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.

 

People implicated in 9/11

page: 5
8
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


The image which shows a drawing of the RB211 dwarfs the technician, whereas the actual image of the engine found at the pentagon is small in comparison. This is pointed out in the aerospace website but then later affirmed that it is the same engine because the part is only a central hub. Don't you find it odd that a picture of only this central hubb was taken while the rest of the engine, and the second engine, was not found? Wouldn't it make more sense that this engine belonged to the global hawk, which had only one rolls royce engine?

If photographers were able to take a picture of one part of one engine, why could they not also take pictures of both engines, or at least find both engines? Did the FBI confiscate only one engine and leave the other one to be photographed? But of course a believer of the OT would not admit that the FBI confiscated material, because that would imply a cover up. So how is it that you can deny the global haw theory, when the global hawk has one engine, and only one engine was found at the pentagon?

[edit on 22-12-2009 by ancient_wisdom]




posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave


So what are YOU saying, that the conspirators are going to install large Rolls Royce engines onto a smaller plane becuase when they crash it into the Pentagon, it'll leave Rolls Royce engine parts and trick you personally into thinking it was a 757...? I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that this is not what you're saying.


I am saying that you were given an article about this plane being secretly modified. You are saying it cannot be that plane because, even though many parts that indicated a much smaller type of plane, they found a different type of engine. I am just not sure what part of 'modified' or 'altered' secretly you do not understand. Do you not see that the article clearly stated something was changed on the plane but they do not say what? And your proof it did not happen? They found a little bit of something different.


Tell me, what exactly would you accept as evidence that a 757 had crashed there, anyway?


Footage from security cameras showing it.
Parts from a 757 that have been fully examined and match to a real plane that also left wreckage there.
Parts identified by serial number as matching the plane they say it was.

You have to remember something. I have said many times that I am even willing to accept a 757 crashed there if any evidence of one ever surfaces but my biggest contention is that it was AA77.

What else might help - logic. The depth of damage done by soft aluminum through those reinforced walls and yet fully evaporated after making said holes.

The chain of custody of the DNA.

And explanation of how DNA can survive what the material making up a plane and extremely solid walls.

I am sure I can come up with plenty more. In fact, how about you start a thread.



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale
No 757 parts.


oh dear, except for the 757 engines, the 757 seats, the 757 undercarriage, the 757 wheels, 757 fuselage parts etc etc.



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by ancient_wisdom

If photographers were able to take a picture of one part of one engine, why could they not also take pictures of both engines, or at least find both engines?


there are photographs of both engines - you really should not believe cons[iracy sites


and only one engine was found at the pentagon?


who claims that?
www.aerospaceweb.org...
shows 2 engines

[edit on 22/12/09 by dereks]



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by dereks
 


okay, it had to be asked, where is the picture of two engines found at the pentagon?



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale
They did. They let out just enough false info to get the support of the country behind the invasion of Iraq because he supposedly had WMDs AND LENT SUPPORT TO THE PEOPLE THAT ATTACKED US ON 9/11.


I think you need to refresh your history. From day one, Al Qaida and Bin Laden has always been identified as the culprit behind the 9/11 attack, and Afdghanistan didn't become a target until they refused to hand him over to us. Iraq and WMD wasn't even mentioned by anyone until well after the Afghanistan invasion.



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by Lillydale
They did. They let out just enough false info to get the support of the country behind the invasion of Iraq because he supposedly had WMDs AND LENT SUPPORT TO THE PEOPLE THAT ATTACKED US ON 9/11.


I think you need to refresh your history. From day one, Al Qaida and Bin Laden has always been identified as the culprit behind the 9/11 attack, and Afdghanistan didn't become a target until they refused to hand him over to us. Iraq and WMD wasn't even mentioned by anyone until well after the Afghanistan invasion.



and since prior to day one, and up to day one, the US govt worked with Bin Laden

Sibel Edmonds

www.b12partners.net...



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by dereks
 


no, that is one engine, and the article itself claims that the part inside the pentagon is the combustor case, and the part outside of the pentagon is the high pressure compressors. So in other words, the two parts are from the same engine.

that website says

"To give a better idea of how the three engine components we have discussed relate to one another,"

[edit on 22-12-2009 by ancient_wisdom]

I think the image is wrong, because the image of the wreckage shows a protruding object, whereas the image of the compressor does not show that. Either way, the article does not show two engines, it says that all three parts are from the same engine.

[edit on 22-12-2009 by ancient_wisdom]



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by downisreallyup
Negative. The few parts, very few parts found at the Pentagon were way too small for 757 engines, and they also had the wrong hole configuration. Suggest you stop believing the official story and look at many places on the net that clearly show the pictures of the wreckage, and detailed comparisons between the parts found and the ones used in 757s.


You really should have taken your own advice in this case. The parts that were found at the Pentagon site have been identified as having come from a Rolls Royce RB211 engine, the very type of engine that the Boeing 757 used, as well as what the part had actually been used for on the engine. Here is a writeup from an Aerospace engineer ring-

Rolls Royce engine parts at the Pentagon attack site

You'll forgive me if I defer to the opinions of people with actual relevant technical backgrounds and training, rather than conspiracy web sites hosted by college kids making internet videos out of their dorm room.



Well, I looked at the document you linked to, and find it quite lacking because the author would have you believe that two parts match, when they clearly do not if you look CAREFULLY at the details. Only if a person looks casually, ignoring the minute details, can one be fooled into thinking they are matching parts:



In this first image we see a comparison of compressor rotor hubs. Clearly these do not match. Look at the flanges in the center. The one found in the rubble has perforated square holes around the circumference of the flange, and the ones in the image on the left do not. Also, in the image on the left the outer flange shows a depth of nearly 3 inches, where the image on the right has hardly any flange depth at all. Also, those finger-like protrusions all around the circumference of the wrecked compressor part do not appear in the Rolls-Royce part in the image on the left. While all jet engine compressors tend to look similar, these two are clearly not from the same engine IF YOU LOOK CRITICALLY at all the details.

Also if one looks CAREFULLY at the next two images, there are many distinct differences:






If you look at the distance between the row of intake ports and the flanged edge of the combustion chambers, there is a large difference between the two images. In the 757 Rolls Royce engine, the row of ports appear to be about 1/3 distance down on the assembly, leaving a fairly substantial region of metal between the ports and the big flanged circular rings of the assembly. In the image on the right, however, we do not see that same placement of the intake ports in relation to the flanged rings. These holes are much closer to the ring, almost touching it. The flanged rings of the combustion assembly appear to be largely intact, indicating that the chamber was NOT grossly malformed, and also there is no evidence of crumpling of the tough metal between the ports and the ring either. While to the casual observer these may look like they come from the same engine, a more careful and critical analysis shows significant differences, particularly in where the ports are located and the overall size of the assembly. Undoubtedly, all jet engines have a similar type of intake port arrangement, given that all turbofans/turbojets work on essentially the same basic principles of igniting a compressed fuel/air mixture.

What is most puzzling about this whole thing is WHERE ARE THE INTACT ENGINES, since in nearly all crashes, even of the worst kind, the engines remain largely intact due to the composition and construction. But, the more important question that is really the BILLION dollar question is: how did engines become completely destroyed inside a building and yet not do ANY damage to the building as the plane supposedly flew into it? There is no physical way for the plane to enter the building without making a hole that is at least as big as the plane is, and from all the photos taken of the entry point, not only is the hole way too small, but also the ground shows no evidence of any engines hitting anything. No big gouges in the ground, no disturbance of the big spools sitting right in line with the flight path, and no destruction of the building at the very spots where it would have HAD TO BE destroyed if a 757 did indeed fly through it. These issues are not at all answered by anyone in a satisfactory way.



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 08:38 PM
link   
Isn't it funny how all of the "important" close up photos from the Pentagon crash site are low resolution and appear to have been taken by a 40 year old crappy Polaroid camera on its last legs? Only the pictures from afar, which show absolutely nothing of importance, are of higher resolution.

What's the matter, the Government was unable to afford some professional camera equipment because they were too busy ripping off a trillion dollars from the coffers? Or, do they prefer the images to be of low resolution quality so nothing of investigative value can be properly deciphered and the images could be digitally altered with little or no suspicion being raised?

Also, how many pictures did they actually take and release of the crash site? You'd think with such an important event, there would be a ton of pictures being taken. Was the film or the memory cards too expensive? And was the person who took these photos blind? Let's face it, a two year old sitting in a baby stroller could have done a better job.

Anyway, this horse manure of "evidence" the Government is shoveling here is consistent with their failure to release any video of the impact. When evidence is withheld, tampered with, altered and destroyed, it is not only a crime, it is logical to infer a cover up is in the works.

Looks like they spent a great deal of time on planning the mission and very little time planning the coverup. But then again, there is only 24 hours in a day.



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave


FYI who the flip are the "cavemen"? Bin Laden comes from a super-wealthy family and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has a degree in engineering.


You can take 1 name off that list Trick

OBL

www.globalresearch.ca...



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 02:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sean48

Originally posted by GoodOlDave


FYI who the flip are the "cavemen"? Bin Laden comes from a super-wealthy family and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has a degree in engineering.


You can take 1 name off that list Trick

OBL

www.globalresearch.ca...



This is just a more idiotic than usual website. Try checking the open source History Commons site and check for hundreds of items showing bin Laden's terrorist activities leading up to 9/11.

A warehouse full of documentation, communications, testimonies of bin Laden's overseeing the financing of 9/11.

Truthers often try to claim bin Laden is not on the FBI most wanted list so that is suspicious. Given that he is not an American citizen and never stepped foot on US soil, he's wanted organizations with international jurisdictions.

All academic now - he was dead by 2002.





[edit on 23-12-2009 by mmiichael]



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 03:27 AM
link   
reply to post by mmiichael
 


It seems to me, more and more people are saying that OBL is dead. Not only that but like you, they are even saying dead in 02.

There was another ATS thread on this very topic a week or so ago. I'll pose the same question I did him/her.

Who do you think has been making the video's of him? Do you believe that the person we see on those videos is a actor look a like? What makes you think this?

It sure would be nice to know when exactly he passed. To know how much information from him was faked. Also, why AQ decided to hide his death and why our government went along with it.



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 04:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by PersonalChoice
reply to post by mmiichael
 


It seems to me, more and more people are saying that OBL is dead. Not only that but like you, they are even saying dead in 02.

There was another ATS thread on this very topic a week or so ago. I'll pose the same question I did him/her.

Who do you think has been making the video's of him? Do you believe that the person we see on those videos is a actor look a like? What makes you think this?

It sure would be nice to know when exactly he passed. To know how much information from him was faked. Also, why AQ decided to hide his death and why our government went along with it.




From memory - Bin Laden either died either in a Tora Bora air raid December 2001 or later in 2002 from complications of his kidney ailment. Conflicting reports. But there is an obituary in Arabic and reports of his death in print in Egypt. There have been testimonies form attendees of the small funeral. Benazhir Bhutto let it slip in an interview OBL was dead. Other credible evidence.

The tapes that have appeared since 2002 are fakes. No ambiguity here. Either compilations of previous material or using that fat guy actor who looks nothing like Bin Laden.

General thinking is Zawahiri's al Qaida finds these messages a useful PR tool. the US intelligence services give them a pass as it is policy to maintain the belief OBL is out there somewhere.

At this point it's embarrassing for anyone to admit they've known he's dead all this time. So the charade carries on from both sides.


M



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 08:22 AM
link   
Only one thing to add, the death from kidney thing was a myth. He had injuries from Tora Bora that he just couldn't heal from.

The videos use the same German technology that were used in UFOs over Haiti with actors who's face imprint doesn't match bin Laden. But an effective propaganda machine is produced and delivered to recruit and keep the Holy War genocide going.



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 08:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by ancient_wisdom

The image which shows a drawing of the RB211 dwarfs the technician, whereas the actual image of the engine found at the pentagon is small in comparison. This is pointed out in the aerospace website but then later affirmed that it is the same engine because the part is only a central hub. Don't you find it odd that a picture of only this central hubb was taken while the rest of the engine, and the second engine, was not found? Wouldn't it make more sense that this engine belonged to the global hawk, which had only one rolls royce engine?


I don't find this odd in the least, no, specifically becuase they were using one single photo in their analysis. There were many, MANY photos taken of the area and of wreckage found in myriad shaped of destruction which they didn't show, plus, there were many things found which they didn't take a photo of. The photos aren't meant to be an inventory nor should they be considered as such.

Thus, I have to ask, what are you going on that says only ONE engine had ever been found?



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
FYI who the flip are the "cavemen"? Bin Laden comes from a super-wealthy family and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has a degree in engineering.


I believe he is referring to this.




posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 09:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael

This is just a more idiotic than usual website. Try checking the open source History Commons site and check for hundreds of items showing bin Laden's terrorist activities leading up to 9/11.

A warehouse full of documentation, communications, testimonies of bin Laden's overseeing the financing of 9/11.

Truthers often try to claim bin Laden is not on the FBI most wanted list so that is suspicious. Given that he is not an American citizen and never stepped foot on US soil, he's wanted organizations with international jurisdictions.



Yep, that's yet another example in a long list of examples on how these conspriacy web sites are being fast and loose with the truth. For the FBI to put anyone on the "Most Wanted" list it means they first need to be charged by a grand jury, a CIVILIAN court of law. The gov't has never made their intentions secret that they want to try any terrorist they catch in a MILITARY court of law, because military courts can be kept closed but civil courts have to be open. There's bound to be classified intelligence involved during the trial that they don't want made known to the public, like who in the Al Qaida organization are CIA informants.

The reason these damned fool conspiracy web sites never mention that is obvious- they want to use this to drop innuendo of impropriety, to get people to think something sinister is going on.



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael

Originally posted by Sean48


You can take 1 name off that list Trick

OBL

www.globalresearch.ca...



This is just a more idiotic than usual website. Try checking the open source History Commons site and check for hundreds of items showing bin Laden's terrorist activities leading up to 9/11.









Ok , off we go to YOUR SITE

www.historycommons.org...

umm MM my friend (whispers )

It says "No hard Evidence Linking OBL to 911"



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nutter

I believe he is referring to this.


Calling THAT a cave, and the people using it, "cavemen" is being deliberately disingenuous. That isn't a cave. It's a full blown underground installation, and a pretty professional looking one at that.

How many "cavemen" ever rigged their caves with hydroelectric power generators, anyway?



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join