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.

 

The Hard Truth Of September Eleventh.

page: 8
0
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Musclor
Let's go back to the basics, the things everybody saw and cannot deny.
How can you explain the big flash which occured just before the impact of both planes ? Did Ossama do this ?


You're asking us...but how do YOU explain it?
I'm assuming you're going with the missle theory?

We know for a fact which planes were hijacked and crashed into those buildings. How did they attach missles to those planes without anyone noticing it? If it was a bomb it would be exploding, not shining.


Maybe you're going with the bombs in the building theory?
How did (whoever) know exactly where the planes were going to go in at? How did the planes know exactly which part of the building to hit?


If it was a missle or bomb....why are the flashes so small and only centered where the nose of the plane is going in at? If it was a missle, there's no way that's possible.




posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Musclor
Let's go back to the basics, the things everybody saw and cannot deny.
How can you explain the big flash which occured just before the impact of both planes ? Did Ossama do this ?



I have to ask you this: How can you claim that the flash was prior to the impact and not the actual initial impact of the plane with the building?

Secondly, are you claiming that this is not the same plane full of passengers that departed Logan? How did a plane with a missile hanging off of it pull away from the gate, surely the ramp workers would have noticed?

Next, why fire a missile? Why not just put the explosives in the baggage compartment?

What about the missile safety features?

How easy is it to override the safety features of a missile that prevent it from arming itself until it has flown a certain distance from the plane.

Finally there is the issue of timing. How are you going to fire that missile exactly when the nose of the plane is only a few inches from hitting the building?

Sorry, but the whole missile concept is silly.



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 11:52 AM
link   
I am seriously wondering if both of you actually downloaded the video
because almost your main questions can be answered by watching it.



If it was a missle or bomb....why are the flashes so small and only centered where the nose of the plane is going in at? If it was a missle, there's no way that's possible.



I have to ask you this: How can you claim that the flash was prior to the impact and not the actual initial impact of the plane with the building?


As it can be clearly seen on the video, the flash does NOT occurs on the nose of the plane, and also occurs BEFORE the impact. Watch the video, there is no better explanation than VIDEO PROOF.




Secondly, are you claiming that this is not the same plane full of passengers that departed Logan? How did a plane with a missile hanging off of it pull away from the gate, surely the ramp workers would have noticed?


I don't have a damn idea. I just wanted to talk about the flash. I haven't investigated much concerning that, maybe others guys on ATS can add their word about that.




Finally there is the issue of timing. How are you going to fire that missile exactly when the nose of the plane is only a few inches from hitting the building?


Technology can do lots of things nowadays. I assume it would be very easy to program this. But i'm not expert. Maybe someone can help.


The fact is that something weird happens. And the missile theory is certainly not a silly idea. Do you offer another explanation ?
Again, please watch the video carefully and you should have some of your questions answered. If no, i will start to doubt about your good faith.

[edit on 1/6/2005 by Musclor]



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 12:46 PM
link   


Where is the pod again? I just see the normal fairing at the wing root.



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Okay, I got just ONE question. Why....why...WHY...fly planes into the towers if you already have explosives wired inside? To cover the explosion?? That makes ZERO sense. If it is your intention to level a building, and it's wired anyway, AND YOU FULLY INTEND TO TAKE CREDIT FOR IT ANYWAY...why fly planes into it?

Okay, ANOTHER QUESTION. If the explosives were set by demolition experts, why was virtually EVERY BUILDING in the WTC complex damaged?

And lastly, why not level the blame on who is REALLY to blame...the TERRORISTS???



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 12:58 PM
link   
"and lastly, why not level the blame on who is REALLY to blame...the TERRORISTS???"

racism and arrogance.

I believe at the root of many cons theories is "those muslims aren't smart enough, technologically advanced enough to land such a massive blow against the US, so it had to be isreal or the US that did it......."



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
"and lastly, why not level the blame on who is REALLY to blame...the TERRORISTS???"

racism and arrogance.

I believe at the root of many cons theories is "those muslims aren't smart enough, technologically advanced enough to land such a massive blow against the US, so it had to be isreal or the US that did it......."




You have voted syrinx high priest for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.


Exactly.

but you forgot to heep in a healthy dose of scientific illiteracy and paranoia as well.



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 02:32 PM
link   


The pod is clearly visible in this picture. Taken from New York Magazine, September 24th, 2001 issue.

[edit on 1/6/2005 by Musclor]



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 04:38 PM
link   
You are looking at the fairing of the wing root. Due to the light and shadow effects, it looks odd in that photo, but it is a standard part of that type of plane.

Take a look at this photo.

Notice the fairing at the wing root. Also notice the landing gear doors. How would have it been possible to raise the landing gear and close the doors with that “Pod” in the way? Please explain to me how this would work.


In this photo you can see the lights at the leading edge of the fairing. Kind of like on your so called “pod.” notice also how the fairing on the far side of the fuselage stands out from the bottom of the fuselage.

And even more views:

here the rounded edges of the fairing are clearly discernable.

Is that a pod on the left side of this plane?

www.airliners.net...








[edit on 1-6-2005 by HowardRoark]



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 05:06 PM
link   
The pod theory has never made since to me either. You couldn't take off with it attached where it is supposed to be attached. I've seen the flash no idea what it is. I think it's just a case of flying 2 planes into the towers creating shock value and then using controlled demolition to add even more shock and deaths for the cause. The cause being invading middle eastern countries to control the supply of oil and establish military bases for peak oil. This was just the start of the “Oil Wars” and the lose of our democracy in favor of Empire. May the force be with you.



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 05:23 PM
link   
That whole pod theory was put out there to confuse and derail legitimate investigations. It also makes those who support it look "tinfoil hat."



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 11:42 PM
link   
Quote: "the TERRORISTS???"

And just who are the Terrorists again? Oh yes those Terrible Arab Moslem Extremists who cut of Peoples Heads & Suicide Bomb themselves over in the Middle East! They MUST have been the people that did 9/11 - that Reasoning is good enough Evidence/Proof for me (actually it is not Evidence/Proof at all -
Just Media Manipulation)! SHEESH you must watch a LOT of Cable News!

Quote: "those Muslims aren't Smart Enough, Technologically Advanced Enough to land such a Massive Blow Against the US".

Well they are not! An Event like 9/11 COULD NOT HAVE EVEN OCCURED without a HIGH LEVEL of
either Government Incompetence or Government Complicity! Were was the Air Force - who told them to "Stand Down" - what happened with NORAD & the FAA again?


[edit on 1-6-2005 by Seraphim_Serpente]

[edit on 1-6-2005 by Seraphim_Serpente]



posted on Jun, 4 2005 @ 06:18 PM
link   
That does not look like the fairing wing root at all. The pod have probably been placed over it in order to be camouflaged though.






Not to mention that the flash occurs exactly in the continuation of the supposed pod :



Sources : Letsroll911.org



posted on Jun, 4 2005 @ 06:40 PM
link   
9/11
Its not 9 divided by 11, its 9 eleven's.

So lets check it out
111 111 111 now theres 9 one's. Damn, I'll make them vertical I guess
111 111 111 oh, look, 111.
adding downwards
222+222+222
666


Now that wasn't so hard.
There's 9 pairs of 11, forming 6 pairs of the occultic number 111.

No accident. Its all in a name.

Did I mention there are 111 days in the year left, after September 11.


______________
^^bottom line
It wasn't Muslims.

[edit on 4-6-2005 by akilles]



posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 02:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
That whole pod theory was put out there to confuse and derail legitimate investigations. It also makes those who support it look "tinfoil hat."


Agreed, the pod conspiracy is highly inconclusive, simplified, I personally put it down to the pronounced area where the undercarriage is stored combined with the shadow of the left engine.

Damning Evidence for 9/11 Conspiracy

I haven't come across anyone who has debunked my thread above, as yet.



posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Koka

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
That whole pod theory was put out there to confuse and derail legitimate investigations. It also makes those who support it look "tinfoil hat."


Agreed, the pod conspiracy is highly inconclusive, simplified, I personally put it down to the pronounced area where the undercarriage is stored combined with the shadow of the left engine.




Add to that the fact that digital photography is not without its flaws. Notably the process known as "blooming." and the fact that most of those photographs have been highly manipulated by those proposing the theories.

Now if the pods were in the basement of the WTC, however, you might have an interesting theory there.


[edit on 7-6-2005 by HowardRoark]



posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 11:33 AM
link   
Is there anyway that the flash could have been caused by static electricity, or an induced emf across the tips of the wings of the plane?

Plane tyres are usually made with some strip of a conductor imbedded in them, if the charge isn't discharged it could cause something like the flash.

The earth's magnetic field can induce an emf in the plane and the static could build up from the atmosphere. I don't know how to calculate the static build up but the emf would be:
ε=∫(vxB).dl



posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 12:02 PM
link   
The flash was caused by the initial impact of the plane’s nose with the building.

Would the energy of that initial impact been enough to vaporize and ignite the aluminum cladding of the building/aircraft fuselage? Maybe, I don’t know. It is a possibility.

Also, there are a number of power supplies, batteries, oxygen generators, etc located in the front of the plane. Could these have contributed to the “flash?” Probably.


dh

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark
The flash was caused by the initial impact of the plane’s nose with the building.

Would the energy of that initial impact been enough to vaporize and ignite the aluminum cladding of the building/aircraft fuselage? Maybe, I don’t know. It is a possibility.

Also, there are a number of power supplies, batteries, oxygen generators, etc located in the front of the plane. Could these have contributed to the “flash?” Probably.


The flashes on ! and 2 have been quite clearly been demonstrated to occur a second before impact



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 03:17 AM
link   
While many claim the fashes occur a second or so before impact, when I watch the footage it looks to me as though the plane has definitely impacted the building.

However, the flashes do appear to occur one or 2 metres to the right of the cockpit. This is hard to verify on the 1st hit (North Tower) as the Naudet brother's footage was taken from a great distance and not at the best of angles to verify where exactly the flash occurs, it does however occur at pretty much the same time as the 2nd hit (South Tower).

Now, we can go on speculating about the flashes, but without further evidence that is all we can do, a simple explaination would be that an electrical conduit was ruptured.

As for the pod attachment theory, this is inconclusive, as I mentioned previously. In the numerous pieces of footage I have seen, there does appear to be an enlarged area in the undercarriage area, it does not however appear on all the different available shots. I believe that this pronounced area looks larger than normal as the contrast is quit great between light and dark, the plane was tilting more and more, in an anti-clockwise direction, the closer it drew to the tower. As the plane tilted, the shadow of the right engine falls on the undercarriage, this would also explain why some have claimed that the object appears to change shape, logical in my book.

To continue to speculate on the pod theory, merely detracts from the greater anomolies that occured on that day and to insist on these kinds of theories, which cannot be verified, only fuels the arguments of the debunkers, who will discredit more obvious discrepencies regarding 9/11, as they have been bundle with less credible theories.

You don't need anymore evidence than that supplied by the Commander in Cheif himself.
Damning Evidence for 9/11 Conspiracy

[edit on 8-6-2005 by Koka]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join