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.

 

What type of missile hit the WTC?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 02:06 AM
link   
*IF* it was a missile (and I am fairly convinced it was), then it would have to be:

VERY PRECISE (cruise missile)

SUBSONIC (cruise missile)

BIG (hmmm, too small, How about a custom-made cruise missile? A snark?)

there are options

Remember the various videos that showed a black cigar shaped thing with winglets?




posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 05:23 AM
link   
Have you listened to the Howard Stern?
There too are people to whom it was news that is was an airliner,
and again, there, too, was the odd eyewitness who saw NO flying object.
There too, was someone who saw the fly-by plane circling, there, too, was someone who identified the plane, different from a 767.. WHILE IT WAS FRESH IN THEIR MEMORY, like, seconds after it happened.

In other words... the "missile" was swift. Fast and relatively quiet.
A jet would have been very noisy, and the turbo-fan would have been unmistakable.

In the Bob-and-Bree(?) - video the *man* is quoted as having seen/heard a missile,
the *woman* is unsure. In the video where you can see the north tower through a bridge(***see below), again there is a man filming and talking into the camera, mentioning a missile.

Of course EVERYONE is convinced it was a 767 AFTER they saw it on TV and AFTER a few media-whores LOUDLY PROCLAIMED they saw jetliners. But I think they were reading from a script...they get paid for that.

But you knew all of that. Nothing new here.

I wish Killtown would make a better 2nd Hit page. The overview page takes far too much browser memory and is too slow to load. A quick thumbnail overview with tiny JPGs is needed. We need a 911 WIKI.

Find all videos where the "plane" looks more like a missile is a next step. And then evaluate the videos for believability, i.e. likelihood of it being drastically faked (inserts).
It is self-evident that 99% of the videos went through the hands of the FBI (secret [dis-]service "help us find the towelheads"). We have seen obvious video cuts with continuous sound-tracks ... manipulations must be assumed. Clearly, SOME videos needed EXPERT WORK (hezarkhani+taylor) and others were allowed to pass unedited***.

We researchers can do more work on these videos to further cement video fakery.
The other avenue to prove fakery to the masses would be to investigate the fate of the airplanes themselves. Where are the remains of UA93/N591UA .. AA11/N334AA .. UA175/N612UA .. AA77/N644AA ????
A TV team from the biggest German TV channel got nowhere and was adamant that this was unheard of.

UA93 is in a warehouse somewhere. Anyone could take photos. Or is there nothing to be photographed? Where is the US TV/radio/newspaper reporter who publishes a story about it?

Imagine that. 6 years later and still there was NOT A SINGLE reporter who wrote a story about the MYSTIC AIRPLANE PARTS IN STORAGE.


[edit on 29-9-2007 by u2r2h]



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 05:35 AM
link   
sound always comes second. so what they heard came after what was seen.l... by the cameras.
it was a man missile that hit the tower.
or 300 of them, a plane loaded with people.

you do them no justice by question their fate?



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 06:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by u2r2h
*IF* it was a missile (and I am fairly convinced it was), then it would have to be:

VERY PRECISE (cruise missile)

SUBSONIC (cruise missile)

BIG (hmmm, too small, How about a custom-made cruise missile? A snark?)

there are options

Remember the various videos that showed a black cigar shaped thing with winglets?






Why fire a missle when the tip of an airplane could be converted to carry a warhead? This theory is so dumb.


[edit on 29-9-2007 by onthefence81]



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 07:04 AM
link   
reply to post by spearhead
 



On the contrary.

Imagine you were flown to an unknown location and then you realize you were killed by some criminals. Wouldn't you want the crime to be investigated?

Or would you be happy with a lie on your headstone?

The David Thom pictures show a big white flash in the sky in the same moment that the "plane" impacted in the south tower.

Ground Zero EMT Patricia Ondrovic also talks of a plane in the distance that explodes in a fireball:

"I saw two other planes. One came in one way, and the other came in the other way, and there was a plane in the middle that was way far off in the distance. Then the plane in the middle just disappeared into a little fire ball. It looked like the size of a golf ball from where I could see it."

We have lots of work to do. The perpetrators are still running the show.



[edit on 29-9-2007 by u2r2h]



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 07:06 AM
link   
there are so many stories now what really happened won't ever be known.

but you have no one to blame but yourselves...



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by onthefence81
Why fire a missle when the tip of an airplane could be converted to carry a warhead? This theory is so dumb.



A missle or a fissle in the head of a teenager? Could be construed as a head-war? This dumbness is practically so...


But seriously.
The "tip" of an aeroplane cannot easily be converted to carry a heavy load.

First it is mostly full of essential gear and second, the weight distribution in an aeroplane can't be too radically altered.

You are thinking of placing bombs into a 767 huh? Funny you say that, because that was also an observation of the Howard Stern idiots when they first saw the massive impact explosions.



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 07:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by spearhead
there are so many stories now what really happened won't ever be known.
but you have no one to blame but yourselves...


That is defeatist crap.

We will find out what happened. Its probably not very difficult once the SUBPOENAS are issued. Imagine how many researchers WANT to find out, how many compartmentalised co-conspirators WANT to ease the load on their soul, how many unpublished items there are...

Blame? Blame helps nobody. How about atonement... Yes, I want to see justice done, don't you?

Of course there are more crimes that need justice. Here is an interesting lecture for you inexperienced, uneducated teenagers. This man has a conviction.



posted on Sep, 30 2007 @ 09:08 AM
link   
the videos contain faked sound.

There is a authentic recording from an open mike at a recording studio, watch september clues part 2, I think.

Also there is various eyewitnesses that clearly identify a missile FROM THE SOUND.

If you read between the lines! Dahler is sure it was a missile, but he is shy about it, considering the implications:

DON DAHLER reporting: I'm about four or five blocks just north of the World Trade Center. And at about 10--I would say 10 minutes ago, 15 minutes ago, there was a loud sound that I can only describe it--it sounded like a missile, not an airplane. Then there was a loud explosion and immediately lots of screaming out on the streets. And I don't want to cause any speculation, but that's the only way I could describe the sound. And it was definitely not the sound of a prop plane or anything like that.

SAWYER: And am I right? Are you a pilot?

DAHLER: Well, I have flown. I do not have a pilot's license, but I--I grew up on military bases. and I know the sounds of jets. And--and I've been in war zones and--and heard those kinds of different sounds. So, again, not to cause any kind of undue speculation but the sound itself was not of a prop plane. It was perhaps a jet. But it could have been a missile as well.

GIBSON: Can you give me--was it--was it a whining sound, Don, or what?

DAHLER: Yes. It was--it was a--how to describe it. It was a high pitch, but it had a--a--a whooshing sound. Not--not like a prop plane.



posted on Sep, 30 2007 @ 08:48 PM
link   
I think if the plane were modded to be something like a missile or contained a payload/warhead perhaps it would be something like an anti-tank buster, loaded to the brim with thermate. Just an idea.



posted on Sep, 30 2007 @ 11:17 PM
link   
john lear has given proof a hologram device EXIST and is capable of making planes. I think they either A: made hologram of planes over a missle, or B:used just a missile with CGI effects on news. If B is the case, then all the "armature video" taken when it happened were government people put there to give disinformation, even some eye whitness could have been placed there to say PLANE PLANE. Also if B, there would have to have been a small time delay, matter of minuets, so that news companies or gov had time to make CGI effects from footage then broadcast it as live. The time delay was there, but either way, I don't think B is the case.

I think A is a much more explainable cause, as I have seen a video of a laser designator beaming the building from another aircraft with a laz desig onboard. In this vid, you see the laser sweep the 'target' (wtc) then the plane hit. It hit exactly where the laser was, in my eyes, proving a missile was used. Why do you need to laser guide a terrorist driven plane? OH YA... you don't...

What type of missile? We don't know for 100% that it was a missile, or a plane, or anything, how could we know what type? It could have been a tomahawk cruise, but they don't need a laser. It would have to be a laser designated missile, something like a Jdam.



posted on Sep, 30 2007 @ 11:38 PM
link   
IMHO a fully loaded 767 would cause catastrophic damage not only to the facade of the pentagon but also to the adjacent grounds. This is just not so. A subsonic cruise with a du tip to blast through three highly reinforced concrete is entirely believable, especially considering many studies have found elevated radiation readings near pentagon. I don't think AA planes are allowed to carry UCLA nuclear physics lab experiments, that's more a DHL thing.



posted on Sep, 30 2007 @ 11:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by u2r2h
*IF* it was a missile (and I am fairly convinced it was), then it would have to be:

VERY PRECISE (cruise missile)

SUBSONIC (cruise missile)

BIG (hmmm, too small, How about a custom-made cruise missile? A snark?)


Not to want to beat a dead horse again, but what happened to the flights that in your world didn't hit the WTC'S?

You are adding layers of complexity onto your explanation. Explain what happened to them, where they went, what happened to the passengers, crew ect?

I honestly can't believe you think it was a missile with all the video evidence?

You guys need some fresh arguments that make at least a little sense.

Now that I have met my quota, I will leave this thread.



posted on Sep, 30 2007 @ 11:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by jpm1602
A subsonic cruise with a du tip to blast through three highly reinforced concrete is entirely believable, especially considering many studies have found elevated radiation readings near pentagon.


Please, let's see your "many studies" that indicate a DU warhead being used . You should know better to make claims like that without the proper scientific backup. I trust you have some peer reviewed documents for us right?

See, now you made me exceed my quota .... Thanks!@!@!



posted on Sep, 30 2007 @ 11:57 PM
link   
By the volumes of first hand pics from bystanders and first responders with them new fangled cell phone thingies. My pleasure Pavil. Take a paxil.



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 12:03 AM
link   
They sure made sure no superstructure was 'peer reviewed' at wtc now did they. They shipped that stuff outa here quick fast and in a hurry. IMHO of course.



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 12:05 AM
link   
i think it was one of those new experimental missels used by low budget terrorists its still classifyed but my sources say it is called a 767...

i just dont see it. i was watching tv when #2 hit. i just have a feeling that this whole no plane thing is disinfo created by liberal agents to turn us away from each other

[edit on 15amu122007 by DaleGribble]

[edit on 15amu122007 by DaleGribble]



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 12:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by u2r2h

That is defeatist crap.

We will find out what happened. Its probably not very difficult once the SUBPOENAS are issued. Imagine how many researchers WANT to find out, how many compartmentalised co-conspirators WANT to ease the load on their soul, how many unpublished items there are...


Tell that to the people want to know the truth about JFK. If the govt doesn't want the people to know the truth, the people will not know the truth. It just isn't going to happen. Even if someone does uncover the truth, it will be impossible to tell the difference between the truth and all of the disinfo that is out there. Sorry man, but we don't live in a just world and I will bet that you will NEVER know the truth of what really happened on 9/11.

I for one have a hard time believing that a missle covered by a hologram would have been used on the WTC. That is just too much for me and I am open to most of these theories. Now, the Pentagon is another case all together.

I just wish they would release the security camera footage that would clearly show what hit the pentagon. The fact that they won't show that footage is pretty damning to me. I mean, I guess I just don't understand why they wouldn't. We all saw the towers get hit, it would futher the arguement that terrorist flew a plane into it. Instead it just fuels conspiracy theorists, which could be what they want I guess.



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 12:26 AM
link   
You want peer review? Here's your peer review.

www.rense.com...




posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 12:34 AM
link   
Look at that lawn on first pic. I could have gone putt putting on that puppy. Don't even try to give me that 767 phony baloney. That's nonsense.




top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join