'911 in Plane Site' - Has Anyone Seen It?

I'm going to have to go with Howard here...

Airliner windows easily get obscured at a distance. The pods are just what he mentioned they are, and I used to fly about twice a month, every month, or even more often. The nose explosion to me seems that the oxygen ignited upon impact Many planes have small sensory antennae, etc. that stick out further than the nose. This could have impacted, blown the oxygen tanks, and made it look like the explosion happened before the nose itself did (because in essence, it did, but not before another part of the plane, i.e. the antenna, did).

Personally, I am aquainted with some of those who did the cleanup, and I can remember the stories of some of their gruesome finds. So, if we are to believe that these were "dummy" planes, then who are all the people whose parts are strewn to the winds? (and no, they weren't the tower victims, much luggage, etc. was also found, as well as personal effects that then went to the victims' families. Did they somehow transfer the people from their regular flight to this one? What about the cell phone calls placed to loved ones before the crash? (surely they'd have called sooner if they noticed no windows on the plane...)

As for the way the building went down, it's mechanics... In essence, as I understand it, the effect was similar to a planned demolition. In a planned demolition, the object is to take out the supports all over, to allow for a nice quick straight drop. The intense heat from the jet burning melted the steel (as evidenced by those doing the cleanup) supports, basically causing the same thing to happen.

Does this mean Bush didn't know something? Can't say that. What I can agree with, is that Bush knew this had something to do with Bin Laden RIGHT after it happened. This much is evidenced by the Saudi plane that was allowed to leave while others were grounded. But I don't believe it was dummy planes and missiles...that's just going too far.

I saw the second plane go in live though, (switched on the tv after the first one hit), and man, I'll never forget that. The first, you're like, could have been an accident....the second....you just knew that we were now at war.

The top 10 reasons why putting explosives in when the building was built is just a silly idea.

10) First of all, that is simply just not done. Think of the enormous liability if the explosives went off by accident?

9) There was a small fire in one of the towers back in the 70�s would that have set off the explosives?

8) Do you know how many people were involved in the construction of the towers? How come no one noticed these either when the towers were built

7) How come no one noticed them in one of the many tenant renovation projects?

6) How were the explosives wired together? Did anyone ever notice the wires and trace them to figure out what they were?

5) Any wiring/ control system would have had to survive the impact and fire and still work as planned.

4) Any explosives on or nar the impact floor would have had to not go off prematurely due to the fire or the impact.

3) There is no credible evidence that there were any explosions in the collapses

2) Explosives by their very nature are unstable chemical compounds. They do not age well. Old explosives can be very dangerous stuff, not something that I would want attached to a building that moves and flexes in the wind, houses high energy telecommunications gear and regularly gets hit by lightning.





Finally (drum roll please)

The number one top ten reason why it is dumb to think that they prewired the WTC towers with explosives:

1) George Bush was just getting out of high school when the towers were designed. You don�t really think he thought that far ahead, do you?

You are prob right, i wasnt there and dont know anyone who was, its frustrating when all you have is grainy footage. but there are alot of things on film i cant explain like the 70 storie Ball of smoke that was filmed before any of the buildings fell. I just dosent smell right, i like to think im a level headed person but too much happened that just cant be explained away.

1) George Bush was just getting out of high school when the towers were designed. You don�t really think he thought that far ahead, do you?


As i said they were just ideas i was kicking around.
and if you read my post you will see i wasnt accusing Bush of anything and that i thought they were there from the beggining. Really no need to be patronising was there?

just a thought on how you could have got explosives into the buildings before it happened .... a quick google on the security company for the world trade centres at the time might raise a few eyebows - its called Securacom & a major shareholder is none other than bush's little brother marvin, who was also on its board of directors until 2000 & that company has been in charge of security @ several other 'interesting' places also, but im sure that just another 'coincidence'

Obviously you have never worked in a large high rise building. Especially one like the WTC. Most high profile tenants have their own security systems for access. Furthermore you can not just walk into a tenant space and start a construction project (i.e. opening up walls, column enclosures, ceilings, etc. ) without some sort of co-ordination with the tenant. Many of the financial sector offices are manned 24 hours, building maintenance and engineers are there 24 hours, so it�s not like you could just sneak into the building and start wiring it with explosives. A lot of people are going to notice and wonder what you are up to.

Yes, i have worked in a high rise building before although not as large as the WTC's (funnily enough it was when i worked for an underwriting company who later lost all their money because they were underwriters for both WTC'S & the aeroplanes!). So long as you were authorised to be there, as an employed security firm would have been, you are not that likely to have be searched or questioned. That may not be the case anymore now though.

Originally posted by crossfire
That the President of the USA knew of an attack on key landmarks in two cities that could cause thousands of deaths and deliberately did nothing so he could get a political advantage?

Is that what you REALLY think?

not for his political advantage , but for the plan

a new world order yes.
he is just a toy.
and toys get broken , soon enough.

his nickname isnt *temporary* for nothing...
and what about kerry.... *long devil*

oh how the puppets dance in the show...

Here is very good artical on the subject. I have reports about portions of the towers having worked done before 9-11 large areas were off limits during the time.

letsroll911.org...

Respects,

Any large building always has construction going on in it. The problem with your theory is that although those areas may have been inacessable to the public and the tenants, they were not to the contractors working on them. Furthermore the building managers and engineers keep a close eye on all such work.

Have you ever worked on a construction site in a high rise? I have.

Originally posted by justyc
Yes, i have worked in a high rise building before although not as large as the WTC's (funnily enough it was when i worked for an underwriting company who later lost all their money because they were underwriters for both WTC'S & the aeroplanes!). So long as you were authorised to be there, as an employed security firm would have been, you are not that likely to have be searched or questioned. That may not be the case anymore now though.

I have worked on a number of projects where a tenant on an occupied floor is very cautious about allowing any workers onto their floors. This was pre 9/11.

Wireing a building with explosives is not an easy task. You are talking about major renovation here.

Originally posted by HowardRoark
The top 10 reasons why putting explosives in when the building was built is just a silly idea.

Long time reader, first time poster here.

Actually, I wouldn't think explosives were placed when the buildings were constructed, but the fireproofing material surrounding the central concrete/steel columns WAS fully replaced about 6-8 weeks before 9/11.

check out sites like www.physics911.org. It has a lot of stuff, most of it includes the source of information.

Similarly, I wouldn't pin it on GWB either. The forces that wanted a "new Pearl Harbor" DO include Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz though. Their involvement with the Project For a New American Century (PNAC) is well-documented.

You can read about it at www.newamericancentury.org, the thinktank's official website. It includes their seminal document, Rebuilding America's Defences. This is the document that talks about a long range transformation of the American military into an expansionist imperial power, and how this transformation would be a long one and difficult to sell to the public and America's allies without a "catastrophic and catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbor."

No but I would like too.

Has anyone read - Alice in Wonderland and the WTC disaster by David Icke?

preview here...


www.tvnewslies.org...

I haven't seen the movie, but I think I get the gist of it and others who believe Bush is all powerful and able to do what he wants, have it play out perfectly, and get away with it.


---
Around 1998, Governer Bush starting meeting with Bin Laden and other terrorists (because you know, terrorists always have high respect for governers of Texas) also some CIA and other Clinton officials (because you know democrats just love attacking America too) to plan an attack like none other. Governer Bush used his power of governership to train and fund the terrorists (because you know governers are powerful like that).
All that election crap was blown out of porportion. Bush won fair and square, how else would "the plan" go forth. It was smooth sailing after his election blowout. All he had to do is sit back and wait. Clinton's officals still said nothing about the attack because you know how they really love the Republicans and forgave them of all the crap they did over Monica and of course they like attacking America.
9/11 is finally here.
All passengers of the airlines that are "hijacked" are secretly transferred to a remote location soon after takeoff and are killed somewhere. They are replaced with robots with cell phones programmed to call victims relatives. And on one of the flights these life like robots were trained to attack the "hijackers" causing it to crash into a remote location.
Of course jets could have been scrambled to intercept these planes on time but why? After the second plane hit the tower is when people started to realize we were "under attack" and the FAA accidently ordered all planes to be grounded (they didn't get the memo that the attack was today). This meant thousands of planes were now off course and headed toward the nearest airport but the jets could have easily found which ones were hijacked. Besides Regan National is a mile or 2 away from the pentagon....so there's plenty of time for a jet coming from ten+ miles away to intercept it in time.
Post 9/11 - all the fighting and stuff in Afghanistan....all planned. Our deal was you kill us so we can kill you (because you know how terrorists love the US and would do anything for us).

Iraq- Oh please. Of course it was for the oil? Haven't you noticed the HUGE spike in the flow of Iraqi oil to the US. The oil we get from the middle east may be up to 15% now! I don't know about where you are but gas around my way has dropped to about $0.25 per gallon as a result. What was Bush's tax return? How much did he make? He's got to be a billionaire by now for sure. Bush just wanted to do this for his own political (and finacial) gain and it shows, his poll numbers are through the roof now!

That just about sums up the "Bush did it, Bush knew" people.





Ignorance is not being denied

Some interesting videos.

WTC Shake

CNN Video explosion

Firefighters - bombs...

I've checked those previews... they are amazing. By the way, that "flash" can be seen on the 1st tower, fireman video. The Naudent video is manipulated, many sites claim, it is not reliable... at least, the official verson is not.

The thing that bothers me is that this has become a political party thing. Let me ask this of anyone that like myself thinks this movie or parts of it are true. Do you really think it was just Bush that did this and that no person from the Democratic party was involved ? And if you do why havent the Dems been running with this info?

Personally, I don't think, Bush or anyone else has done it within the states. But there are too many things being covered, that it is frustrating.

Those videos released by CNN are highly manipulated, frames duplicated or taken out, etc...

Originally posted by Istvan
Personally, I don't think, Bush or anyone else has done it within the states. But there are too many things being covered, that it is frustrating.

Those videos released by CNN are highly manipulated, frames duplicated or taken out, etc...

I dont know i would as far as saying that CNN manipulated the footage but there is some footage that was shown live by CNN and then never seen again. The smoke rising up to the 70th floor from ground level before any of the buildings went down would be one example.