ABC's Peter Jennings Knew The Truth About 9/11

reply to post by traderonwallst



Are you familiar with the Chopper 7 shot,
one of the two live videos of the second "plane"?


Isn't it strange that the Chopper 7 pilot was recently killed after being run over by a taxi?

The taxi swerved after being cutoff by a "black car".

Oddly, the camera operator (who sat next to the pilot) was called on the telephone by 9/11 researcher Jeff Hill, a few months earlier.


Here's the phone call MP3 and news reports about the pilot's death:
www.shure.proboards19.com...

reply to post by traderonwallst


In that case, why don't they make buildings out of aluminum alloy?

An aluminum alloy tube with attached wings and tail is not going to glide into structural steel girders and steel reinforced concrete slabs, it will CRUSH against it with a million serial-numbered parts flying everywhere, and the fuel filled wings will explode on impact.

reply to post by apex


The "wings" did not explode on impact, the fireball appeared after the "tail" was completely inside.

The plane did hit at an angle, and the tail should therefore have snapped off. This test flight illustrates how fragile airliner tails really are:

Google Video Link

reply to post by CB_Brooklyn


Was the test flight your video shows done at the speed at which the hijacked plane was traveling. I am at work now, and stupid websense will not let me view such videos here. I highly doubt the test flight was done at such speeds. Uh-oh, new variable to throw into the works. Things might not go EXACTLY as you envision, when everything is accounted for.

reply to post by CB_Brooklyn


I too was a witness to the second plane impacting, as you can see in the numerous threads I have posted on. I was at the base of the building that day, eating breakfast I bought from a vendor.

No black cars following me. Did you know there aer more black car taxi's in NYC than yellow cabs? A black car swerving is normal everyday occurences here in NYC.

Nothing interesting there, just bad luck for the poor guy.

reply to post by CB_Brooklyn


The Towers were constructed when???? They do make buildings out of such alloys now.



Sutipd does as Stupid is told to do!

DAM
23

Originally posted by CB_Brooklyn
The "wings" did not explode on impact, the fireball appeared after the "tail" was completely inside.

Strange, I never said they exploded on impact, you said thats what they should have done.

The plane did hit at an angle, and the tail should therefore have snapped off. This test flight illustrates how fragile airliner tails really are:

Not much of an angle, and even so it would take a longer time than the impact to do much bending or twisting.

And i can't see your video, but if it's that DC-9 thats nothing like the impact of UA 175 or AA11, plus I was talking about the vertical stabiliser and the horizontal stabilisers, not the tail assembly including the rear of the fuselage.

reply to post by CB_Brooklyn


I am not dodging the point, you are missing it entirely. An object can, in fact, damage or destroy a harder, stronger object than itself. I will not explain it again, you will have to go back and read all the stuff that proves you wrong that you are ignoring.

reply to post by mattifikation


Agree with you 100%.

Hey Brooklyn, ever see footage of a tornado? How about the aftermath? Ever see what it can do with simple blades of grass? Did you know that blades of grass can become flying razor blades? They have been known to become embedded up to 3 inches into sides of houses. Granted we are nott alking about steel homes, but homes made of woods. Still its unbelievable what the right variables can do to objects that are softer, but DENSER than the obejects they are thrwon against. Aluminum, though lighter, is denser. When you make it an alloy or coat it with an alloy it truly does become something completely different than what you started with.

Your arguement is BUNK!!!!!!!!!!!!

Click here to learn more about this warning.