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.

 

Why there were no planes at the WTC

page: 28
2
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 27 2006 @ 12:27 PM
link   
cmon peeps r u seariusly argueing this?

all the evadense like the orbs and invizible wings pruve holigams.





posted on Oct, 27 2006 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
John lear : the final straw
“ john lear “ appealing to the authority of his alleged pilots credentials made this statement .


In the last 60 seconds he is going to cover 8 miles during which he can't vary even one degree to hit the target


This is referring to the handling characteristics of the BOEING 767 ,whether it could be flown into the WTC tower
[edit on 26-10-2006 by ignorant_ape]


I'm curious here.. are you a pilot? if not what is your point?

Furthermore, pilots are not trained to hit objects.. the last time that was done was via the kamikaze in WWII. Maybe you need to study what they did for awhile before you make sweeping generalizations.



posted on Oct, 27 2006 @ 12:57 PM
link   
You are kidding about those links, right? The only thing that they prove is that people have overactive imaginations and the abilty to alter a video/picture to fit their arguement.

Do any of you have working knowledge of or have you worked with holograms that would be displayed, in air, in real time? just curious...



posted on Oct, 27 2006 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71
Do any of you have working knowledge of or have you worked with holograms that would be displayed, in air, in real time? just curious...

I don't. But I wanna know what yer cat is listening to. He's been really enjoying it for some time now.



posted on Oct, 27 2006 @ 02:48 PM
link   
The 10-11-06 plane did not crash into the Belaire building.

Cory Lidle's plane flew down to the lower left hand side of the screen just above the water. At the same time, a huge explosion(at least 10 times as big as a standard small one engine plane crash) rocked a building with no plane near it.
The only plane on radar was Cory Lidle's plane.
The only plane seen on the footage did not crash into the building. It flew back to the right(left side of the screen) and lowered its altitude until it flew just above the water as seen in the footage.
The plot to set up a fabricated death of the 72 game career loss pitcher on the 72nd street of Manhatten on the upside down 9-11-01 date of 10-11-6 just 4 days after his contribution to the Yankees season ending loss to the Tigers has seem to be a success for the masterminds of this conspiracy.

Here is the footage:
www.youtube.com...


Within the article below:
"The NTSB's Debbie Hersman said the Cirrus Design SR20 aircraft was traveling 112 mph at 700 feet when it reached 70th Street and began the turn. The plane slammed into the Belaire condominium building on 72nd Street moments later."
www.cnn.com...

When going Ferrari sports car speed of 112 mph from 70th Street(ABOVE the building) to 72th street, it would be going way too fast to "hide" behind the building for 10 SECONDS during the video footage before the "crash"(bomb).

Also, the construction workers of the 46th floor right above the explosion(which occurred at the 40th and 41st floors) had more than enough room in those huge windows: d.yimg.com...
to drop small pieces of airplane parts: cache.gawker.com...
out of them at the time of the explosion.
Also, they wanted the public to really believe that Cory Lidle died with no evidence so they threw his passport out the window as well. Of course, the passport didn't get fire damaged because they probably mistimed the throw through the flames of the explosion.



posted on Oct, 27 2006 @ 03:59 PM
link   
www.myspace.com/foxfallen is what the cat is listening to, plus some Tool and the Who.

There are certain things that are needed to provide a hologram, and there are different types. In order to pull of what they did, the coordinated effort would have been so large, why not jsut attempt another bombing, street level, the size of the Oklahoma City blast. It is not like there is no way to have done it. Multiple trucks at the same time, and they would have caused more destruction.

In this case, it was 2 planes, loaded with passengers, seen from across the river, groundl evel, inside both towers, uptown and downtown there were witnesses to both impacts and people who witnessed them the enitre length of the Island, then strike the towers. After the first, people were outside watching and saw another flying low overthe bridges, directly flying at and accelerating toward the WTC. \


Where were the optics located that would have been able to do this, i mean, you might as well state the CIA called in David Blaine.



posted on Oct, 27 2006 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by denythestatusquo
I'm curious here.. are you a pilot?


No I am not ……….. I specifically said I was not why did you not read my post ?


if not what is your point?


Why do I have to be a pilot to have an opinion in this issue ? it is basic physics that lears statement :


In the last 60 seconds he is going to cover 8 miles during which he can't vary even one degree to hit the target


Was WRONG get over it .

Please note he never actually answered the issue – he chose instead to attack petty minutiae details of terminology – and told me to take medication which I am not permitted to take – that was not very responsible



Furthermore, pilots are not trained to hit objects.


Please look up how “ way points “ \are used , both normal pilots and suicide bombers use way points to navigate . and make course corrections at each way point

The only difference , is that a suicide terrorist bombers select a final waypoint which lies INSIDE their target building .

Please tell me what is different ?

Finally , to be pedantic Yes they [ none suicide pilots ] are – they train to hit objects – they are known as runways – your position , heading , attitude and rate of descent all have to be correct to land safely

If any one is incorrect : You will either , miss the runway , overshoot , crash or career of the runway


. the last time that was done was via the kamikaze in WWII.


Yes – I know , I brought it up , citing the fact that the ` cherry blossom squadrons ` only received 10 hours instruction .

And were attempting to hit a moving target , taking evasive action , and defended by AAA fire – a smaller target than WTC too .

What possesses you to believe that this is somehow easier ?


Maybe you need to study what they did for awhile before you make sweeping generalizations.


What “ sweeping generalization “ ???

I have studied the issue – and lears claim that :


In the last 60 seconds he is going to cover 8 miles during which he can't vary even one degree to hit the target


Is so wrong , it is stupid

If you believe there is any substance to lears statement – please tell me how the hell you believe aircraft change heading in flight ?

You are the one you needs to study – it is you who is attempting to prop up a lie .


[edit on 27-10-2006 by ignorant_ape]



posted on Oct, 27 2006 @ 06:41 PM
link   
How about, if those "projected hologram's" were being projected by the cameras the FBI removed, like the one from the sherington. I read somewhere here that they removed 85 video tapes. I believe from the thread "Details Regarding the Confiscated Security Videos Of Pentagon Attack", the camera from the sherington and the citgo fuel station were removed also. What if those objects were a multitude of projectors of some kind, and the video tapes removed were'nt recording, they were playing images that were being projected somehow!
If they removed 85 or so video tapes, does that mean there may of been 85 cameras, or possible projection units?



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 08:45 PM
link   
I read this earlier on. It reminded me of this thread.


Originally posted by johnlear
This paper titled Airborne Holographic Projector describes a holographic projector which displays a 3 dimensional image in a desired location removed from the display generator (in this case another aircraft flying nearby). The projector can be used for psychological operations and strategic perception managment. It is also useful for optical deception and cloaking, providing a momentary distraction when engaging an unsophisticated adversary (you and me).

The 3 dimensional display of flying airliners was projected to to show airliners flying into the WTC. That is why you can 'see through' the projections.

My opinion is that this technology was perfected about 15 years ago.



Holographic projection.
The Defense Weekly article describes a quasi-information warfare/psychological operations program that was first discussed by the Air Force after Operation Desert Storm in the Gulf War.
This involves projection of a three-dimensional holographic image to act as a decoy. The Pentagon spoke openly about its use of holographic projections during discussions of its non-lethal weapons program back in 1994. Since then, the program disappeared, most likely becoming a black project.


[edit on 9/12/06 by Implosion]



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tuning Spork(replying to esdad71)
I don't. But I wanna know what yer cat is listening to. He's been really enjoying it for some time now.


Gotta love that cat!


As for the topic, the whole world watched as planes struck both buildings.

WTC 9/11 both towers


[edit on 12/9/2006 by Mechanic 32]

[edit on 12/9/2006 by Mechanic 32]



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 07:44 AM
link   
The Cat is cool....Kazoo was always one of my favorites...I could never figure our why Fred, with all the powers Kazoo had....why didnt he sat up a three way with Wilma and Betty?

Anyway...I love reading the no-plane theory's. It's better than watching the Sci-Fi channel.

For anyone to think that the plane can not penetrate a building..The Kamikazi pilots actually breeched the sides of ships. They I would assume are more durable.



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 08:21 AM
link   
Ewing2001

check this out

youtube.com...


there was no plane.



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 09:12 AM
link   
Dear Mechanic 32:

I happen to also “love” that cat — metaphorically speaking only of course. But to the point — brainsucker is right — there were no planes at the wtc. We can only speculate what actually did happen. And at the end of the day, people will believe whatever they WANT to. If you want to swallow that aluminum jetliners sliced through 14”x14” quarter inch thick steel perimeter box columns with only 25 inches of space in-between, then you are not alone, that’s for sure.
The boys at MIT will fully and happily support your position. I’m surprised they’re not chiming in at this very moment. They also “scientifically” documented how the fire caused the truss support “clips” (what a joke) to fail causing the floor slabs to pancake on top of each other. I simply had to bring this up — because most of us here at ATS have forgotten that this is still the prevailing collapse theory outside “CT” discussion forums.

Yeah, YOU’RE right also. The entire industrialized world “watched” the planes smash into the towers — on our television sets. Yippie! Therefore it’s gotta be true, right? TV — it’s BECOME our reality now. Dan Rather said…and he wouldn’t lie now would he? The same Dan Rather who on 22 November 1963 stood a mere six feet from the manhole out of which one of the snipers popped during JFK Sr.’s assassination. Oddly, his career as a journalist skyrocketed from that point on.

Side note to CameronFox — I’m still trying to “research” your kamikaze “picture”. It would help a great deal if we knew the name of that ship. I reviewed as many Navy documents as I could but I could not find any damage reports which might match. I’m sure there is an explanation for the image you linked. The profile somewhat resembles a Kaiten suicide torpedo.

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods



[edit on 12/10/2006 by Wizard_In_The_Woods]



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 10:44 AM
link   


Side note to CameronFox — I’m still trying to “research” your kamikaze “picture”. It would help a great deal if we knew the name of that ship. I reviewed as many Navy documents as I could but I could not find any damage reports which might match. I’m sure there is an explanation for the image you linked. The profile somewhat resembles a Kaiten suicide torpedo.


Instead of reviewing all your documents, if you looked at the "Contact Me" page...you would have seen this:


Wist to contact me? Want to submit some photos? Have a complaint?
Email me using this address: skunker@gmail.com

www.ww2incolor.com...

The hole in the side of this ship does not resemble a Kaiten Suicide Torpedo at all!



Here is a picture of a Kaiten Suicide Torpedo:



Here is a picture of a Kamikazi plane:






I don't know. Call me ignorant...but what would you think ??


I edited a different picture of the Kamikazee that shows better detail.

[edit on 10-12-2006 by CameronFox]



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 07:30 PM
link   
Dear Cameronfox:

You’re right. The hole in the ship does not resemble a “normal” Kaiten suicide torpedo. And of course it couldn’t have been caused by a submarine-type device anyways, the damage is located too far above the waterline. I was thinking more along the lines of some type of “baka”-style airplane/suicide torpedo/bomb, or some other experimental last-ditch-effort-type design. Truth is I have no idea what could have caused that “hole” if that indeed is what it is. Naturally, the photo quality is horrible. If it were a photo taken during battle that would be understandable. But being that there are two sailors in the upper corner of the picture “shooting the breeze”, it’s a little odd why this document is so grainy.

One thing is certain, the damage profile of the “entry hole” does not match any of the common Japanese WWII fighter planes. The wings are (almost) always attached (tangential) on the bottom of the plane’s body, not on the sides. I say almost, because yes, there are exceptions. But before I speculate any further I would like to know what the name of the vessel is shown in that picture, so that I can get to the “bottom of this”. In the meantime, here are images of a Nakajima “Oskar” and a Mitsubishi “Zero” to illustrate my point.


Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 08:23 PM
link   
I'm not sure as to what plane was used in that attack. What ever it was, it certainly breeched the side of that ship.

Here are a few more pictures :










Clearly this proves that the kamikaze planes did penetrate the ships.



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 08:50 AM
link   
Wizard - the picture you show is from the beams loacted AT THE BOTTOM of the towers....not where the planes hit.



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox
I'm not sure as to what plane was used in that attack. What ever it was, it certainly breeched the side of that ship.

Here are a few more pictures :










Clearly this proves that the kamikaze planes did penetrate the ships.



Looks like just the engine of the plane penetrated, because the rest of the plane would have been aluminum or wood depending on the aircraft.



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 10:09 AM
link   
ULTIMA...the conversation I was having with wizard was the ability of a Kamikazee to breech a ship. He claimed it was not possible.

Per these pictures you can't tell what actually made it in.

You can specualate all you want.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join