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.

 

All of you 'No-Planers' need to see This :

page: 4
36
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 10:09 PM
link   
reply to post by GorehoundLarry
 



I'd love to have a civil discussion with you, but looking at your statements ... Well, your loss!





[Mod Edit - Replaced actionable quote with Reply ToTab]

[edit on 17/4/2010 by Sauron]




posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 10:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
reply to post by AllIsOne
 


The "nose-out" has been debunked here, about half-way down the post:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



Ok, just for argument's sake: what do you think the nose-out is?



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 10:30 PM
link   
ok, where is the 767 parts...?
and that be the wrong engine for that plane... to be certain I would need to take a closer look, but you see that compressor assembly - too small, the central hub just isnt right for that plane. and so is the landing gear, its also too small for a 767. I acknowledge the window sections appear to be consistant. except the plane hit a metal cheese grater - I would need more information - I see window section at ground zero and it should not be that large - let me forward that picture to the lab.

tks for sharing



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 10:37 PM
link   
I've encountered the no plane theory but, like most of you, I saw the plane go into the building.

What I haven't seen is all the pictures of wreckage in the link provided by the OP. I've got to say, those pictures raise a whole new set of questions for me.

How did that much wreckage survive? For the debris to be as recognizable as it is, it obviously did not survive the collapse of the towers. Looking at most of the pictures, it would have had to be launched when the plane went into the building but that doesn't make much sense to me.

When I've rewatched the footage from that day, I see debris flying but only after the plane would have fully penetrated the building. Wouldn't the steel/concrete have contained the plane somewhat? I understand that these planes were traveling at tremendous speeds but how do they take out the buildings and still have enough momentum to launch parts that are engulfed in a building?



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllIsOne
Ok, just for argument's sake: what do you think the nose-out is?

It's smoke. It can't be anything else.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 10:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Scalded Frog
 


No-Plane there was a Plane, (yes), there are parts of an Air Craft at WTC on top of buildings, and the photo's are a day or two after... hum,
Shanksville comes to mind.

*the second plane that hit the WTC has two video's both similar but different - one level flight into building and the other decends into the building. both have clear sign of video editing. both towers appear to have a like laser pointer projected around the impact areas of both towers, visible on the towers, (one appears real, and two appears superimposed)
* guys, this is part of their plan to divide and conquer us on details.
dont go there. in my opinion there where no planes. (the richer the person the tighter their wallets, and this was a budget job).
*for an eye opener - read their demolition plan for the trade towers, they had to have them on file before they would allow them to be built. let me just say atoms are mighter than the towers.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anti-Evil
and that be the wrong engine for that plane... to be certain I would need to take a closer look, but you see that compressor assembly - too small, the central hub just isnt right for that plane.

Care to show your qualifications as an aircraft engine mechanic or assembler so there can be some sort of credibility to your claim?



Originally posted by Anti-Evil
and so is the landing gear, its also too small for a 767.

Got any proof of your claim? You can't just come on a forum and make claims. You have to back those claims up with some kind of proof.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 10:55 PM
link   
Of course planes hit the towers..Boeing 757-767s in all of their glory. What they fail to let you know is how they were guided to their targets. They werent driven by wide eyed P off'd jihadists.

But many of you still want to say laser designators were simply paper reflecting off the sun.

Unfortunately, no 757/767 hit the Pentagon. I can say that with 110% affirmative. Argue all you want..it doesn't make it less true.


[edit on 16-4-2010 by superluminal11]



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Anti-Evil
 


Maybe you could provide a link for the 'demolition plan' , as I've not been able to find one .

It has been my understanding that no demolition plan was required due to the Port Authority having a multi-state jurisdiction .

A link would be great .



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 11:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Scalded Frog
 


Run the math, the plane is a beer can with two massive metal engines.
the plane is only capible of reaching about 350 miles a hour at that altitude, they say it was going 530 miles an hour ... big descrepancy right there. now why was 530 miles an hour important - one would ask.
it appears that if the plane was doing 525 miles an hour it would have just crunched up on the outside of the building... they did the calulations what 7 times and the results were the same all 7 times, no penetration.
and we had two 500+ MPH Planes hitting the buildings on their first pass. these piliots knew how to fly - since no pilot has ever been able to duplicate 911 on the first pass. and we are led to believe hijackers did this... something aint right, what it is - is everything -- its just wrong~!



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 11:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anti-Evil
*the second plane that hit the WTC has two video's both similar but different

There are 42+ videos of the second plane hitting the south tower. They all show the same thing.



Originally posted by Anti-Evil
both have clear sign of video editing

You claim with zero proof. It's only clear to you and a very few others.



Originally posted by Anti-Evil
both towers appear to have a like laser pointer projected around the impact areas of both towers

As for the south tower, it was a piece of paper floating in the wind. I haven't heard about the laser disinfo for the north tower. That must be some new made up disinfo material.



Originally posted by Anti-Evil
guys, this is part of their plan to divide and conquer us on details

There is no "us" when it comes to "no planes at the WTC". Those that espouse the NPT disinfo are not 9/11 truthers and are not supported anywhere in the truth movement.



Originally posted by Anti-Evil
in my opinion there where no planes.

Thank goodness you admitted that it's your opinion. Because there surely isn't a single residue of evidence to support your opinion.



Originally posted by Anti-Evil
for an eye opener - read their demolition plan for the trade towers, they had to have them on file before they would allow them to be built.

Yet another claim made by you without any sources for backup. Please post a source for your claims.

Making claims without posting links to credible information to back up your claims wastes our time and yours.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 11:10 PM
link   
reply to post by superluminal11
 


Posting this link simply for discussion purposes .

I will not argue the plane / no-plane theory as regards the Pentagon , as I am not that far along in my study of all this .

But as it deals with plane/no-plane topic , you are welcome to debate it with anyone else who wishes to .


www.rense.com...

[edit on 16-4-2010 by okbmd]



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 11:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anti-Evil
the plane is only capible of reaching about 350 miles a hour at that altitude, they say it was going 530 miles an hour ... big descrepancy right there.

Big disinformation right there. It's only a discrepancy to those who have no knowledge of powered flight.

Yes, it's true that a jetliner cannot exceed 350mph at sea level because it's engines aren't powerful enough. But a jetliner can reach and exceed 500mph without using it's engines while coming down from altitude. It's called "gravity". The second jet that hit the south tower came down from altitude and only leveled out in the 2-3 seconds before impact.

You can simulate that in any cheap flight simulator right on your computer.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by okbmd
 


I saw it in a binder, but I also saw the same picture in a poorly produced youtube video... let me get it for you.

found it... here you go....
www.youtube.com...

this is the same as the picture i saw, this one is in color the one
I saw was in black and white on old xerox yellowed paper.

but if you want to examine the evidence for a nuke here you go:

www.youtube.com...



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 11:16 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 

well take it up with pilots for 911 truth before labeling something dis information.
even your own 911A&E presentation says as much: Ron Avery review please.

Bonez, were sort of on the same side - but i have you at a sever disadvantage, I have been working on 911 and the Evidence since 2003, about 16 hours everyday. I have one constant theme that will end my
inner turmoil - We Dont Know What Happend On 911.
you can point to this and that - all you want -
911 was botched and I'm siding it was done to help destroy our nation.
not bring a few towers down. they did it to make us get rid of them.
but that is only an educated guess. you want proof you should have it around 2011.

[edit on 16-4-2010 by Anti-Evil]



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anti-Evil
well take it up with pilots for 911 truth before labeling something dis information.

The whole 9/11 truth movement has labeled NPT disinformation. And Pilots for 9/11 Truth does not support NPT. They allow the discussion in a hidden forum out of public view, but that's about it.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 11:34 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


review the video of RON AVERY Please.
here is the link for you...

www.youtube.com...

and yes, I am aware of NPT, they can rule anything out if they want to. I on the otherhand am aware of the beliefs, out there. and if you call me on my knowledge of 911. well good luck, I eat trolls.

and the Russian Nuclear Scientist - he also runs the math for you.
about the NPT thing.

[edit on 16-4-2010 by Anti-Evil]



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 12:01 AM
link   
I live in San Francisco and every year we have the blue angels fly over head for fleet week.

Everyone who lives here can tell you that it is not easy to hear a screaming plane and look up and locate it right away. It always sounds like it is somewhere else.

The film of the first plane hitting the first tower makes every San Franciscan cameraman wince.

The shot is of a fireman on the street and then a smooth pan up and steady shot focus on the tower just before something white hits it.

If you are downtown and surrounded by tall buildings, the noises would be ricocheting all over the place.

Add sirens and helicopters and everyone being pushed back by the police away from the towers so that views were obscured...

It doesn't surprise me that people could be confused about what they saw, thought they saw, and later saw on TV from that stressful day.



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 12:33 AM
link   
yeah, there were planes...

yes, people died.

Yes, its still an inside job.‘‘



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 12:37 AM
link   
reply to post by trusername
 

well, the French camera crew, more than likely was planted it appears they had 50 yard front row seats for WTC 7 later that afternoon.

and bush said twice he saw the first plane hit the tower before he went in the classroom. boasting or embellishing or lying or watching on CIA secret camera location. Ill take Lying for 100,000,000,000 ALex.

if you watch bush before during and after he was told about the second plane you will see his mind is not reading a pet goat book, he is holding it upside down. as if he was hiding something - he sure looks like he is.
he is doing just what a school boy would do, trying to not get caught -
but in his efforts to look normal - well, he aint - he wants to get the hell out of there... and it was the secret service who should have grabbed him and split... even before andrew whispered in his ear. Protocol Baby!!!

[edit on 17-4-2010 by Anti-Evil]

[edit on 17-4-2010 by Anti-Evil]



new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join