants. Pilots don't even know about them.


So 9/11 was carried out by installing remote controls (that no one knew about) in every 757 built!

Who serviced this equipment? Did the same invisible ninja's that planted all the "explosives" in the WTC buildings do the work? Or was it the invisible ninja's that painted on the nanoo nanoo therrmite to the WTC?

Your conspiracy theories gets sillier and has more people involved every day!


On December 4th of 200


You missed that date, that was after 9/11!

What happened to your claim it was a missile? You really are very confused, you are getting your silly conspiracy theories all mixed up. That is what happens when you just make crap up!



posted on Jun, 4 2016 @ 12:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
Man! It's looking more and more like a missile hit the Pentagon.


How do you explain the 757 wheels found in the wreckage at the Pentagon?
How do you explain the 757 undercarriage found in the wreckage at the Pentagon?
How do you explain the 757 engines found in the wreckage at the Pentagon?
How do you explain the DNA from the bodies of passengers and crew of Flight 77 found at the Pentagon?
How do you explain the damage done to the Pentagon of a 757 sized aircraft done to the Pentagon?

Or do you just hand wave these facts away as they totally destroy your silly conspiracy theory!


They carted all that fake junk there after a missile hit the building. They screwed up though when they included a black box that was a prototype that had been stored locked up at the FAA, and it's serial numbers didn't match the airplane it was supposed to represent.

Oh, and you really need to ditch that line you always use : "silly conspiracy theory", and the exclamation mark as well. They aren't working anymore. Probably because people can see through your use of it as being a blanket shield for the official status quo cartel.

The MSM use it a lot as well when they are called upon to shield someone that is corrupt in government, or whenever they want to discredit someone calling out corruption in government. You might want to educate yourself on these points for the future before you use those methods to ridicule others.



posted on Jun, 4 2016 @ 12:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: Doctor Smith

You literally went from

Man! It's looking more and more like a missile hit the Pentagon.

To

And that doesn't rule out remote controlled planes.

With a single post between them.

You've flopped and changed your story/theory based on the tiniest things, while ignoring the bigger things that prove you wrong.

And this is why you are funny and not taken seriously.


I'm not set on any one theory on the Pentagon plane. Many claim to have seen an American Airlines plane hit the Pentagon. Some debris found days later. At the same time the flight path is illogical, next to impossible and a pilot that had very little training. No clear footage of the impact.

The silliest are the ones that buy into just one scenario and viciously defend it no matter what. Those are the ones I don't take seriously.

Nobody supposedly takes me seriously but somehow their is always someone here waiting to respond 24/7.



posted on Jun, 4 2016 @ 01:09 AM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce




You missed that date, that was after 9/11!


This is why I don't trust you Bruce. They won the patent on the technology after 911. They could have been installing Uninterruptible flight control for decades. I heard about this long before 911. The opposition from some of the Airlines.

Why aren't they making aware and training the pilots on how to use it?



posted on Jun, 4 2016 @ 01:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
Some debris found days later.


Wrong again, found and seen the same day....


At the same time the flight path is illogical, next to impossible


Stiill wrong, why do you claim that?


and a pilot that had very little training.


Hanjour gained his FAA commercial pilot certificate in 1999....


No clear footage of the impact.


Why should there be?


The silliest are the ones that buy into just one scenario and viciously defend it no matter what. Those are the ones I don't take seriously.


So you think it is better that conspiracy theorists believe in different theories about 9/11.... Like it was a missile and/or a plane that hit the Pentagon, it was silent explosives and/or nanoo nanoo thermite that was painted onto the WTC buildings....



posted on Jun, 4 2016 @ 01:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
Why aren't they making aware and training the pilots on how to use it?


So how about providing evidence it has been installed on commercial airliners, and just what training do the pilots need on it?



posted on Jun, 4 2016 @ 04:04 AM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed


Really


For example a report from a witness.


Noel Sepulveda:

The plane dipped its nose and crashed into the southwest side of the Pentagon. "The right engine hit high, the left engine hit low," Sepulveda said. "For a brief moment, you could see the body of the plane sticking out from the side of the building. Then a ball of fire came from behind it."
Telephone interview:

I was a medic in the military, and shortly after I ran into the building and started pulling people out. I spent the next two weeks pulling out bodies, out of the Pentagon ... Some of the bodies that we pulled out were still strapped into their ... airline seats.


More reports here The Pentagon



posted on Jun, 4 2016 @ 08:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
Man! It's looking more and more like a missile hit the Pentagon.


How do you explain the 757 wheels found in the wreckage at the Pentagon?
How do you explain the 757 undercarriage found in the wreckage at the Pentagon?
How do you explain the 757 engines found in the wreckage at the Pentagon?
How do you explain the DNA from the bodies of passengers and crew of Flight 77 found at the Pentagon?
How do you explain the damage done to the Pentagon of a 757 sized aircraft done to the Pentagon?

Or do you just hand wave these facts away as they totally destroy your silly conspiracy theory!


The bigger question is how do YOU prove that? How does the government prove that?

Answer is that you cannot, and the government has not proved any of the above. What you claim above is merely pentagon talking points, and the pentagon is notorious for its mendacity.




top topics



 
42
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join