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.

 

New Footage 9/11 Second Tower Explosion Incredibly Clear Video From Helicopter - Where Is The Plane?

page: 33
106
<< 30  31  32    34  35  36 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by pianopraze

So that's a yes?

Interesting that all the Pilots and Architects are calling BS on the OS...


No it's your misinterpretation of facts. P4T and the Architects for truth are a small proportion that obviously fall for conspiracy theories. As I suggested go over to PPRuNe and put forward your videos. See how many of them will agree with the findings and rush to sign up for P4T?

Go back and examine your reply to Zorgon's post. Seriously you find that 'positive proof'? And you wonder why people take you to task over your 'Geo Engineering' and aviation theories? It is utter ignorance of aviation that leads you to support Zorgon's post. Did it ever cross your mind to do any research on the images that he posted rather than just blindly starring and posting in blind faith?




posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:02 PM
link   
reply to post by tommyjo
 

You do know the feds confiscated all public footage of the Pentagon "crash", right?
4 or 5 frames were released only....



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird

"every pilot you know"? How many? What are their qualifications??
There was nothing "impossible" about any of the flights of 9/11. Not one thing.



ATP Commercial Rating, more than the fingers on my two hands,
and I am not an alien, so that would be...nvmd....let me do the math for you...

fingers on my hand (left) = 5
fingers on my hand (right) =5

5+5 = 10

so I personally know more than 10 pilots. And then a few.

They all know beyond a doubt that 9/11 is a monstrous lie.

edit on 15-3-2012 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:09 PM
link   
reply to post by pianopraze
 





Interesting that all the Pilots and Architects are calling BS on the OS...


Sorry PP, I have to disagree with you on this one.

I just depends in which order you put the words in the google machine.

there are plenty of engineers

just another example

These are just a couple of links after doing a quick google search.

There are many qualified engineers and architects that know how and why the towers fell.

It just seems that most want to ignore these people and jump right to the truther's.

Hmm, why is that.

It seems that people only see what they want to see.

As far as the pilot thing goes.

We have one right here on ATS that says it is possible.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:14 PM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 


Sorry, but this is hard to believe (I cannot doubt that you think that they think this).

BTW....just having an ATP, or even a Commercial Certificate, if they have no actual hands-on experience in a Transport Category jet, well then.....perhaps they need some.

Or, they have been fed a pack of lies (from the many, many ridiculous "conspiracy" sites out there) and don't have the full and factual information to properly assess.


Here....I highly suggest your pilot friends read this book...was written by a pilot (so they will be able to relate a lot, I imagine) and is a factual account:

Touching History: The Untold Story of the Drama that Unfolded in the Skies over America on 9/11

In fact, I should drag it out again, been several years since last read it....



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by LightSpeedDriver
reply to post by tommyjo
 

You do know the feds confiscated all public footage of the Pentagon "crash", right?
4 or 5 frames were released only....


Hasn't this been covered repeatedly on ATS? I take it that you are referring to the video tapes?

www.911myths.com...



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by pianopraze
 


Source?:


The people who WROTE the 9/11 report even say it's BS...



What you are probably misunderstanding there (having been led astray by any number of incorrect claims online) is that the Commission were stymied in certain ways, in their fact gathering. Not about the details of the physical events, but the Government's sketchy information about just WHEN they knew, HOW soon and HOW much.

That is the crux of the "cover-up".....it is the Bush Administration's, and the Intelligence community's failures. That is the so-called "BS" that is referred to by the 9/11 Report authors....and, of course, taken completely out of context by the "conspiracy" websites.....



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:19 PM
link   

U.S. Navy 'Top Gun' Pilot Questions 9/11

www.youtube.com...
thats "TOPGUN COMMANDER"

I don't have anthing to add to this guys opinion of 911
Im not a pilot, I'm only occasioanaly a passenger....


I did note the bit where he points out the buildings were designed to withstand the inpact of a jet liner.
edit on 15-3-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



Commander Ralph “Rotten” Kolstad
23,000 hours
27 years in the airlines
B757/767 for 13 years mostly international Captain with American Airlines.
20 years US Navy flying fighters off aircraft carriers, TopGun twice
civilian pilot flying gliders, light airplanes and warbirds
Command time in:
- N644AA (Aircraft dispatched as American 77)
- N334AA (Aircraft dispatched as American 11)

pilotsfor911truth.org...

NOTE this guy ACTUALLY FLEW THE ACTUAL AIRCRAFT!!!

edit on 15-3-2012 by Danbones because: LINKS!!!

edit on 15-3-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:20 PM
link   
reply to post by pianopraze
 


The Jesse Ventura show again?

Rob Balsamo and Rusty Aimer are both misleading in the video.

Dont take my word for it, google v-speeds and learn how and why they are established for certain aircraft.

Balsamo is referring to Vmo (operating speed) which is limited to 250kts below 10,000 ft because the windscreen isn't rated to withstand bird-strikes over 300kts, it is not a structural limit. Vne (Never exceed) is considerably higher and even then there is a 10% margin.

Rusty Aimer states at 2:30 that the wings fall off at 500kts then they go on to exceed 500kts in the garage simulator at 3:40 (assuming the flight model is close to being accurate) clearly in control.

The crash in the simulator seems silly and contrived as well. A little right rudder would have corrected the "fatal" roll.

500 kts is.75 mach at a standard atmosphere, a 757-200 has plenty of rudder authority at .75 and the entire premise as presented is flawed.

Proudbird, please correct me if I am mistaken.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Major General Albert "Bert" N. Stubblebine III, head of all intelligence says:

www.youtube.com...
re the pentagon "It was NOT an airplane!"



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Missile Witness Cut Out

www.youtube.com...

who knew?



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:29 PM
link   
I have seen both planes hit the towers. I am a pilot and I would of had a hard time with this.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Capt. Russ Wittenberg, U.S. Air Force – Retired commercial pilot. Flew for Pan Am and United Airlines for 35 years. Aircraft flown: Boeing 707, 720, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, and 777. 30,000+ total hours flown. Had previously flown the actual two United Airlines aircraft that were hijacked on 9/11 (Flight 93, which impacted in Pennsylvania, and Flight 175, the second plane to hit the WTC). Former U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions.

Video interview 9/11 Ripple Effect 8/07: "I flew the two actual aircraft which were involved in 9/11; the Fight number 175 and Flight 93, the 757 that allegedly went down in Shanksville and Flight 175 is the aircraft that's alleged to have hit the South Tower. I don't believe it's possible for, like I said, for a terrorist, a so-called terrorist to train on a [Cessna] 172, then jump in a cockpit of a 757-767 class cockpit, and vertical navigate the aircraft, lateral navigate the aircraft, and fly the airplane at speeds exceeding it's design limit speed by well over 100 knots, make high-speed high-banked turns, exceeding -- pulling probably 5, 6, 7 G's. And the aircraft would literally fall out of the sky. I couldn't do it and I'm absolutely positive they couldn't do it."

americanbuddhist.net...



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


So why apply fireprrofing to steel if doesn't make a difference ....?

Ordinary room contents fire can reach 1200 F in few minutes

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

I take it you never had to drag a line into a building - would realize just how hot things are.....



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:36 PM
link   

It’s roughly a 100 ton airplane. And an airplane that weighs 100 tons all assembled is still going to have 100 tons of disassembled trash and parts after it hits a building. There was no wreckage from a 757 at the Pentagon. … The vehicle that hit the Pentagon was not Flight 77. We think, as you may have heard before, it was a cruise missile."
911underground.com...


Article 7/17/05: "The government story they handed us about 9/11 is total B.S. plain and simple." … Wittenberg convincingly argued there was absolutely no possibility that Flight 77 could have "descended 7,000 feet in two minutes, all the while performing a steep 280 degree banked turn before crashing into the Pentagon's first floor wall without touching the lawn."…


Wittenberg again
edit on 15-3-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)


all you talk pilot types please note
this guy ACTUALLY FLEW THE ACTUAL PLANES INVOLVED AT ONE TIME OR ANOTHER


Captain Russ Wittenberg (ret)
30,000+ Total Flight Time
707, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, 777, DC-8, L-1049, Learjet 24/25, L-188
Ground Instructor, Advanced Ground Instructor, Instrument Instructor, Flight Engineer Turbojet
Aircraft Dispatcher
Pan Am, United
United States Air Force (ret)
Over 100 Combat Missions Flown
Command time in:
- N591UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 93)
- N612UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 175)


pilotsfor911truth.org...
so he certainly trumps the armchair guys
edit on 15-3-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-3-2012 by Danbones because: LINKS!!!



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:39 PM
link   
reply to post by pianopraze
 


Lying as usual ...

The plane you picture was a takeoff accident from Teterboros airport in 2006 - plane tried to abort takeoff and skidded off runway across highway into warehouse


The twin-engine Canadair, Challenger 600 skidded off the runway, through the fence, across Route 46 striking several cars before crashing into Strawberry clothing warehouse.


www.hasbrouck-heights.com...

Big difference in crashing building at 500 mph and takeoff accident......

Truthers like to lie by posting things which have no relevance then twist the facts to suit them



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 


Ah, old Stubblebine!!

Yeah....credibility factor = zero.

He knows nothing, has no "insider" knowledge! He is just like the rest out there who flap their lips based on armchair "sleuthing" of photos....and usually influenced (and thus biased) from the outset by the "conspiracy" sites. He is a classic "argument form authority" because he thinks his years of studying satellite photos somehow relates to studying photos from 9/11....but, the problem is he's not getting all of the evidence to view, and is making incorrect assumptions as a result.

In that impromptu interview he says (possibly, a "truth" to him) that there were no "wing marks" on the Pentagon facade wall.

This is incorrect...and if he did proper research, then he would realize his mistake. He is also misinformed when he thinks he was told that one wing "hit the ground" and "broke off".

His opinion is useless in light of all the real evidence. He is even one of the "NYC Towers were taken down by explosives" nutters. He is stuck on the "melting steel" nonsense meme.......Sorry, the guy is out of his league.


Guess what?

This photo is in the Best Thread On ATS:



(This Post)




That thread should be required reading for everyone.......



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:49 PM
link   

January 14, 2008 – Twenty-five former U.S. military officers have severely criticized the official account of 9/11 and called for a new investigation.
They include former commander of U.S. Army Intelligence, Major General Albert Stubblebine, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense,
Col. Ronald D. Ray, two former staff members of the Director of the National Security Agency; Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, PhD, and Major John M. Newman, PhD, and many others. They are among the rapidly growing number of military and intelligence service veterans, scientists, engineers, and architects challenging the government’s story. The officers’ statements appear below, listed alphabetically.

“A lot of these pieces of information, taken together, prove that the official story, the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 is a bunch of hogwash. It’s impossible,” said Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret).1
With doctoral degrees in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering, Col.Bowman served as Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter.
“There’s a second group of facts having to do with the cover up,” continued Col. Bowman. “Taken together these things prove that high levels of our government don’t want us to know what happened and who’s
responsible.
Who gained from 9/11? Who covered up crucial information about 9/11? And who put out the patently false stories about 9/11 in the first place? When you take those three things together, I think the case is pretty clear that it’s highly placed individuals in the administration with all roads passing through Dick Cheney.”
Regarding the failure of NORAD to intercept the four hijacked planes


patriotsquestion911.com...

NON EXISTANT TRUTHER MOVEMENT !!!???
it is to LULZ sais I...It is to LULZ


No wonder lil dick is afraid to come to Canada...
edit on 15-3-2012 by Danbones because: formatting from PDF at link



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by pianopraze
 


Source?:


The people who WROTE the 9/11 report even say it's BS...



What you are probably misunderstanding there (having been led astray by any number of incorrect claims online) is that the Commission were stymied in certain ways, in their fact gathering. Not about the details of the physical events, but the Government's sketchy information about just WHEN they knew, HOW soon and HOW much.

That is the crux of the "cover-up".....it is the Bush Administration's, and the Intelligence community's failures. That is the so-called "BS" that is referred to by the 9/11 Report authors....and, of course, taken completely out of context by the "conspiracy" websites.....


How about this guy, who called it a "national scandle" and when he stared to get into it on NPR he was basically shut up?

CLELAND: Let's talk about that here. This commission was formed about mid-December, the 9/11 Commission. We were supposed to use the joint inquiry report as a launching pad to get into this issue of not only fixing the intelligence community, but moving beyond, and getting into what is the al Qaeda all about? What is this terrorist global network that we're fighting? A new kind of war and all that.

Well, the independent, bi-partisan commission, hello, didn't even get the stuff 'til a few weeks ago.

I'm saying that's deliberate. I am saying that the delay in relating this information to the American public out of a hearing… series of hearings, that several members of Congress knew eight or ten months ago, including Bob Graham and others, that was deliberately slow walked… the 9/11 Commission was deliberately slow walked, because the Administration's policy was, and its priority was, we're gonna take Saddam Hussein out.

SESNO: Senator, do you have any documentation or any proof to back up this very serious charge of yours that this was deliberate besides your own…

CLELAND: Well, first of all…

SESNO: …hunch or gut?

CLELAND: …it's obvious.

SESNO: No, no, no, no…

CLELAND: But… but…

SESNO: …but beyond… but beyond being obvious, let me press…

CLELAND: First of all the war in Iraq…

SESNO: …you on this…

CLELAND: Yeah, okay.

NPR transcription.

Calling it national scandal = BS in my book...

In Context he is saying they delayed and stymied the 9/11 commission so they could implement a policy... which i linked to in my OP from the neocon think tank.

Originally posted by pianopraze
reply to post by burntheships
 


Operation Northwoods told me everything I needed to know.

This was the beginning of their bid for all out control.

project for a new american century - neocon thinktank


This was a false flag attack to implement a pre determined war of aggression.

What did we get out of it?

TRILLIONS of dollars going to Bushes family, friends, and business interests like Halliburton etc...

Increased control of the american public by the Patriot act and worse sense...

This was a Coup. And we are seeing this play out daily on ATS. NDAA, SOPA, PIPA, ACTA, ect ad nauseum.

That's just one of many examples.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by Danbones
 


Ah, old Stubblebine!!

Yeah....credibility factor = zero.

He knows nothing, has no "insider" knowledge! He is just like the rest out there who flap their lips based on armchair "sleuthing" of photos....and usually influenced (and thus biased) from the outset by the "conspiracy" sites. He is a classic "argument form authority" because he thinks his years of studying satellite photos somehow relates to studying photos from 9/11....but, the problem is he's not getting all of the evidence to view, and is making incorrect assumptions as a result.

In that impromptu interview he says (possibly, a "truth" to him) that there were no "wing marks" on the Pentagon facade wall.

This is incorrect...and if he did proper research, then he would realize his mistake. He is also misinformed when he thinks he was told that one wing "hit the ground" and "broke off".

His opinion is useless in light of all the real evidence. He is even one of the "NYC Towers were taken down by explosives" nutters. He is stuck on the "melting steel" nonsense meme.......Sorry, the guy is out of his league.


Guess what?

This photo is in the Best Thread On ATS:



(This Post)




That thread should be required reading for everyone.......




RIGHT the top guy in the US at what he does which is intelligence...as connected to the inside as anyone could possibly be and miles above your level of credibility ..I'll take his word for it over yours..

So....who are YOU to question HIM?


100 tons of airplane ...one hundred tons of wreckage...

edit on 15-3-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
106
<< 30  31  32    34  35  36 >>

log in

join