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.

 

Was the 10-11-06 New York plane crash a bomb? Footage doesn't show a plane.

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 07:59 PM
link   
If we don't keep responding to this thread maybe we will be lucky enough for it to go away.

I thought I had seen it all when people believed that the footage at the beginning and ending of Texas Chainsaw Massacre (the remake) was real.

I am sorry, this was an accident. To make more of it is just pointless.




posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Misfit

Originally posted by realanswers

The radar had clearly shown that there was only one plane under radar in that area at that specific time.


So, if you are saying there IS one aircraft in that area, how does that attribute to the explosion being a bomb and not the aircraft in question?


Originally posted by realanswers

The actual footage shows a plane just above the water that you seemed to avoid in explaining.


Scratch this 2nd part of the reply, thought it was referring to the radar ani.

Misfit



[edit on 23/10/06 by Misfit]


The bomb was already planted in the building. The plane flew under radar until it had to fake a dive into the building, then it dove down as it turned into the opposite direction. It had to cruise just above the water and then land some where close to the beach. And there you have it.



posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by realanswers

There you go again. Thinking like a robot


Not hardly. When attempting to prove a conspiracy - attention to detail is everything. I asked you those questions relevant to what do know in fact. When you know nil of aspects of functions, you can not begin tograsp all the possible scenarios.





I have already corrected the wording in the post that it came from so you all would definitely know what I was trying to convey and you know that.


Done deal. Apologies.




You still have not explained what the **** a plane is doing flying just above the water coming from the direction of the buildings.



Now, here is where I get confused, considering your opening statement, andstatements since:


Originally posted by realanswers

The footage doesn't show a plane in the air.
A whole 10 seconds of no plane in the air before the crash!
Witnesses heard a BOOM, but did not "see" a plane!



Plane? No plane? You seem to be syaing it both ways.




The plane flew under radar until it had to fake a dive into the building, then it dove down as it turned into the opposite direction. It had to cruise just above the water and then land some where close to the beach. And there you have it.


(1) That is to say the ATC is also in on this conspiracy, no?
(2) Where then, is the ball player?
(3) All those NY'ers didn't see a plane land on the beach?

Misfit

[edit on 23/10/06 by Misfit]



posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Misfit

Originally posted by realanswers
I have already stated some motives that the shadow government may have had: ........... (snip)..........

So in other words .......... you have nothing outside of wasting my time waiting to see a conspiracy.

Could have does'nt count. Anyone could have done something, does'nt mean they did or that something ever was.

Damn three pages and ....................... nothing.

Misfit

It has only been 12 days since the event. Many people still don't know all the reasons behind 9-11 and that was OVER 5 YEARS AGO. Someone should give me credit. I have explained where the plane from radar went while others only came up with the upside 9-11 date thing. But, apparently that isn't enough, I have to know why and not just how.



posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 08:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by realanswers
I have explained where the plane from radar went

Um, no, you have only surmised.

Misfit



posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 08:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Misfit

Originally posted by realanswers

There you go again. Thinking like a robot


Not hardly. When attempting to prove a conspiracy - attention to detail is everything. I asked you those questions relevant to what do know in fact. When you know nil of aspects of functions, you can not begin tograsp all the possible scenarios.





I have already corrected the wording in the post that it came from so you all would definitely know what I was trying to convey and you know that.


Done deal. Apologies.




You still have not explained what the **** a plane is doing flying just above the water coming from the direction of the buildings.



Now, here is where I get confused, considering your opening statement, andstatements since:


Originally posted by realanswers

The footage doesn't show a plane in the air.
A whole 10 seconds of no plane in the air before the crash!
Witnesses heard a BOOM, but did not "see" a plane!



Plane? No plane? You seem to be syaing it both ways.




The plane flew under radar until it had to fake a dive into the building, then it dove down as it turned into the opposite direction. It had to cruise just above the water and then land some where close to the beach. And there you have it.


(1) That is to say the ATC is also in on this conspiracy, no?
(2) Where then, is the ball player?
(3) All those NY'ers didn't see a plane land on the beach?

Misfit

[edit on 23/10/06 by Misfit]

When I was saying that there was no plane in the air, I was refering to the area near the buildings. The plane flying just above the water was not near the buildings. People probably did see the plane land along the water or beach area, but the news and media don't have to and nor do they even try and ask the people those questions. People can get paid to lie anyways. Where is the ball player? That is another question the media or police will not ask so if they don't even try and come up with the real truth outside from the footage then how on Earth will I be able to?



posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 09:01 PM
link   
I will leave the readers with this to review as I retire for the day:
Here you see the explosion covering about an area of 100 feet by 50 feet. That is a VERY BIG EXPLOSION!
us.news2.yimg.com...

Here you see a person standing in one of the large windows after the explosion. That was an ENORMOUS EXPLOSION compared to the limited wall damage!
d.yimg.com...

Here you see how small Cory Lidle's plane was.
www.physics.ucsb.edu...

Here you see how small the explosions are from small single engined/single propellered planes. Watch the part at 1 minute 30 seconds and 4 minutes of this video:
www.youtube.com...

Cory Lidle's plane did not crash.

Here is the radar tracking data with Cory Lidle's plane being in red:

www.youtube.com...

Here is the footage:

www.youtube.com...

What happened was:
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 within the Illuminati/shadow government.



posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by spanishcaravan

Originally posted by realanswers
This is footage of a Cessna 172 crash in Orlando:

www.youtube.com...

I know that Cory Lidle's plane was a Cessna 172N. I don't know if a Cessna 172 is the same as a Cessna 172N, but to me it is close enough.

THE PLANE DIDN'T EVEN EXPLODE and this huge explosion: www.youtube.com...
is supposed to be from a small Cessna 172N?!?



He wasnt flying a cessna. He was a flying a cirrus sr20. The plane made famous for its safety record and parachute deployment.


Cirrus

If you happened to catch the news footage just after the accident happened,you would see that it was a dark,rainy/foggy afternoon. Even the news cameras were getting as good a picture as usual. You could also see the actual plane wreckage on the street below from some news chopper camera angles.

I remember hearing that the parachute did get a chance to deploy.


Wow,please read again..........



posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by spanishcaravan

Originally posted by spanishcaravan

Originally posted by realanswers
This is footage of a Cessna 172 crash in Orlando:

www.youtube.com...

I know that Cory Lidle's plane was a Cessna 172N. I don't know if a Cessna 172 is the same as a Cessna 172N, but to me it is close enough.

THE PLANE DIDN'T EVEN EXPLODE and this huge explosion: www.youtube.com...
is supposed to be from a small Cessna 172N?!?





He wasnt flying a cessna. He was a flying a cirrus sr20. The plane made famous for its safety record and parachute deployment.


Cirrus

If you happened to catch the news footage just after the accident happened,you would see that it was a dark,rainy/foggy afternoon. Even the news cameras were getting as good a picture as usual. You could also see the actual plane wreckage on the street below from some news chopper camera angles.

I remember hearing that the parachute did get a chance to deploy.


Wow,please read again..........

He did fly a Cessna 172N before. It is the plane that he was seen in pictures with. But, of course, for some reason, his plane on that day was a Cirrus SR20.
This was an era on my part that I have corrected many postings ago and the picture in one of the links in my last posting show a Cirrus SR20 as an example for people to review.
"Wow, please read again.........." sounds like what a little kid would say to a grown up when they still need to fall asleep.
I see that many still actually believe that plane crashes and bomb damage result in the same destruction and some ridiculous cases of DEMOLITION(9-11).

Someone else out there can see the deception and may have even noticed it before I got around to it. Please let people know here that you do.
I feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone where a 9-11 conspiracy has happened and everybody's minds are controlled by the government to think a certain way like a computer program while I'm like Neo of "The Matrix" who knows the truth.



posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by realanswers
The footage doesn't show a plane in the air.
Watch this link:

www.youtube.com...

A whole 10 seconds of no plane in the air before the crash!
Witnesses heard a BOOM, but did not "see" a plane!



Of course it does not show a plane. Whoever did the video might have taken the original and changed the frame rate, then posted his version of the video.

If you compare the orginial to the youtube it appears the clouds moved much faster after the explosion.



posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by shots

Originally posted by realanswers
The footage doesn't show a plane in the air.
Watch this link:

www.youtube.com...

A whole 10 seconds of no plane in the air before the crash!
Witnesses heard a BOOM, but did not "see" a plane!



Of course it does not show a plane. Whoever did the video might have taken the original and changed the frame rate, then posted his version of the video.

If you compare the orginial to the youtube it appears the clouds moved much faster after the explosion.




Your so called "original" shows the exact same thing except for the explosion being highlighted. NO PLANE ecept for the one that I have explained time and time again that is just over the water on the left side coming from the direction of the buildings. I only real dispute is that this plane just over the water is a boat, but it doesn't break or change the water at all and does apear to be a good distance above the water.



posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 04:21 PM
link   
Here you see the explosion covering about an area of 100 feet by 50 feet. That is a VERY BIG EXPLOSION!
us.news2.yimg.com...

Here you see a person standing in one of the large windows after the explosion. That was an ENORMOUS EXPLOSION compared to the limited wall damage!
d.yimg.com...

Here you see how small Cory Lidle's plane was.
www.physics.ucsb.edu...

Here you see how small the explosions are from small single engined/single propellered planes. Watch the part at 1 minute 30 seconds and 4 minutes of this video:
www.youtube.com...

Cory Lidle's plane did not crash.

Here is the radar tracking data with Cory Lidle's plane being in red:

www.youtube.com...

Here is the footage:

www.youtube.com...

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 in that area at the time.
The only plane seen on the footage did not crash into the building it is the plane that 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 plane appeared to be attempting to land near the beach area of the river to avoid being seen in the air by the public after they notice the explosion.
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 within the Illuminati/shadow government.



posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 07:39 PM
link   
I've skimmed through the thread, but didn't see what I look for. Does anyone know the source of this video? It appears as if it is just a simple webcam that maintains a recording (such as even my city does, from the top of a bridge overlooking the area).

On another note of the video - I see so many claiming that there should have been more videos of the crash iteself ........ um, why? For example - of 911, the vid of the first jet impact was a freak instance, there is only one video. Why is there no claiming of "where's all the video cams of the first impact?" The vid of the 2nd however, obviously everyone's cams were on, because there was already a set of events taking place ......... white behind white / in front of white / in white.

Another question is, the aircraft that was being flown (not the model, but the actual registered aircraft), does anyone know if it was of a stock white paint scheme? If so, how could one possibly expect to see, from the distance this video cam is from the flight area, a small white single engine prop in the atmosphere cover that is? I mean, the hazy day it is on, there is atmosphere in between and behind the aircraft, as well as the aircraft itself being in the atmosphere.

@ realanswers

While I do commend you for your perseverance in this endeavor, sometimes (as previously stated) an accident is just an accident. Don't be so adamant as to close yourself off to other ideas and possiblilities. This would be tantamount to one that is gung-ho government adamantly claiming the gov does no wrong.

On another note, while I have been on the side of "this is just an accident", don't misconstrue that into a thought that I am anti-CT - quite the contrary ....... I scoff the idea that 19 Muslims terrorists hijacked 3 jets and crashed them into buildings and made them dissolve straight to the ground.. Nor do I believe Flight 93 (93?) crashed into a field and drilled itself into a hole, leaving the "nothingness" that is shown.

On a last note .......... the passport: this truely does open full a conspiracy theory, unless one acquires the knowledge that passports are made of a material that is flexibly hardened (ie: lamenation that does in fact, inadvertantly, resist falme; there are such advers reaction from the simplest of compounds). Does anyone have any info on the physical nature passports??

Misfit



posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 01:50 PM
link   
Please first review this article about the so called constuction workers witnesses:
www.nytimes.com...

After I saw a video of the contruction worker Luis Gonzalez explain how he saw the plane come into the building with a terrible poker face, I knew he was lying. So, I knew he was contributing to this conspiracy. Having said that, I have gone from there to the conclusion of how the parts got there:

There were many so callled "construction workers" and "others" viewing plans for renovating an apartment at the 46th floor right above the explosion which occurred at the 40th and 41st floors. The WINDOWS ARE SO BIG that you can actually fit huge airplane parts through them as you can see by this picture with a person standing in them:
d.yimg.com...

Now look at how small the parts were in these pictures:
cache.gawker.com...

us.news2.yimg.com...

d.yimg.com...

d.yimg.com...

d.yimg.com... RCZQ--

What happened was the contruction workers took the airplane parts and threw them at out of the 46th floor right above the explosion at the 41st floor as the flames filled the area from the bomb. And of course, these same construction workers of conspiracy are the so called witnesses to see the so called "plane".
What a bunch of PAID LIERS!!!!



posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 10:21 PM
link   
realanswers - here is the thing -- you are sure it is a conspiracy and we are sure it was a tragic accident -- you can keep posting the links and saying it is a conspiracy but it isn't going to change what we feel - just like what we say won't change what you feel.

Please don't take this as harsh because I am not saying it in that tone - I think it is a case of we have to agree to disagree on this one ok?



posted on Oct, 26 2006 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by justme1640
realanswers - here is the thing -- you are sure it is a conspiracy and we are sure it was a tragic accident -- you can keep posting the links and saying it is a conspiracy but it isn't going to change what we feel - just like what we say won't change what you feel.

Please don't take this as harsh because I am not saying it in that tone - I think it is a case of we have to agree to disagree on this one ok?


When you speak for yourself, then that is when that would be an accurate statement, but even then that would still be something better left unsaid because it just makes you look like a debunker who plays down the truth with nothing/non-topic comments that don't really contribute to my thread as they could be posted on just about any thread.



posted on Oct, 26 2006 @ 10:57 AM
link   
The thing is realanswers, you have provided close to horrible evidence of a conspiracy and done nothing, but repeat the same thing over and over again avoiding other people's input.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Oct, 26 2006 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
The thing is realanswers, you have provided close to horrible evidence of a conspiracy and done nothing, but repeat the same thing over and over again avoiding other people's input.

Shattered OUT...


What input?
I've been surrounded by a gang of debunkers and down players except for someone that I do respect that has contributed which was "misfit".

I have been sent a number of emails containing viruses in the last 24 hours!

My email account rarely gets any spam at all and yet the emails I have been getting weren't selling anything and contained viruses!
They know that I know too much.

Read the truth and then cut,paste, and save it because for all I know, they may erase it from the website.

Here it is:

10-11-06 (9-11-01 upside down)
Here you see the explosion covering about an area of 100 feet by 50 feet. That's a HUGE EXPLOSION!
us.news2.yimg.com...
a129ad92.high_rise_plane_crash_ny109.jpg

Here you see a person standing in one of the large windows after the explosion. That was
an ENORMOUS EXPLOSION compared to the limited wall damage!
d.yimg.com...

Here you see how small Cory Lidle's plane was.
www.physics.ucsb.edu...

Here you see how small the explosions are from small single engined/single propellered
planes. Watch the part at 1 minute 30 seconds and 4 minutes of this video:
www.youtube.com...

Here is the radar tracking data with Cory Lidle's plane being in red:

www.youtube.com...

Here is the footage:

www.youtube.com...

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 in that area at the time.
The only plane seen on the footage did not crash into the building it is the plane that 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 plane appeared to be attempting to land near the beach area of the river to avoid being seen in the air by the public after they notice the explosion.
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 within the Illuminati/shadow government.

Explaination of how the 10-11-06 conspiracy airplane parts got there.

Please first review this article about the so called constuction workers witnesses:
www.nytimes.com...
2eb5e5302787&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

After I saw a video of the contruction worker Luis Gonzalez explain how he saw the plane come into the building with a terrible poker face, I knew he was lying. So, I knew he was contributing to this conspiracy. Having said that, I have gone from there to the conclusion of how the parts got there:

There were many so callled "construction workers" and "others" viewing plans for
renovating an apartment at the 46th floor right above the explosion which occurred at the 40th and 41st floors. The WINDOWS ARE SO BIG that you can actually fit huge airplane parts through them as you can see by this picture with a person standing in them:
d.yimg.com...

Now look at how small the parts were in these pictures:
cache.gawker.com...
wreckage.jpg

us.news2.yimg.com...
c7f9de54.high_rise_plane_crash_nydk111.jpg

d.yimg.com...

d.yimg.com...
w_B_.11WHYvnZldw5ux4BQ--

d.yimg.com...
0.high_rise_plane_crash_nybm108.jpg?x=380&y=249&sig=xJj91gJgiyxk664odaRCZQ--

What happened was the contruction workers took the airplane parts and threw them at out of the 46th floor right above the explosion at the 41st floor as the flames filled the area from the bomb. And of course, these same construction workers of conspiracy are the so called witnesses to see the so called "plane".
What a bunch of PAID LIERS!!!!



posted on Oct, 26 2006 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by realanswers
People actually believe in fabricated events despite the proof otherwise.

Originally posted by justme1640
realanswers - here is the thing -- you are sure it is a conspiracy and we are sure it was a tragic accident -- you can keep posting the links and saying it is a conspiracy but it isn't going to change what we feel - just like what we say won't change what you feel.

Please don't take this as harsh because I am not saying it in that tone - I think it is a case of we have to agree to disagree on this one ok?


When you speak for yourself, then that is when that would be an accurate statement, but even then that would still be something better left unsaid because it just makes you look like a debunker who plays down the truth with nothing/non-topic comments that don't really contribute to my thread as they could be posted on just about any thread.


Mods - I apologize for quoting the entire post above but I think it necessary to what I have to say

real - you don't know me so I will just giggle at your comment that I am a debunker - anyone who knows me here knows better than that -- but I was actually trying to be kind and point out to you that posting the SAME links time and time does not accomplish anything other than ticking off members here.

And you bold declaration that everyone believes fabricated evidence despite proof otherwise is only your opinion - as your so called proof has proven nothing at all to me (and apparently others judging by the comments) despite your linking to them numerous times.



posted on Oct, 26 2006 @ 03:14 PM
link   
the 'evidence' looks good, but now the question is 'why'...why would it be faked? has it lead to ..for lack of a better term..'anythig'? testing the waters? what about the people? where's the connection between how it was faked and why it was faked?

can't anything just be simple anymore................



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join