Did Large Airliners Really Hit the Buildings on 9/11?

Originally posted by Leo Strauss
In fact the leading building collapse expert witnessed the first collapse in person and said he believed there were bombs because WTC 2's destruction was "too even". He died during the second collapse.

Leo, do you have more information or a source/link to the above? I'm working on my own documentary and this would be great information to look over. Thanks!

reply to post by rick1


IMO they were used to mask the explosions that happened at the base of the towers. we know this because of William Rodriguez stating he heard rumblings/explosions underneath him before he heard the explosions at the top of the building.

they were used to mask the explosions, and to help give the case that we need to invade a 3rd world country because 19 supposed hijackers were from there.

If you’re responsible for those who died and in a position of power at the highest level with ultimate power over the investigation, wouldn’t you also end the investigation after hiring con-experts/attorneys false witnesses/planted-evidence/phony reports/media/news to come up with the best report/cover up you possibly could?




[edit on 18-3-2010 by ET_MAN]

"The objectives of the perpetrators at wtc93 were not realized because one> they hit only one building and two the one they did manage to hit was a failure. Murrah building same thing almost. One building only. Although they did blow it up it was an obscure building no one knew anything about."

I would hardly call the main U.S. Federal Government building in any major city "obscure". I agree with you...WTC '93 and OKC '96 appear to have been warmups for the main event.

"9/11 was completely different. We were attacked economically,politically,and militarily. Explosives or planes would have worked with that big of an attack."

Obviously, the "planes" didn't "work" fully, so they need the explosives to finish the job.

"Imo using planes gives them a much more likelihood of being found out because there is so much more evidence."

Are you talking about the same evidence which was discarded and suppressed and remains suppressed to this day?

"And why in the world would our govt.(perpetrators) send men to flight school? You and I both know they know plenty of people who can fly."

If the Government had used their own people, then the operation could have been traced back to the Government. By sending the alleged fanatic Muslims to flight school, the operation ended up being traced back to radical extremists. If you're smart enough to plan 9/11, you're smart enough to cover your butt.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by rick1
can someone tell me why they needed the planes(projetiles)? It makes no sense.

The plane strikes were the actual terrorist acts. The demolition of the WTC was the "shock-and-awe" part of the operation.

As SPreston likes to keep in his signature:

'Hindsight allows us to realize that
9/11 was the Bush Administration's
first shock and awe campaign.'

It's incredible how you dismiss the no plane theory with your own brand of disgust, but then believe wholeheartedly that the towers were demolished. Even when there's no proof of a controlled demolition.

If planes really didn't destroy the towers, then there would be some video to support this. There are too many videos for this conspiracy to be true. I'm not ruling out that the official story is false, but it definitely was not a missile that flew into the towers.

reply to post by _BoneZ_

Bonez, I think he was referencing this: 911blogger.com...

It was mentioned in the testimony of Father John Delendick when he said the following in his interview:

"I remember asking Ray Downey was it the jet fuel that blew up. He said at that point he thought there were bombs up there because it was too even. As we've since learned, it was the jet fuel that was dropping down that caused all this. But he said it was too even. So his original thought was that he thought it was a bomb up there as well."

It can be found on page 5 of Father Delendick's interview here: graphics8.nytimes.com...

reply to post by NIcon


NIcon, that will fit perfectly into my documentary. Thanks for the info!

reply to post by SphinxMontreal

I said there would be more evidence if they used the planes.
Yes that is the evidence I am talking about. You know the evidence that YOU and everyone else across the country has been questioning since 9/11. Come on man.

loving this discussion folks, keep it up! very glad to have you all discussing these topics in my thread, I am relatively new to ATS so it feels good to have started a thread that is resulting in this discussion. I love seeing people with different view points maturely and respectfully sharing their information. This is what truth-seeking is all about! Keep it up folks

-Abe

Originally posted by wayaboveitall

I hate to say it but I no longer believe that commerical airliners hit the WTC towers...

Your laser dot is very likely nothing more than sunlight refracting off the approaching plane, nothing more.

This is not a laser, this is Infrared light. that's why the film mentions that the camera has an Infrared Filter on...

-Abe

reply to post by Iamrealistic


This video has been floating around for awhile. When it first came out, people said it was an israeli jet. I don't have a web site to support such a claim, it was on a site on the days after 9-11.

Now people say this is a ufo, not a jet.



Suppossedly, there is another video out there of a jet. Like a fighter jet, an israeli fighter jet.

After 9-11, everybody though everything they saw all over the web, would be there forever, as it couldn't be erased. There are quite a few things that I haven't seen since, that I won't talk about

Even if I thought the buildings were not hit by planes I would not promote the idea.

Since REAL Airliners could not produce that much destruction it is more important to get people to understand why they could not. It looks like we have to attack the idea of AUTHORITARIAN SCIENCE though.

Science is what can be understood not what a "scientist" tells you.

psik

Originally posted by PookztA

Originally posted by wayaboveitall

I hate to say it but I no longer believe that commerical airliners hit the WTC towers...

Your laser dot is very likely nothing more than sunlight refracting off the approaching plane, nothing more.

This is not a laser, this is Infrared light. that's why the film mentions that the camera has an Infrared Filter on...

-Abe

Ummm dood. I am sorry. You have to watch better quality videos or open your eyes more. The laser dot was started by the pod people and has been debunked back in 2002-3. The 'laser/infrared' spot can been seen floating across the sky to another building. It is floating debris. Sorry to break it to ya.

Let the record show that a very very minuscule fraction of 'truthers' believe in this but most of them can be swayed by very simple evidence that is readily available.





[edit on 21-3-2010 by Shadow Herder]

here are two more reasons...

4. And here is another reason, relating to video footage that has not really been closely examined by the mainstream media:

Chopper 5 & the Missing Shadow:



5. And here is yet another reason I have been questioning the official airlinre story, after seeing how easy it is to create a fake airliner impact using computer technology:

9/11 Ghost Plane Theory - Digital Computer Recreation of WTC Plane Impact:

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

Let the record show that a very very minuscule fraction of 'truthers' believe in this but most of them can be swayed by very simple evidence that is readily available.

I sincerely doubt that, for the very reason the rest of you conspiracy people can't be swayed by very simple evidence that is readily available: your entire world is built upon abject paranoia, make believe, and circular logic, and whenever evidence is presented to you that refutes what you want to believe, you use your mechanism of abject paranoia, make believe, and circular logic to come up with some other reason why you shouldn't have to believe it.

Take the whole "planes never hit the Pentagon" bit. We show photographs of wreckage found, and you people simply say it was manufactured. We show you accounts of eyewitnesses that saw the plane, and you people simply say they're all disinformation agents. We show you Black Box data, and you say it was planted. Dude, if aircraft wreckage, eyewitness accounts, and black box data isn't enough to convince you conspiracy mongers that yes, flight 77 hit the Pentagon, then nothing on the face of the Earth will convince you.

When Pakistani journalists personally interviewing Bin Laden and Al Qaida broadcasts on Al Jazeera becomes "CIA manufactured disinformation" and yet a bunch of college kids making up every goofball conspiracy claim they can think of and putting them on internet videos they make in their dorm room becomes "credible research material", it becomes painfully obvious that you people are simply too much in love with these conspiracy stories to ever be swayed away from them.

Originally posted by 517.101
Suppossedly, there is another video out there of a jet. Like a fighter jet, an israeli fighter jet.

It was an F-15, from the Massachusetts Air National Guard scrambled from Otis air force base in Massachusetts. If you are even remotely claiming it was an Israeli jet, you will be lying through your teeth.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
It was an F-15, from the Massachusetts Air National Guard scrambled from Otis air force base in Massachusetts.

What is your source for this?

The timeline does not allow for a fighter to be at the location during the strikes on the buildings.

Originally posted by REMISNE

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
It was an F-15, from the Massachusetts Air National Guard scrambled from Otis air force base in Massachusetts.

What is your source for this?

The timeline does not allow for a fighter to be at the location during the strikes on the buildings.

A) the 9/11 commission report, which lists what planes were being scrambled and where they were being directed to. A flight of F-15s came out of Otis air force base and arrived over NYC some five minutes after the second strike. The "UFO over WTC" video was taken *after* the strikes, not during, so I'll side in with the theory that it was one of the Otis fighters, rather than a flying saucer.

B) The very video this guy is referencing. It was a CNN film footage of an aircraft flying over NYC during 9/11 that's currently on Youtube, and the very distinctive twin tails show it is an F-15. The plane being an F-15 means it came from Otis.

C) Not to mention, anyone in Manhattan who happened to look up during 9/11. I've spoken to someone who was physically there, and she saw the fighters herself.

I'm sure you can find more evidence with a bit of Google searching. This guy is manufacturing the Israeli connection entirely out of his own abject paranoia, and there is no justification for such unrepentent rumor mongering whatsoever.

thanks for discussing this folks, this is a very important issue. i only recently started doubting the official airliner story after seeing all this evidence so it is cool to hear people from both sides of the story. gotta work together to find the truth.

-Abe