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: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 27 2006 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by clearmind
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................


I believe that I am the first person in this entire planet to have any legitable explaination to explain the conspiracy and weird coincidences around this 9-11 type of event in Manhattan of all places. I challenge anyone to find a person that has ingeniously unraveled this mastermind of a conspiracy before I did. Not even Alex Jones knew about this one.

I believe there was multible reasons for the 9-11-01 conspiracy as I have read them.
As far as this 10-11-06 conspiracy, thus far, I have only concluded a number of possible reasons rather than assume one over the others.




posted on Oct, 27 2006 @ 02:26 PM
link   
realanswers, have you stopped to think of maybe WHY you're the first and ONLY person to think and actually forcivly look for evidence of a conspiracy?

This conspiracy will never fly because there is simply not enough evidence to suggest such. It was an accident that occured on a small scale and affected directly only a few lives.

You have made not one person I can see a believer of a conspiracy with your "solid" evidence.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Oct, 27 2006 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
realanswers, have you stopped to think of maybe WHY you're the first and ONLY person to think and actually forcivly look for evidence of a conspiracy?

This conspiracy will never fly because there is simply not enough evidence to suggest such. It was an accident that occured on a small scale and affected directly only a few lives.

You have made not one person I can see a believer of a conspiracy with your "solid" evidence.

Shattered OUT...


Do you remember what people thought of 9-11 just 2 weeks after the fact?
The 10-11 conspiracy has much evidence(mainly in the form of lack of evidence for the official story). You'll see, there will be a time where more information about this will come up, but it has only been about 2 weeks right now. And, when it does, people will consider me as the pioneer of the truth behind this event.



posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 03:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by realanswers
Does this look like a plane crash people?


img.servihoo.com...

People with common sense will say that it's obvious that it was a bomb.


yes, yes it does...ya twit.



posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by stigrayos

Originally posted by realanswers
Does this look like a plane crash people?


img.servihoo.com...

People with common sense will say that it's obvious that it was a bomb.


yes, yes it does...ya twit.


That's ok. You can go ahead and actually believe that it was a plane crash as you might as well believe:

-That the 9-11 Pentagon small missile "CIRCULAR HOLE" was actually from a huge passenger airliner.

-That on September 11, 2001, it just so happens that the CIA was planning an exercise whereby it would crash a small jet into one of its own buildings. Don't believe me? Check this www.usatoday.com...

-That on September 10, 2001, it just so happens that Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) deployed search and rescue teams to New York City. Don't believe me? Maybe you'll believe Rudolph Giuliani www.whatreallyhappened.com...

-That on September 11, 2001, it just so happens that George W. Bush's younger brother, Marvin Bush, was the principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport. And it just so happens that, according to its present CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down." www.commondreams.org...

-That on September 11, 2001, building 7 of the World Trade Center complex was intentionally pulled down even though it only had moderate fire damage and was in no danger of collapsing. The building's owner, Larry Silverstein, admitted on PBS that the building was intentionally pulled down. Building 7 included offices for the CIA, Department of Defense, the Office of the Mayor, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the IRS. Check out this page which includes a New York Times article: www.wtc7.net...
Also check out this, 22 minute video: 70.84.33.210...

-That 4 of the 19 alleged hijackers are still alive. Don't believe me, well maybe you'll believe the FBI, yes the FBI! Check out this BBC News article:
news.bbc.co.uk...

-That the official explanation for 9/11, which was presented to us within 48 hours of the attacks without ever being changed, modified, or altered thereafter, is exactly the way it happened.

-That the 1,856 possible dates from 9-11 to the "Cory Lidle incident" just so happened to be on the only date that is 9-11-01 upside down(10-11-6).

-That the so called "complete footage" of the "Cory Lidle" explosion was all that the U.S. Coast Guard's SECURITY CAMERA had to offer for "evidence" of a plane hitting the building despite no plane being seen hitting that building on the footage!
www.youtube.com...

-That Cory Lidle's mysterious death happened just 4 DAYS after his contribution to the Yankees baseball season ending loss exactly 4 miles from the WTC site on the 72nd Street while Cory Lidle had a career 72 games loss on his baseball record.

-That Cory Lidle as a person that gets paid millions of dollars for his superior hand and eye coordination can't even steer a single engined small plane away from a huge building.



posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 07:34 PM
link   
We're all alotted our opinions based on what we have personally viewed and taken in and are capable of understanding to our mental capacities.

Some people are more limited than others.

You can throw out as many sources as you want "proving" that 9/11 was a conspiracy, but that won't make Cory Lidle's plane crash a conspiracy. One conspiracy does not justify another.

Conspiracies have been here since the time of FDR and possibly before then(The Mexican War for one). I'm not worried about them because I love this country and government no matter what anyone says. What you choose to believe if your chose. But enforcing these opinions on us as fact with little to no substantiated evidence really is absurd in my opinion.

Quite personally I don't see what the government had to gain from 9/11, the economy itself froze for a bit and was damaged heavily, till this day the effects are very noticable and life has changed in many respects. War with Afghanastan and ultimately Iraq? For what? Oil? Iraq burned many of their oil fields and Afghanastan really has nothing. The most we did was go in there and stop the Taliban from it's rule, remove the Al Queda from it's influences in that nation and liberate a nation from oppression and tyrany. I think the wars in the Middle East has cost the government a pot load of its money and has done nothing, but put the Republicans in a bad spot and shread Bush's name and whatever legacy he would have had.

If 9/11 never happened, Bush might have gone down in history as a decent president. Too bad it did happen. So I have no idea what the government; long term had to gain from causing 9/11.

Cory Lidle's incident was a plane crash and nothing more, there is more evidence pointing to it being a plane crash than otherwise, 9/11 however, there were alot of unanswered questions as there still are. We just have to wait for the final NTSB reports.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 08:31 PM
link   
Hey everybody!

I've found the original footage for this so called "plane crash" from the coast guard. Here it is:

www.uscgnewyork.com...

You Tube and news channels videos only showed as much as 10 seconds of no plane in the air before it so called "crashed", but this original source footage shows 22 SECONDS of showing NO PLANE in the air near the building!!!!!!!

Talk about LACK OF EVIDENCE of a PLANE heading toward a building!!!



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 09:49 PM
link   
This feed shows the far angle of the city and the angle at which the plane crashed at is covered by the skyline.

My final analysis:

This video is useless as evidence of a conspiracy.

Perhaps maybe the fog was so heavy and the camera was so far away that it actually becomes virtually impossible for the human eye to see the airplane? The aircraft he was flying is extremely small, I've attempted to spot it out in the skies when I was flying in a Cessna 172N. At just 6 miles away and with what's called "Unlimited Visibility" it is almost impossible for me to see the airplane. I'm pretty sure this camera is more than 6 miles away and there is fog.

So even IF the plane crashed on the side of the skyline facing the camera I doubt we would see it.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 01:54 PM
link   
Everybody review this footage of Cory Lidle so called "plane crash":

www.uscgnewyork.com...

Of all 22 SECONDS before the explosion, there is NO PLANE in the air heading to the building!!!

From the ground(where witnesses where at the time) in 22 SECONDS, they would have had enough time to say to each other;"LOOK, there is a plane stuck in the air!", then grab a camera and take a picture of it and then say;"Gee, when will it start moving again???"



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 04:02 PM
link   
I don't think anyone came up with this first time around but... Why that building? Who owns it etc? If you want to put some meat on these bones then you should research that building and how it ties in with....well, anything!

You mentioned once that the plane flew low to get under the radar - then why was it still on the radar?


Originally posted by realanswers
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.


So the plane flew UNDER the radar and climbed back up before it DOVE down? How does that work exactly and not raise flags? Then it cruised just above the water for what purpose exactly, as if it was to avoid radar then they obviously need more practice if that is even the radar. Where would the plane have landed "close to the beach"? And why close to the beach?



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 04:20 PM
link   
The reason why it doesn't work out is because it was an accident.

It genuinely was an accident and I don't know where the cause for alarm is.

Everything that happened, all of the physical evidence and videos and such point to it being an accident and for some reason it's hard to believe.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muppetus Galacticus
You mentioned once that the plane flew low to get under the radar - then why was it still on the radar?


Originally posted by realanswers
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.


So the plane flew UNDER the radar and climbed back up before it DOVE down? How does that work exactly and not raise flags? Then it cruised just above the water for what purpose exactly, as if it was to avoid radar then they obviously need more practice if that is even the radar. Where would the plane have landed "close to the beach"? And why close to the beach?


As seen from the radar video:
www.youtube.com...
The plane(the red plane) escapes radar in the middle of the East River.
You have asked why it was still on radar? That question does not apply since it wasn't on radar after that. I would think that it did land some where on the other side because the footage shows a plane sized object travel just above the water(suspeciously). If that thing was a boat, then it would have made water waves in the river, but it didn't. So, it must have been a plane. Also, I think that faded object moves sporadically so it looks like someone tampered with the video to cover it with a faded color as it moved along. The tampered faded color bar moved with the plane along the water a little faster than the plane at times as seen in the video:

www.uscgnewyork.com...

Also, the faded plane just above the water actually is still partially visible in the footage after it stops on the beach from 00:42 to 00:55. This video actually shows that it makes a stop there!

[edit on 9-7-2007 by realanswers]

[edit on 9-7-2007 by realanswers]



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 05:02 PM
link   
The plane not showing up on RADAR is answered by the people who commented on the youtube video so read their comments, no point in reiterating them.

Once again the evidence you've supplied doesn't adequately support any basis for a conspiracy theory. What really gets to me is that that's not what a real RADAR tracking screen looks like. I've been in a control room before and seen them, it's not what it looks like. There's also a "microsoft.com all rights reserved" print on the bottom left of the video. So... what does Microsoft have to do with RADAR tracking?

Shattered OUT...



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
Once again the evidence you've supplied doesn't adequately support any basis for a conspiracy theory.
Shattered OUT...


You must have sold out America too by being part of the coverup.

I think the saying should be: "Once again the evidence the government supplied doesn't adequately support a conclusion of a plane crash."

Gee, why does this make me think about the 9-11 Pentagon crash?
The government shooting itself with a missile.
pentagon.batcave.net...



[edit on 9-7-2007 by realanswers]

[edit on 9-7-2007 by realanswers]



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 06:14 PM
link   
RA,

I was about ten blocks away from where that plane hit that day. It was a piss-poor wet day, foggy and overcast.

It hit a regular, non-descript apartment tower on the East side by the river in late afternoon. I think it killed the person who's apt was directly hit, the ballplayer/pilot, and his passenger.

A woman who lived in the apt. right next to the impact site, saw the plane coming in and gave a vivid description for the 6 o'clock news. The smoldering plane parts were immediately photographed and broadcast, as NYC has about the densest media concentration in the world.

I'll give you one thing, everyone did have momentary 9/11 deja-vu, but it passed as soon as the particulars of the accident came out.

And that was it. The crash and the massive traffic jams that resulted, and the torrential rains that started at around 7 that evening, ruined a gathering I was part of that night.

But I don't think that it was a conspiracy to ruin everyone's night out. Because quite frankly, beyond the immediate loss of life and damage, that was the only effect it had.



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 08:46 PM
link   
GTG, the people who said that they saw it were paid to say that. I saw one of those paid liers testimonies. He looked happy talking about it as if he was getting something(money) out of it. Most people thought it was a helicopter because they didn't see any plane.

Take a good look at this small area between the two buildings. The only place the plane could have been "hiding" for all 22 SECONDS of footage prior to the explosion:

www.flickr.com...

HOW ON EARTH can a plane stop in the air for 22 SECONDS in between this small area of these two buildings before crashing?
I would say that is physically impossible. Therefore, this event couldn't have been a plane crash.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 12:33 AM
link   
Prove it, that's all I can tell you Realanswers.

I've looked at your sources and quite frankly I am not the least bit impressed or swayed. You need to prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt that the deaths of about 3/4 people truly is conspiracy related and had any form of impact on whatever the government wanted to do by crashing a plane full of explosives into an apartment building.

Just thinking about it, it did nothing, absolutely nothing, but make a few people sad and that's about the extent of the damages. And oh yeah, it cost a few bucks to some people for repairs and such.

You're so caught up with how it happened that you neglected to come up with a viable or plausible BS excuse why it would have happened.

You can say that people have been payed by the government to lie and so have I to do whatever the agenda of the government is, but until you can prove that my check is in the mail (which I don't get a check in the mail) then everything you say might as well be regarded as an illusion.

You my friend have fallen past the point of "Truth". You have fallen to the point where the agenda filled truthers and conspiracy theorists want you to be at so that they can profit off of you or in some form or another take advantage of your situation.

Quite frankly I would much rather see my time and money be spent on the government for whatever they do, after all I do live on the land of the US and I do eat the food I buy in US markets and I do pay US taxes.

I see a lot of people like this as con-artists and you can believe it I'm done with this thread.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 12:50 AM
link   
Though I hate replying to this thread I must give you credit for sticking to your story real, or rather lack of story. Let me riddle you this, did the Yankee pictcher fake his death and lose all the money he would have earned through the rest of his career for a conspiracy theory to.........basically do what? Pretty exlaborate hoax for no particular reason. What exactly were they covering up withe the plane? Why the so called bomb? Why I am replying to this?

I feel dirty now. Thanks.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 03:15 AM
link   
Thank-you for your earlier answers but you did not mention whether or not you are going to research the building and who lived in where you say the bomb was. Surely if someone inside died then that would be significant to your theories? Who was it? What are they linked to? Why would someone blow them up? And why would Cory Lidle go along with it or be blamed for it?

You cannot say it was because he lost game 4 against the Tigers...because he didn't - Jaret Wright was the losing pitcher that day.

With the plane flying low, was Cory Lidle qualified enough for that? If not, where was he and the other man on the plane and who was flying the plane?



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muppetus Galacticus
Surely if someone inside died then that would be significant to your theories? Who was it? What are they linked to? Why would someone blow them up? And why would Cory Lidle go along with it or be blamed for it?

With the plane flying low, was Cory Lidle qualified enough for that? If not, where was he and the other man on the plane and who was flying the plane?


You know, you all really sound like you are part of the lie instead of congradulating me on a spectacular find. As usual, instead of contributing answers, they only ask questions and expect me to explain everything.
You see, I display what is a sure thing and anything else is my opinion. My opinion is very thought out and contemplated based upon what MOST LIKELY happened.
A plane stopping in the air for 22 seconds is a THEORY!
Video footage prooving that there was no plane is not a theory, IT IS A FACT. Even if everybody thinks that the world is flat, THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S A FACT.
Now to answers your shady questions. You have no idea the reasons for this event. It could have been just a test on the public. I have been recently involved with a UFO crash in my city so I rather investigate things like that that I can gain more proof rather than more explaination through mere opinion.
This whole thread is based off of what I knew at the time which was enough to have everybody open up a serious investigation into this event. It was based upon PROOF not THEORY. About 11 seconds of a plane stopping in mid air instead of flying to show itself to the world. That's the proof I had at the time, BUT NOW I found the original footage. The strength of PROOF has doubled from 11 seconds to 22 seconds of still NO PLANE in the air there!

[edit on 10-7-2007 by realanswers]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join