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.
I did not ask what they do, I asked why they would damage them and a plane would not? The sheer mass of the planes wings is what caused the damage to the outer core. I am aware that multiple strikes could be made but how can you hide 5-10 JASSM missiles? You could not. You cannot green screen reality.
Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by tpg65
And what if you've already heard the truth and insist on perpetuating myths and all out lies? Does that honor the dead also?
Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by Yankee451
I see that you are still at a loss to explain how the vestigal wings on a JASSM could damage the structural columns but a 757 could not. You also fail to explain how the JASSM warheads were replaced with thousands of gallons of jet fuel.
Show how the JASSM can cut steel and a 757 can't and explain the fuel fireball or withdraw the claim.
Originally posted by Yankee451
Originally posted by waypastvne
reply to post by Yankee451
The tips did not cut the steel only bent it inwards you know that. The cut steel ended at the same place were the gas tanks ended. Take a look.at the shanksville crater you can clearly see were the fuel tanks end.
Below is a closeup from the left side of the gash. To the left of the severely bent columns, note the two with the dents on the LEFT side of the column, an indication of the direction of travel of the projectile.
Since the wings of a 767 are swept-back 35 degrees, even if they could do such damage to steel formed in a box with two protruding edges, they would not dent the columns on the left, as seen in the image.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3884722677ae.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/117fe6565b66.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/40db283a4252.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0a52d52e225a.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/be666c577e6a.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/40904c4910fa.jpg[/atsimg]
Multiple missiles are consistent with the explosions exiting the tower on three sides:
Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by Yankee451
Missiles don't strike at an angle, they hit head on. And no idiot would try to program it to hit at an angle either, too great a chance of it missing altogether.
Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by Yankee451
I'm not saying silly things about your hypothesis, I'm flat out saying you don't know jack about air launched missiles. The damage is in no way consistent with the buildings being hit by one. If you think that the wings of an airliner couldn't cause the damage in the photo, then there is no way in hell you could honestly claim the skinny little wings of a missile could cause it either.
If you know missiles, you know very well this is possible. These are the same missiles they brag about lobbing down chimneys so launching a couple volleys in a cross fire formation using pre planted homing beacons would be something you air force types can do with your eyes closed.
Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by Yankee451
The missiles can't do it, Yankee. The fold out wings can't cut much of anything and they are aluminum, the stuff you say can't cut steel. The fuel fireballs can't be accounted for by JASSM's. Your entire argument hinges on bent flanges w/resp to the wing angle. You assumed that you knew the dynamic geometry of a 757 wing cutting the columns.
Explain how those small wings can cut steel. Explain how the fireball was formed. You are unable to support your theory and can only bluff.
In the second half of the 20th century, the burgeoning American media was co-opted by something called Operation Mockingbird, the CIA's subversion of the free press in America. Frank Wisner, who ran the project in the 1940s and 1950s for the Agency, once famously said that the American media was like his own "...personal Wurlitzer; I can play any tune I want on it and America will follow along."
In the 1970s, CIA director William Colby admitted, "The CIA owns assets at every major media outlet in America, TV networks, newspapers, publishing houses, and magazines."
In a 1977 Rolling Stone article, Carl Bernstein estimated that there were hundreds, perhaps thousands, of CIA-friendly assets at all the major TV networks, newspapers and periodicals in America.
We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false. -- William Casey, CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)
Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by Yankee451
The missiles can't do it, Yankee. The fold out wings can't cut much of anything and they are aluminum, the stuff you say can't cut steel. The fuel fireballs can't be accounted for by JASSM's. Your entire argument hinges on bent flanges w/resp to the wing angle. You assumed that you knew the dynamic geometry of a 757 wing cutting the columns.
Explain how those small wings can cut steel. Explain how the fireball was formed. You are unable to support your theory and can only bluff.