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.

 

What Happened to the Planes? 911 and Logic

page: 1
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Greetings, ATS!

I’ve been looking into the 911 conspiracy issues for the past couple of months. I know there’s a plethora of 911 threads on ATS already, but I’d like to make this thread different.

I’m aware that many folks don’t believe a plane hit the Pentagon, or that a plane crashed in Shanksville. Recently, to my surprise, I discovered that some folks even question whether or not the passenger planes hit the WTC. According to a few threads I’ve read, the other theories about what hit the WTC include remote-controlled military plane, a missile, or even a hologram.

I don’t have the expertise to debate the impact sites at the Pentagon, the WTC, and Shanksville. I can’t intelligently discuss what caused the WTC buildings to collapse the way they did, or even if that collapse was unusual. I have to accept what the professionals tell me, and I’m very well aware that the professionals disagree, sometimes quite vehemently. So I decided to take a different route.

Here’s what I’d like to do. Let’s use logic and discuss only one issue: WHAT HAPPENED TO THE PLANES? Where did the planes go, if they didn’t crash into the WTC, Shanksville, or the Pentagon? Did the planes fly to some unknown location where the passengers and crew were executed? If so, why?

To me, it seems illogical to fly a missile into the Pentagon and attempt to pass it off as a passenger plane. After all, there were witnesses who saw the plane (and personally, I think I’d remember a plane crashing a couple hundred yards away). More importantly, why use a missile instead of the actual plane? Was it to cause less or more destruction? And if you use a missile, what happened to the plane?

If the 911 attacks were planned by the government to raise support for the War on Terror, then it would be counter-productive to use a missile instead of a plane. This sounds callous, but I believe it to be true; to really enrage the public, you would prefer a higher body count. It would, in that light, make more sense to crash the plane into the Pentagon. Same with the WTC and Shanksville.

So, to recap: this thread is to discuss the logic of the 911 attacks and not to debate free falling buildings, debris fields, etc. ATS has a wonderful reservoir of bright and analytical minds, and I look forward to reading the different viewpoints and ideas.




posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 06:36 PM
link   
I can't make an educated decision on the world trade center, because of the gigantic buildings and the height.

But I have been a 1st responder at a jet crash, and I can tell you without a doubt in my mind. That the pentagon incident was no passenger aircraft.

The amount of debris and wreckage that should have been strewn about the area would have left no question as to what impacted the building.

These are the only facts that I am sure of. Everything else in my opinion is up for debate.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 06:37 PM
link   
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


I like your logic and I'm marking this thread to check back on and see if anything but the usual 911 trolling comes to address it. It's the one thing I can never get past myself. We *KNOW* as absolute, unquestioned FACT that 4 aircraft loaded with passengers and crew took off that morning. We have Airport tapes of everything from the Hijackers coming through security to the passengers boarding at the gates. We know this happened. There is not a question.

So.. Indeed. Where DID they go if not all over lower Manhattan, Shanksville and the lawn of the Pentagon? They did have to go somewhere and with a few hundred people and pilot crew. To my knowledge, not a single one of them was ever seen alive again by anyone. Not even an oddball Elvis type claim on this one.

So,...As you say.. What is the answer to this mystery? Has to be one...if the rest is to make sense.

edit on 6-4-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



To add a little here...

United States v. Zacarias Moussaoui - Case # 01-455-A

That links to the full and complete repository of *EVERY* item of evidence used in the only 9/11 trial to come so far. (KLM may rehash this..who knows). Included are the photos, diagrams, transcipts, testimony of witnesses and other material. The Gov't put this together and online for wide open public view in a unique move for a fedral criminal case. They specifically did it so questions like this could be more easily examined and answered with the literal facts and evidence as it exists.

Hope that helps

edit on 6-4-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: Added case link and explanation



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 06:39 PM
link   
reply to post by watchitburn
 


Without going into gruesome details, can you describe the jet crash? I mean, did it hit a building or just go straight to the ground? The jet fuel...was it burning when you arrived and if so, how hot would you speculate it was? The debris field, what were the largest parts found?

Star for you, thanks!



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 06:46 PM
link   
As to the logic, Hhmmm.

Well allegedly all the information connected to the several Trillion dollars that the DoD could not account for was supposedly stored in the exact location that the plane struck.

In my opinion(which doesn't mean anything) Is that an aircraft impact would be too chaotic to accurately predict whether or not all the necessary information would be irretrievably destroyed. But a JSOW missile


is easily confused with an aircraft. And because of it's design, can be much more reliable in destroying a given target.

just my two cents



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 06:51 PM
link   
Who knows what happened... many questions...

...but one thing that is clear is that the claims of those who support the official story are so RIDICULOUS that it is almost easier to believe that a Leprechaun jumped out of a hoovering weather balloon that day and waved a magical wand at the planes and buildings making them disappear into pixie dust...

They must take the public as being awfully stupid people.
edit on 6-4-2012 by HangTheTraitors because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by HangTheTraitors
Sadly, the claims of the official story supporters are so RIDICULOUS that it is almost easier to believe that a Leprechaun jumped out of a weather balloon that day and waved a magical wand at the planes and buildings making them disappear into pixie dust...

They must take the public as being awfully stupid people.
edit on 6-4-2012 by HangTheTraitors because: (no reason given)


What claims are you referring to?



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 06:56 PM
link   
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


The debris field was easily as far as 300 meters from the impact point. Which was a pond. The largest part of the wreckage was slightly smaller than a city bus, and approximately 60 meters from the impact point.

Bear in mind this was complete chaos, and occurred 5 years ago. There were fires every where. The point of impact was in a pond about 150 ft. to the left of a 2 story house. The house caught on fire from the crash.

We found the pilot about 200 meters from the crash site still in the ejection seat leaning face first against a tree.(which is probably irrelevant to Sept 11.)



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by smyleegrl

Originally posted by HangTheTraitors
Sadly, the claims of the official story supporters are so RIDICULOUS that it is almost easier to believe that a Leprechaun jumped out of a weather balloon that day and waved a magical wand at the planes and buildings making them disappear into pixie dust...

They must take the public as being awfully stupid people.
edit on 6-4-2012 by HangTheTraitors because: (no reason given)


What claims are you referring to?


The question in the title of the thread.

My little fictional story makes more sense than the "official" answers we receive.


edit on 6-4-2012 by HangTheTraitors because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


I haven't even read your OP, because the Title was too funny to pass up!!

You put 9/11 ......... and ......... Logic within 3 words of each other!


Doesn't matter which side of the argument someone is on, we can all agree those two words have no business being in any kind of proximity when it comes to a discussion of 9/11!!



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


I haven't even read your OP, because the Title was too funny to pass up!!

You put 9/11 ......... and ......... Logic within 3 words of each other!


Doesn't matter which side of the argument someone is on, we can all agree those two words have no business being in any kind of proximity when it comes to a discussion of 9/11!!


While I agree the two terms are rarely seen together, I had hoped to change that...

Star for you because you at least read the title.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 07:07 PM
link   
what happened to all the information on the black boxes in the planes?
Also, why is there a huge boulder over the top of where the plane is supposed to have hit the ground in the field and also, about 4 years before it hit, there was a photograph taken fom a satellite of exactly the same spot and it was a long indentation which is explained now to have been made by the wings of the plane!
look at the craters made in lockerbie when a plane was blown up in the sky, this one was supposed to have hit the ground!
why do you let the american people be fobbed off with this fairytail of lies and deceipt?
in the twin towers there is many questions to be asked, as is the pentagon, then we have the news saying a plane had crashed at camp david even though it hadn't.
also, the bbc reporter saying a building had collapsed when right behind her it was clearly seen.
why did the towers and building 7 free fall into their selves? did the recent russian tower blaze collapse when it was badly hit with fire? no! Have any others collapsed the same way anywhere in the world? No!
why were the rescuers told it was safe to breathe the air when a lot of them are dying today due to breathing problems?
too many questions, very little answers........



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 07:07 PM
link   
There is so much confusion about the whole day. I can't understand why the most secure building in the world with so many cameras watching everybody’s move would not catch even a glimpse of what happened that day. The gate camera fiasco is just silly and there must be other clear footage apart from that time-lapse rubbish they have pumped out to the media.

I have been lucky in life to fly quite a few aircraft for a living. One thing I can say with hand on heart, that under those conditions (heart going a million miles an hour, not really knowing the aircraft, just about to kill myself etc etc) I could not line that aircraft up enough to accurately hit a small wall in a building that high. Sure, we land aircraft every day and they come down to that height but the aircraft id set up for it (Flaps, gear, rpm all down) and the aircraft is moving slowly. One twitch of the wrist at that speed at that height trying to line yourself up with a small wall (Relative to aircraft)..........no way. Sure with plenty of practice you might get near..........but were they just lucky? No. I believe you need something a lot more accurate for hitting buildings at speed..........I think they call them missiles?



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by HangTheTraitors

Originally posted by smyleegrl

Originally posted by HangTheTraitors
Sadly, the claims of the official story supporters are so RIDICULOUS that it is almost easier to believe that a Leprechaun jumped out of a weather balloon that day and waved a magical wand at the planes and buildings making them disappear into pixie dust...

They must take the public as being awfully stupid people.
edit on 6-4-2012 by HangTheTraitors because: (no reason given)


What claims are you referring to?


The question in the title of the thread.

My little fictional story makes more sense than the "official" answers we receive.


edit on 6-4-2012 by HangTheTraitors because: (no reason given)


I'm sorry, maybe I'm completely dense or perhaps my five year old is causing my brain to atrophy, but I don't understand. Are you saying that the official story supporters (who believe 911 was a terror attack, pure and simple) are supporting their claims with nonsense? Or do you mean those who question whether or not the planes hit are the ones making the silly claims? I did read a thread the other day that I found rather absurd, claiming that the planes and passengers never existed.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 07:19 PM
link   
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


OK, because of your nice response to my sarcasm, I did go read your OP, and I have successfully avoided 9/11 threads for quite a long time now! I put some thorough research and lengthy posts into debunking the notion that fires brought down the towers, and I used the NTSB reports and existing Fire Safety code, and known properties of steel and other things in that research, but it fell on deaf ears and became an exercise in futility.

Still, the question you ask, in my opinion, is one of the least logical and most difficult to answer. There is no way to debate it logically. We can debate the tower collapses logically based on a lot of known science and research and construction techniques, but we can only speculate about what might have happened to those planes, and those people.

It isn't far-fetched to say a faction that would shoot a missile at its own headquarters could also murder a handful of people on a plane and dispose of the plane. Of course, it sounds rather paranoid and crazy, so the topic is often avoided in favor of easier topics. I do not believe a plane hit the Pentagon, but I am certain 2 planes hit the towers.

I know people in Aviation, and in Military, and nobody has any logical explanation for why the Shanksville or Pentagon planes would not have already been shot down anyway. To me, there is no reason to think the Shanksville thing was faked. I think it was probably shot down and not just crashed, and I think the government would have been better off admitting to that, instead of looking so inept in their response. I think the circular hole in the Pentagon, with the workers walking right out of it, and little to no debris in the way is evidence of a missile, not a plane.

The few things I feel certain of regarding 9/11 are this:
1. Airliners hit the towers. I know eyewitnesses that saw this, and I believe them.
2. A missile hit the Pentagon.
3. The towers did not fall from fire alone. I don't know if it was squibbs, or structural cuts, or pre-loaded demolition, or if there was some miraculous explosive aboard the airliners, but I know it was not fire.
4. It was not 11 amateur hijacker/pilots with box cutters. No way the black boxes were destroyed but the passports and boxcutters survived. Just no way.

And, on another note, I know, with 100% certainty, that the TSB and DHS and Airport Scanners, and 4 oz. restrictions have done nothing whatsoever to protect us from any real threat. Sure, they deter the lone nutters and amateurs, but they don't even phase the equipped and educated enemies that we are supposed to be afraid of. Even my FBI buddies laugh and scoff at the notion that those restrictions are anything more than PR stunts. They are there to make the average citizen feel safer, just like the absurd color chart.
edit on 6-4-2012 by getreadyalready because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-4-2012 by getreadyalready because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 07:21 PM
link   
Heres a few questions from my own observations...
What kind of rortor was depicted at the pentagon?
There are several pictures of the engine rotor or hub of same....
This piece should have serial numbers on it that identify the engine it came from, either specific, or type.....
The thing in no way looks like it came from a 757 which has and engine intake about 8 ft dia...
The same for the engine which landed so conveniently UNDER a construction platform, covering the sidewalk where it suposedly knocked a street sign down and landed beside the post. just under the construction overhang...
Wheres the ser#? what did it match?
It looks suspiciously like its too small to also be a 757 engine....
If a whole plane crashed in the Shanksville hole, which was there the year before the crash,then what were all the pieces scattered over the countryside?
There is an airport that stores airplanes in arizona that belongs to the CIA (who has had the worlds biggest airplane services)This place stores those same aircraft, i suggest they were flown back to the airport in arizona and stored away with deferent tail numbers, or even wrecked.....for parts or whatever....
It is from this airport, that the highjackers learned to fly 757s according to some sources....
There is also some question as to the type of plane which hit tower #1....
There are witnesses who plainly state "that was no airliner...."
Others have said it had no windows...
Its possible they used an old KC135 Tanker aircraft to hit this tower by the look of it.....
my 2 cents......



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainBeno
There is so much confusion about the whole day. I can't understand why the most secure building in the world with so many cameras watching everybody’s move would not catch even a glimpse of what happened that day. The gate camera fiasco is just silly and there must be other clear footage apart from that time-lapse rubbish they have pumped out to the media.

I have been lucky in life to fly quite a few aircraft for a living. One thing I can say with hand on heart, that under those conditions (heart going a million miles an hour, not really knowing the aircraft, just about to kill myself etc etc) I could not line that aircraft up enough to accurately hit a small wall in a building that high. Sure, we land aircraft every day and they come down to that height but the aircraft id set up for it (Flaps, gear, rpm all down) and the aircraft is moving slowly. One twitch of the wrist at that speed at that height trying to line yourself up with a small wall (Relative to aircraft)..........no way. Sure with plenty of practice you might get near..........but were they just lucky? No. I believe you need something a lot more accurate for hitting buildings at speed..........I think they call them missiles?


Thanks for your reply!

Its definently interesting that you are a pilot and have first hand knowledge. I find your description of crashing a plane into a small target like the Pentagon very intriguing. May I ask what type of aircraft you've flown?



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 07:24 PM
link   
I have question for your question. Why "save" the people unless they had plans for them. What kind of sick plans could they have had for the people to make them worth saving? Maybe some government mad scientist experiments? Sending them off world?
If they did not have any plans for them they would not have "saved" them in the first place and just got rid of them in the crash. There is no point in saving them just to take some where else and kill. If they did not die in the crash they may have been better off if they had.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


Couldn't have said it better myself.

Well Done


I heard a story about decorating contractors being in the buildings months before the "attack". Any eveidence on "roll-on" thermite? Or shall we save that for another forum? Ahem.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


737-800's Being the largest.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join