Originally posted by USER
The photo's don't look very conclusive do they? One's even got a question mark next to it.
That was just ONE collection of photos. If you did some more investigating you'd see others. Question mark? The only one with the question mark is
the seat belt. I KNOW that it is not a passenger lap belt, it is wrong design. Same way I KNOW it isn't a pilot seat belt. SOME F/A jumpseat
postions have belt buckles that resemble that one, but so do some cars. However, a close inspection would clear up where it came from, perhaps the
"?" was put there until confirmation.
Have you seen Pilots for 911 Truth?
Yes...they make me laugh!
The general consensus there agrees with John Lear on the basis that you can't fly one of those planes at over 500MPH at a thousand ft, as
claimed. You can't fly one over about 350MPH at that altitude.
No, what they are attempting to muddy the story with is a LEVEL flight sustained "500MPH". A jet in a descent will pick up a LOT of airspeed, very
quickly. Do some research into an incident with a guy named "Hoot" Gibson, back in the TWA days. Their
Boeing 727 was in an uncontrolled descent, and exceeded mach 1, something NEVER
designed to do.
Are we to doubt that all these pilots know what they're on about??
Not "all" those pilots have experience in large jets --- just look at their bona fides. AND, quite a few back cautiously away from Capt.
Lear, and his "hologram" theories!!! The NPT crowd are anathema to most 911 "Deniers".
Have you seen "september clues"? The nose out shots?
September Clues has been roundly debunked.
Here is Part 1a:
Link to see the rest.
Furthermore, they never found any "black box" flight recorders that are supposed to be near indestructable
OH?? Never found "any"? Incorrect. Is this what they've been feeding you?
Here is the
Autopilot and Navigation Equipment study from the AA77 and UA93 SSFDRs.
AA11's and UA175's were never found. Gee, they were originally installed in the rear of the fuselage --- do you think maybe they came to rest
INSIDE the buildings??? They weren't designed to survive 1000s of tons of rubble on top, crushing them.
I'm sorry reading that .pdf may seem challenging to someone not familiar with the B757/767 cockpits. But, I've read through it and it shows quite
clearly that
someone was sitting in those cockpits and operating controls. On the MCP, on the CDU, and on the Center Pedestal. You can also
research those terms, and learn them, if you care to. It wasn't 'remote control', or some other fantastic claim.
- but hey found a paper passport of a so-called hijacker that turned out to be alive an well in the middle east.
It's already been shown that very light-weight items will be ejected from the carnage and chaos of an airplane crash. Look into the crash in Iran
last month. Or, the little four-year old girl who was the ONLY survivor out of nearly 200 in a Northwest Airlines crash in Detroit, Michigan in
1987.
Oh, and you don't suppose a lot of Middle eastern men have the same name??
Do you think a passport would survive when a black box wouldn't?
No, of course not.
Already shown to be an incorrect assumption.
Have you ever seen the photo's of the Lockerbie Bombings wreckage?
Yes, of course. What's your point?
When an airplane crashes there is wreckage. Lots of wreckage. As seen in the Lockerbie bombing - and that was plastic explosives!
***sigh*** Very different circumstances. A bomb in a suitcase, structural integrity gone, airplane breaks up in flight and FALLS to Earth, never any
faster than terminal velocity (Google it).
Whilst 'googling', look up SwissAir flight 111. Hit the water, high velocity. VERY small pieces, all that were left. No bomb, just an onboard
fire and loss of control functions.
Why do you think building 7 came down? It was nowhere near any of the "action". Did it just decide to fall down - also on a perfect
footprint of itself....
I don't think Lear mentioned WTC7 much. However, it WAS hit by a substantial amount of debris from the Tower, and was on fire for the entire day.
MANY reports of the building sagging, shifting, and fears of its collapse. All they could do was evacuate, and clear a perimeter.
As to "perfect footprint" nonsense...take a look at overhead depictions, and see the extent of the debris trajectories. BUT, in any case, if a
building collapses, what do you think has the greatest affect on it? Maybe
gravity? Seems like the way things fall, straight down.
As far as John Lear's comments on aliens and the moon go ...... It's certainly debatable but let's not forget - that's not what this thread
is about.
Agreed!!! Least said about that, the better.
_____________________________________________
(tags)
[edit on 20 August 2009 by weedwhacker]
