Pick Your 2 Most Glaring Points of Questions For 9/11?

a) the fact that airplane hit penthagon ...most secured air space in the world
b) this guys

NSA

FBI

images.encarta.msn.com...&t=1" target='_blank' class='tabOff'/> CIA

NORAD


against this guys



no #ing way

Originally posted by xavi1000
a) the fact that airplane hit penthagon ...most secured air space in the world
no #ing way

What should they have done to prevent it? Shoot the plane down?

Oh wait never mind it crashed [Landed] into the building.

reply to post by SLAYER69


yes ..like flight 93

reply to post by xavi1000

....most secured air space in the world ...

?? Where? What is the "most secured airspace in the world"? Area around the Kremlin? Beijing? Fort Knox? Area 51??

Just about any USAFB/NAVY Base, etc???

You were aware, weren't you, of an airport known as "Washigton National"? (AKA "Reagan", but I refuse to call it that...the man doesn't deserve that respect....) DCA is just about one mile, or so, from the Pentagon. Airplanes fly within striking distance every day.....

YEAH, one BIG one. Tell me, what are the odds that both buildings collapsed straight down? You would think that one buildings top would fall from one side or the other. The fact is, this did not happen. I have watched alot of buildings being blown up by demolitioners and 9/11 looks exactly like a building being blown up by demolitioners. Only difference is, a plane hit on top first.

reply to post by xavi1000

...like flight 93...

You don't consider it odd, when trying to claim a "shoot down" of UAL 93, that both the DFDR and CVR continued to operate normally, all the way until impact? AND, indicated no malfunctions, mechanically, at all??

You see, assuming a "shoot down", one would expect something like Sidewinder or something...heat seeker. That would be one of the engines, as primary obvious sources of heat. Losing an engine due to a missile explosion would mean electrical, hydraulic and pneumatic interruptions, to mention just three things. All things that would have registered on the Flight Recorder data.

Noises, too, on the CVR (that didn't occur).

Further, IF catastrophic break-up in flight, and power (normal electrics) both Recorders will stop immediately. The data will stop, prior to the impact. (See TWA 800, PanAm 103 as two examples).

Wild speculations are interesting...until facts get in the way.

1 Where is the flight data recorder information
2 How often do they not recover the above in a land crash situation?

Regards, I winder

Originally posted by nite owl
YEAH, one BIG one. Tell me, what are the odds that both buildings collapsed straight down? You would think that one buildings top would fall from one side or the other. The fact is, this did not happen.

I have watched alot of buildings being blown up by demolitioners and 9/11 looks exactly like a building being blown up by demolitioners. Only difference is, a plane hit on top first.

Buildings do collapse straight down , it is the result of gravity. I was a child in London during the war and I can assure you devasted buildings do fall straight down.

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by nite owl
YEAH, one BIG one. Tell me, what are the odds that both buildings collapsed straight down? You would think that one buildings top would fall from one side or the other. The fact is, this did not happen.

I have watched alot of buildings being blown up by demolitioners and 9/11 looks exactly like a building being blown up by demolitioners. Only difference is, a plane hit on top first.

Buildings do collapse straight down , it is the result of gravity. I was a child in London during the war and I can assure you devasted buildings do fall straight down.

OH REALLY. www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by nite owl
YEAH, one BIG one. Tell me, what are the odds that both buildings collapsed straight down? You would think that one buildings top would fall from one side or the other. The fact is, this did not happen.

:puz

reply to post by SLAYER69


Oh im sorry i was wrong, a slight tilt. It still fell so straight down tho.

reply to post by Iwinder

1 Where is the flight data recorder information

For United 93? Here:
www.ntsb.gov...

For American 77, here:
www.911myths.com...

And, combined American 77 & United 93, here (specific flight parameters):
NTSB Study of Autopilot, Navigation Equipment, and Fuel Consumption Activity...

2 How often do they not recover the above in a land crash situation?

Off the top of my head, there are a few instances of Recorders being damaged to be unreadable (American 77's CVR, for instance). BUT, no land-based crash has ever occurred into 110-story skyscrapers that subsequently collapsed upon the Recorders before. It is little wonder they were not found, in that mess.....

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I forgot to add a big "shout out" to Mr. Warren Stutt, and his work at decoding the raw file DFDR data, from both flights. ( Since, inevitably, some people will always have "heartburn" over the NTSB, as somehow complicit in some sort of nefarious "cover-up"... ):

www.warrenstutt.com...

Originally posted by nite owl

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by nite owl
YEAH, one BIG one. Tell me, what are the odds that both buildings collapsed straight down? You would think that one buildings top would fall from one side or the other. The fact is, this did not happen.

I have watched alot of buildings being blown up by demolitioners and 9/11 looks exactly like a building being blown up by demolitioners. Only difference is, a plane hit on top first.

Buildings do collapse straight down , it is the result of gravity. I was a child in London during the war and I can assure you devasted buildings do fall straight down.

OH REALLY. www.youtube.com...

edit on 14-11-2010 by nite owl because: (no reason given)

Yes, REALLY. It's basic physics. Gravity attracts anything on the surface straight towards the center of the Earth, it doesn't attract sideways. From our perspective on the surface, the center of the Earth is straight... down, not sideways. To get it to go sideways as you suggest would require an explosive charge on one side only (at the base of the structure), cutting the support structure differentially. It would then fall sideways, since gravity is pulling it straight down, but the intact support structure on the other side is working against gravity, causing it to pivot on a line represented by the intact portion.

Think of it like this - if you have two legs to stand on, and one gets kicked out from under you, you will fall to that side. If both legs get kicked out, you will fall straight down.

Sort of like what's happening to this argument.

4 Planes down over land and lots of debris for sure including tires, a fully intact passport, lots of stuff now I must ask what became of the 8 data recorders that could not survive a building crash but a tire and a passport sailed right through?
Second question to you there WW since you are in the know (no insult intended as I mean you seem to know air craft) is what are the flight data recorders made out of? How durable are they compared to .....ohhhhh a piece of paper or a chuck of tire rubber?
Plus I would still like an answer to my question of how rare is it to NOT recover a data recorder over a land crash site.
That versus on over the deep sea which I can see being very difficult to recover.?
No info no evidence and in this case we are missing some real evidence but we do have paper and rubber.
Regards, I winder

reply to post by Blue_Jay33


President Bush mentioning on Camera in front of the School Children he was Reading a Book to that he had seen the WTC Collapse on TV when at that particular moment in Time , it was not Aired on TV .



The Building 7 Collapse Reported by a BBC TV Reporter on the Scene in NY Before it Actually Happened .



Those to me are the two most Glaring Mysteries of the events that transpired on 9/11 . Were they Ever Explained in a Convincing Fashion to anyone here ? ..Hmm....

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by nite owl

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by nite owl
YEAH, one BIG one. Tell me, what are the odds that both buildings collapsed straight down? You would think that one buildings top would fall from one side or the other. The fact is, this did not happen.

I have watched alot of buildings being blown up by demolitioners and 9/11 looks exactly like a building being blown up by demolitioners. Only difference is, a plane hit on top first.

Buildings do collapse straight down , it is the result of gravity. I was a child in London during the war and I can assure you devasted buildings do fall straight down.

OH REALLY. www.youtube.com...

edit on 14-11-2010 by nite owl because: (no reason given)

OK, my first glaring point is debunk. OK, now my second. why is it that noone could hear any charge exsplosion noises, like in all demolitions?

Yes, REALLY. It's basic physics. Gravity attracts anything on the surface straight towards the center of the Earth, it doesn't attract sideways. From our perspective on the surface, the center of the Earth is straight... down, not sideways. To get it to go sideways as you suggest would require an explosive charge on one side only (at the base of the structure), cutting the support structure differentially. It would then fall sideways, since gravity is pulling it straight down, but the intact support structure on the other side is working against gravity, causing it to pivot on a line represented by the intact portion.

Think of it like this - if you have two legs to stand on, and one gets kicked out from under you, you will fall to that side. If both legs get kicked out, you will fall straight down.

Sort of like what's happening to this argument.

edit on 2010/11/14 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)

Ok, my second glaring point. Why is it that noone could hear any charge explosion noises?

Originally posted by Zanti Misfit
reply to post by Blue_Jay33

 

President Bush mentioning on Camera in front of the School Children he was Reading a Book to that he had seen the WTC Collapse on TV when at that particular moment in Time , it was not Aired on TV .

That's not what he said....

Even in the video supposedly " Exposing the Truth " They obviously make it seem as if it's a conspiracy. He said he was standing outside waiting to go into the classroom when he saw the FIRST plane hit on TV [Just like Millions of other people] watching the TV news replay and he thought it was an accident then later after the SECOND plane hit [obviously not an accident] the SS guy comes in and informs him of the SECOND plane hitting.

Now Where is the conspiracy?

My question is -- why did each plane have two pilots and one "extra" pilot. Why did Ogonowski insist on flying that particular flight when he actually had an important meeting scheduled for that particular date, but insisted that he take that flight (who told him he HAD to fly)?

It occurs to me that you would not insist a certain person be the pilot and even add extra pilots -- unless -- you needed those pilots for a specific reason. In other words, I believe some of these people were selected. If certain pilots were selected AND an extra pilot was put on each plane?....

My other question is this. After 911 I specifically remember reading that another 4 men were stopped, but they were on an Amtrak train. Their suitcase contained 12,000 or so AND they had box cutters. If I recall correctly, they were found going to the home of a doctor, and I believe it was in Houston. So now -- whatever happened to those four men?

Those are my 911 questions.

reply to post by Blue_Jay33

.And heat burns human flesh at what temperature? Humans don't do well near very high heat.
If you have ever been close to an industrial fire you would know that even a basic fire can incapacitate a human with no protective gear. I was 500 feet from industrial fire once, the heat was insane.

The heat we are talking about to soften steel girders is hundreds of degrees higher than any human could handle in any proximity for any length of time without the proper protective gear.

If it was so hot from fire as to soften massive steel girders those people would never even be around.

Picture was taken just after impact of AA1 into building - the momentum carried the jet fuel deep into the building
kindling fires on opposite side of the building, Forgetting that each side of WTC was over 200 ft so fires far into
building would take time to affect people here. As WEEDWHACKER said wind on this side would for a time force
the heat and smoke away from the people.

I been a Firefighter for over 20 years so have some concept of heat and what people will do in a fire

Shortly after the people pictured JUMPED ! Ask yourself why would jump to certaim death? Could it be that
conditions became too extreme

Just heard lecture from FDNY firefighter - told how he and 5 others jumped from 4th floor of apartment building
when heat became too extreme - seconds after officer with them reported only minor smoke and heat on that
floor. Shows just how fast things can happen.........