Now I know that FOX news is made up of tin foil hats people.....

but.... they (FOX) do have it on video....

... when the second jet approached the WTC, their (FOX's) reporter observed (and the video shows) that there were no passenger windows on the jet.

He stated emphatically that this plane was not from "here" or any commercial airport.

He and the cameraman must have been very hung over... or something.

:disgust

Slowly but surely, the truth is coming out.

if any of the stories about the US gov't having sumthin to do with it happened to be true that would crush the USA!

by the way,how many days do we have left with our backwoods genious anyway?

I can't even read this board anymore..... [shakes head ruefully]

I'm really bored tonight so I'll answer the questions addressed in this article. Don't blast me too much for this; I'm just being very general. Most of the questions about the WWC involve things that had never happened in real life before, so pretty much anything is possible so much as I'm concerned.

Q: In the history of structural engineering, steel-frame high-rise buildings have never been brought down due to fires either before or since 9/11, so how can fires have brought down three in one day? How is this possible?
A: This is the first time a fucking airliner crashed into the top of a building spreading out tens of thousands of gallons of aviation fuel.

Q: The BBC has reported that at least five of the nineteen alleged "hijackers" have turned up alive and well living in Saudi Arabia, yet according to the FBI, they were among those killed in the attacks. How is this possible?
A: My last name isn't all too common, yet I'm surprised at how many people share my full name. I'm pretty sure if this was true it would have been exposed in the first forty-eight hours. In fact, if this was true, why don't they just take some video footage of them or something to expose this "lie'.

Q: Frank DeMartini, a project manager for the WTC, said the buildings were designed with load redistribution capabilities to withstand the impact of airliners, whose effects would be like "puncturing mosquito netting with a pencil." Yet they completely collapsed. How is this possible?
A: I'm sure it was designed to withstand the impact of jetliners. However, designing something and in this case testing it is too different things. I'm pretty confident that no one has smashed jet planes into a one hundred story bulkding before. At the same time, in fact, the buildings did continue to stand. It wasn't the planes hitting the towers that brought them down, but the fire.

Q: Since the melting point of steel is about 2,700*F, the temperature of jet fuel fires does not exceed 1,800*F under optimal conditions, and UL certified the steel used to 2,000*F for six hours, the buildings cannot have collapsed due to heat from the fires. How is this possible?
A: Well, I'll just have to assume that this is true because I don't give a fuck about how hot steel needs to be before melting. First, how do we know the fire wasn't above 2,700*F? Think about all the other things that caught fire in there afterwards. Then factor in that the towers don't have any center supports; The weaight was carried by the steel on the outer edges of the bulilding. When you think that four or five floors worth of steel was destroyed when the plane hit the building PLUS the resulting fire, well, pretty much anything is possible, isn't it?

Q: Flight 77, which allegedly hit the building, left the radar screen in the vicinity of the Ohio/Kentucky border, only to "reappear" in very close proximity to the Pentagon shortly before impact. How is this possible?
A: I'm not a radar expert, but I'm pretty sure that the US doesn't have wall to wall radar coverage. Large cities like NYC might, but not every place between Ohio/Kentucky and Washington DC does. I'd imagine that these radar tracking stations aren't hooked together; They don't take a plane on radar and pass them off to another tracking station; They can't because there would be too many gaps. Also, you need to define "close proximity". Does the Pentagon have it's own radar? I doubt this. Thus, they must have been using the radar of one of the local airports which was how far away?

Q: Foreign "terrorists" who were clever enough to coordinate hijacking four commercial airliners seemingly did not know that the least damage to the Pentagon would be done by hitting its west wing. How is this possible?
A: Because terrorists are stupid and were unable to fly an airplane.

Q: A former Inspector General for the Air Force has observed that Flight 93, which allegedly crashed in Pennsylvania, should have left debris scattered over an area less than the size of a city block; but it is scattered over an area of about eight square miles. How is this possible?
A: I would imagine that anything is possible when an airplane of this size crashes. Maybe parts of the damn plane fell off as it was crashing down and the wings and the tail ended up coming down miles from where the body landed.

Q: A tape recording of interviews with air traffic controllers on duty on 9/11 was deliberately crushed, cut into very small pieces, and distributed in assorted places to insure its total destruction. How is this possible?
A: Pretty fucking simple really. They crushed the tape, cut it into little bits, and then threw the pieces up into the air or something. Not exactly fucking rocket science, is it?

Q: The Pentagon conducted a training exercise called "MASCAL" simulating the crash of a Boeing 757 into the building on 24 October 2000, and yet Condoleezza Rice, among others, has repeatedly asserted that "no one ever imagined" a domestic airplane could be used as a weapon. How is this possible?
A: How many fucking employees does the US Goverment have, how many different agencies, and is Condoleezza Rice aware of every exercise each of different agencies does four years prior. This is a simple statement that's being twisted around. Perhaps she meant to say the her fucking knitting club never imagined this could happen.

Ya THAT! Free submission news source... Breaking story. :uhoh

I agree with many of your points, but not all of them.

: In the history of structural engineering, steel-frame high-rise buildings have never been brought down due to fires either before or since 9/11, so how can fires have brought down three in one day? How is this possible?
A: This is the first time a fucking airliner crashed into the top of a building spreading out tens of thousands of gallons of aviation fuel.

I am sure that with computer modeling, adding in the exact specs on the construction, this can very easily be answered. And some of the oldschool engineers just know what they hell they are doing.



Q: The BBC has reported that at least five of the nineteen alleged "hijackers" have turned up alive and well living in Saudi Arabia, yet according to the FBI, they were among those killed in the attacks. How is this possible?
A: My last name isn't all too common, yet I'm surprised at how many people share my full name. I'm pretty sure if this was true it would have been exposed in the first forty-eight hours. In fact, if this was true, why don't they just take some video footage of them or something to expose this "lie'.

I believe that they actually have shown some of these guys alive, but never on US television. We watched a program here in mexico, that was filmed in europe somewhere showing the sustects photos from the US, and the actual guys still alive. I think that there were three of them.


Q: Flight 77, which allegedly hit the building, left the radar screen in the vicinity of the Ohio/Kentucky border, only to "reappear" in very close proximity to the Pentagon shortly before impact. How is this possible?
A: I'm not a radar expert, but I'm pretty sure that the US doesn't have wall to wall radar coverage. Large cities like NYC might, but not every place between Ohio/Kentucky and Washington DC does. I'd imagine that these radar tracking stations aren't hooked together; They don't take a plane on radar and pass them off to another tracking station; They can't because there would be too many gaps. Also, you need to define "close proximity". Does the Pentagon have it's own radar? I doubt this. Thus, they must have been using the radar of one of the local airports which was how far away?


I have more than 800 hours of flight time in small aircraft, and I would have to say that 90% of the major metro areas are covered. And if the Public airports could not track them, the military sure could have.

Q: A former Inspector General for the Air Force has observed that Flight 93, which allegedly crashed in Pennsylvania, should have left debris scattered over an area less than the size of a city block; but it is scattered over an area of about eight square miles. How is this possible?
A: I would imagine that anything is possible when an airplane of this size crashes. Maybe parts of the damn plane fell off as it was crashing down and the wings and the tail ended up coming down miles from where the body landed.


This airplane did NOT explode in mid air. Like the lockerbee jet crash. This was said to have been forced down by either the struggle with the " hijackers " or because no one was flying it any longer. There for it would have crashed more like an egg being dropped, rather than being skipped across a floor.

But hey. Thats just my :2 cents:

fiddy 9/11 hoax

i sell short tinfoil hat :pimp

Who flew the planes into the buildings then?

A number of people on those planes using their cellphones said it was Arabic hijackers.

Do we have secret CIA Arabic suicide terrorist?

Were the planes hijacked with a hi-tech device that remotely took over the controls?

Are all the alleged family members of the victims whom received phone calls really CIA agents spreading propaganda through the media..

How about Moussaoui who was arrested on charges affilated with 911?

:helpme

This conspiracy is almost as absurd as the missle hitting the Pentagon one :1orglaugh

http://www.youre.nu/m.php?media=bush-snb&cat=wmv
http://www.youre.nu/m.php?media=kerry-snb&cat=wmv
http://www.youre.nu/m.php?media=limbaugh-snb&cat=wmv

and the cliff notes:

http://www.youre.nu/m.php?media=bush-starwars&cat=wmv

download "confronting the evidence" off a torrent site or get it from reopen911.org, theres some interesting stuff on there for sure, some strange occurances, lots of patriotic "turkeys" with their heads in the sand, time to open your minds and look at the ideas etc. brought forward by these "non loony" professors, physics doctors etc.. instead of just looking like an idiot and saying anyone that "looks outside the box" is a moron u are the moron for having a closed mind and having your head too far up Bushes ass crack :-)

we are not an Islam country and they don't hate us

Come'on guys. Most of you are talking shit. The fact is that two fucking tall buildings got hit by an aircraft and then collapsed...end of story.

Not even George Bush could talk any normal being into flying an aircraft into buildings. You can talk an arab into doing anything as long as he get his virgins at the completion of the job.

Get a fucking life. This is a beat-up by a couple of ex-Murdock journalists who would eat shit just to get a story on the networks. Next they will be telling us that Tom Cruise is straight, but just has a problem with getting a horn when women are around. I am sure most of you would believe it after reading this thread.

Lyn from Oz

Someone should investigate how a politcal party gets all these keyboard warriors to continually spread their message.

Also, wouldn't it be easier for the keyboard warriors to investigate the source of their message than the 100 of thousands of people that would have to have been in on the 9/11 conspiracy. You know, including democrats and families of dead democrats.

These idiots would have you believe that 9/11 was the first attack on the trade towers and Billy Clinton's first words after he saw them wasn't "Bin Laden".

I'm too lazy to post the sleepy smilies.

Very interesting pieces of facts.

The truth will get out.

The White House, the Pentagon and their co-conspirators have become the biggest fabricator of lies in world history. And poor us, they almost had us fooled.

i can't believe there are fucking idiots saying that the planes that hit had no windows, were not commercial planes etc. what kind of moron can be so fucking stupid as to think that something like this would be planned to happen in front of 10,000,000.00 people, in the middle of a bright, clear sunny day with the planners expecting that no one would notice it was not a passenger plane?

I wish we could just go back to the '70's. Life was so much more relaxing back then.

:1orglaugh

It was a FOX News reporter LIVE ON THE SCENE.

Here's the clip: http://911inplanesite.com/media/nowindows.wmv

so fucking what?? some asshole is staring up into the sun watching a plane slam into a building at 400 miles per hour. what about all the other countless 1000's or 10's of thousands that were watching the same thing?

Here is a pic of the plane

http://www.911inplanesite.com/images2005/top_1.jpg

and here is a blowup, showing an abnormal protrusion on bottom of the plane

http://www.911inplanesite.com/images2005/top_2.jpg

draw your own conclusions

http://www.911inplanesite.com/images2005/top_3.jpg

you're right. no one noticed this but a few scattered lunatics on the web. good job sherlock. i expect that you will have blown this whole case wide open and have found the real culprits soon.

your "theory" relies on 2 pretty important factors.

1) that no one was going to actually look up when the plane flew low over the city and into an office building

2) that the planners of this "hoax" were apparently perfect planners and missed some pretty fucking obvious details

Hoax or not, I think we are not that stupid to really believe in all their lies.

I'm not saying I believe it, but I'm not so willing to discount it either. Hitler used a similar tactic to gain the backing of the Germans and then also used 'terrorism' as an excuse to wipe out Germanys constitution and everything else he did.

So why is it so far out of the realm of possibility that it couldnt happen here?
The ONLY people that benefited from 9/11 is the Bush admin. And here we are almost 5 years later and Bush still cannot make a speech without mentioning 9/11 or terrorism. Don't you find that odd? Why did Bush have such a problem with a 9/11 commission? Why did Bush lie and say he saw the first plane hit the tower when obviously there was no tv footage? Why did he stay in that classroom after being told we were under attack? Why did he try to confuse the American public with Saddam and 9/11? Why has he only mentioned bin Ladens name once in the past two years yet he mentions terrorism daily?

Anyone who refuses to question these events either has their head so far up Bush's ass that they can't see or they are just plain ignorant.

I love these threads.

Consider the logic. Millions of people with billions of dollars would have spent it to prove what these kids believe. Crap, the evidence was right here on gfy all along.

If they weren't smart enough to use you to prove the biggest conspiracy in the history of the world, are they smart enough to be running our country?


lol, bump for you.