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.

 

FOUR Napalm bombs were attached to the fuselage

page: 1
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 06:35 AM
link   
Did a search, nothing came up so here it is - Napalm

Napalm2

Interesting, never came across these pictures before.. What do you guys think? Anything is possible, the Napalm could explain why the buildings melted so quickly..also check link 1, and scroll down untill you get to the mysterious white jet "controlling drone aircraft" ... Interesting read.

Well thats all for now..




posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 08:55 AM
link   
I'm not convinced. I'm not into this whole 9/11 consiracy rap. I do believe that the United States Government is withholding key information about the attacks but I am sure that they would not do this to their own citizens. Sure, they're not perfect, but wooooahhhh, that is one big accusation to make.
Who do you believe done it?
And why?



posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 08:59 AM
link   
Its been exposed that 911 debunkers pose as truthers and post ridiculous theories of missile pods and holograms in hopes that people new to the 911 movement will think that 'truthers' are all on board with these theories and are loonies.

911 wargames were cover for the attack of 911.

Disinfomation and disinfomants are being exsposed hourly.



posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by PeaceUk
I am sure that they would not do this to their own citizens.


You might want to look at all the things the government has done through history to its own people, that knew attacks were comming or instigate wars.

Look at Pearl Harbor and the USS Liberty for just 2.

[edit on 26-6-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 02:48 PM
link   
secretary of energy hazel oleary released documents during the 90's detailing our governments experiments on mentally disabled children during the 50's and 60's. things like feeding them mildly radio active oatmeal. newt said of this "this is terrible, terrible! terrible that she disclosed this."

the navy had a ship off of san francisco that sprayed a chemical (forget what it was) into the wind so it would drift over the city. this was in the 60's.

don't forget the tuskegee experiment.

hell, bush wanted to paint a plane in un colors and fly it into iraq with the hope of it being shot down and starting the war.

in short, our government is run by men and women. they are human. and when it comes to humans and power, mankind will always find a way to exploit those who are on the bottom for their own ends. yes, even our own people. why do so many still believe in the " it can't happen here" philosophy is beyond me.



posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 10:07 AM
link   




This is the very tip of the tip of the ice berg, when it comes to things we have done to further our agenda. Lets not forget "we the people" of these united states...all that has to happen is for the situation to be labeled a"threat to national security" and we go from dropping bombs, to dropping nuclear bombs...from talking about ways to remove dictators, to removing by force(iraq)/or by implanting our own people in the country then when things dont go there way letting them all die(cuba). The list goes on and on.



posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shotabel
The list goes on and on.


Yes, its so hard to figure why people still believe that the government would never do anything to their own people.

Its like they are either brainwashed or living in a fantasy world or both.



posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


So you have proof the govt was responsible for this? You did just state this: "Yes, its so hard to figure why people still believe that the government would never do anything to their own people."

The govt would never do anything to their own people.

So that implies that the govt did the 9/11 attacks.

Where is your proof that the govt performed these attacks?



posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 11:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
So that implies that the govt did the 9/11 attacks.

Where is your proof that the govt performed these attacks?


Are for real? How old are you, for real?

I never stated the government performed the attacks, there is not enough evidnece of that. BUT there is enough evidence that the governemnt had plenty of warnings about the attacks.

Just like the government had warnings of the attack on Pearl Harbor.



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 12:31 AM
link   
Napalm been banned like 30 years.Napalm-Bombs are against the international law and are banned by the Geneva-Conventions.You would have better luck seeing a purple elf then napalm.



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 12:43 AM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


Actually, that poster was correct.

You said this:

Yes, its so hard to figure why people still believe that the government would never do anything to their own people.


That implies you believe the gov't did something to their own people. Since the OP was talking about Napalm bombs in the attacks, one would have to assume you are talking about that.

That is, unless you are changing the topic of this thread.



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 04:30 AM
link   
reply to post by alienstar
 


The Geneva Convention is irrelevant here..... otherwise conversations like this could arise...

US Gov 1: "Lets attack America"
US Gov 2: "Ok, lets use Napalm"
US Gov 1: "Cant use that, against Geneva Convention"
US Gov 2: "Oh yeah... damn... will have to use something else."



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 04:47 AM
link   
You guys just seems a bit paranoid. 9/11 is dodgy thats for sure, and trust me I have looked into it over the years in great detail, and maybe I'm just being hopeful and a little naive but I still don't believe the government would do this to it's own citizens.



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 04:49 AM
link   
Ok so I've taken these 3 pics from the second page mentioned in the OP, the first one here our 'detective' has circled for us what he thinks is the so called napalm cylinder, note the colour and position:


Now the second image, again our friend has circled the cylinder, now not the position. A lot more forward and now black.



Third image, again circled for us and the cylinder is white again.



Now come on! our 'detective' has just proven himself to be very, very stupid.
What i think we're seeing there?

reflections maybe? who knows! But napalm cylinders. better luck next time.



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 06:38 AM
link   


Now come on! our 'detective' has just proven himself to be very, very stupid.


They are the fairings over the landing gear ! Every couple months
some "genius" brings it up again

Bottom view of 767 - not bulges under center of fuselage which house
the landing gear




Another shot

Can see the bulging under the fuselage





posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 08:32 AM
link   
I have already shown that airlimers and civilian planes can carry recon, ECM, and weapons pods.

i114.photobucket.com...

i114.photobucket.com...

i114.photobucket.com...

i114.photobucket.com...



posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 09:07 AM
link   
Isn't napalm basically jet fuel mixed with petroleum jelly? Therefore, in regards to the towers actually falling, why would it make any difference as to whether the plane had jet fuel on external pods?

In my opinion the 'pods' look a very close compared with the wing-body fairings of in-service airlines. So my question is - have there been any 767s fitted with such modifications?

[edit on 29/6/2008 by C0bzz]



posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by alienstar
 


They have used something the troops in Iraq call napalm, but it is not.
They got rid of all the old stockpile of napalm, left over from Vietnam.
They reformulated it by changing the benzine level, replacing gasoline for jet fuel and adding another oxidizer.
It is still the same concept as napalm, and has the same affect, but they renamed it, so they can make the claim that they do not use "napalm".
It is MK-77.



posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by C0bzz
 


The gelatinous fuel would be more effective to cause damage to the building.
Straight fuel would just pool-up on the floor and slowly smoke away, not doing any damage.
The "napalm" throws out big globs that would stick to the structural beams and burn fast and hot, because of the oxidizer added.
It could have done serious damage inside the building.


[edit on 29-6-2008 by jmdewey60]



posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by PeaceUk
 

your sure the government wouldn`t do this to their own people...huh?

there is something mounted on the bottom of the plane....
and in both planes hits you can see a flash comming from
the front of the object just before impact.....what is it???



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join