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.
originally posted by: supergravity
a reply to: wmd_2008
we would not even have to argue over none of this if the government had put an air marshal on every plane when they got the MEMORANDUM "ben laden determined to take over airliners" . The government knows isreal has had almost no hijackings since they started using air marshals. it would have saved thousands of lives and money.They sat on there hands and allowed this to happen to put fear in the people and allow them to make money on weaponry ,take away constitutional rights,and start new wars.
April Gallop said she saw none of that when she walked out of that building that morning, carrying her young son.
“I’ve never seen what the pictures looked like. The FBI was here within minutes and took the film.”
originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: samkent
Do you think she could have missed such things? How could she NOT have seen huge engines and landing gear struts 8 feet tall or more? How could she NOT have seen airline seats, baggage and human bodies?
Do you think she could have missed such things? How could she NOT have seen huge engines and landing gear struts 8 feet tall or more?
originally posted by: Salander
Ah, the ignorance astounds.
FAA rules require that the materials used in airline seats, foam and upholstery, be fire-blocked. Yes, it is expensive, but it doesn't burn. People in the aviation industry know that, but self-appointed experts on the internet have not a clue.
April Gallop's case was thrown out of the court system because it made it very clear that the Emperor was completely naked.
Even though she worked in the Pentagon and walked right through all the damage, she was denied standing because she dared to point out the Emperor was naked.
Huge landing gear and engine assemblies were nowhere to be found for the simple reason that there was no airliner that struck the building.
originally posted by: Salander
Huge landing gear and engine assemblies were nowhere to be found
for the simple reason that there was no airliner that struck the building.
Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response.
"It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. "I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building.
Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"
how do you explain the deaths of all the passengers?
From: amhistory.si.edu...
Context: Driving on a highway adjacent to the Pentagon on the morning of September 11, Penny Elgas stopped as she saw a passenger jet descend, clip a light pole near her, and then crash into the Pentagon. Arriving home, Elgas found this plane fragment in the back seat of her car (she theorizes that it dropped through the open sunroof). Feeling that it was her patriotic duty to preserve the fragment as a relic, she crafted a special box and lined it with red, white, and blue material.
originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux
An aviator you are not. Nobody is claiming a 757 could not fly that low. As you point out, it flies that low every time it lands.
People are saying that a 757, or any transport category aircraft, could not perform the maneuver required for the official story to be true. The official "data" has it flying like 100 knots over its redline, and under the control of a rookie pilot in an airliner for the first time in his life.
It is an absurd story meant only for the completely gullible.
By : NILA SAGADEVAN
from: www.veteranstoday.com...
I shan’t get into the aerodynamic impossibility of flying a large commercial jetliner 20 feet above the ground at over 400 MPH.
originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: imjack
Yes I am on board with the planes not being able to take down the buildings.
My question is if the purpose is to kill people, why use the planes at all?
Why not especially if the Powers That Be want to hide demolition and also using the airplanes for SHOCK and AWE to enrage the American people.
The fact is the WTC had to come down, they were built with asbestos that cause cancer, the EPA had order the Port Authority who owns the WTC that they had to do an abatement program floor by floor to remove the asbestos.
This alone would cost the Port Authority millions of dollars to scaffold the WTC, they were considered the White Elephants, an eyesore to NYC skyline.
Many 911 news and information has been scrub off the internet from google searches, I know this for a fact, in 2004 I found News articles from the NYT that Port Authority had submitted controlled demolition to take down the WTC to the City Council of NY in 1998 and in 1999, the City Council voted no to this plan and stated it was far to dangerous.
However when 911 happened the Port Authority was very pleased with what happened and never paid a dime for the clean up process either. They got their buildings removed without paying for it, how convenient for them.