911 NO PLANE BUNKER BUSTER WARHEAD THEORY - IZAKDAVID13

[alphalion360]

@maxcarnage1 of course 9/11 has flaws the whole concept in general is a flaw

[Salsuscanis]

now where am i looking again asshole? You mean the tiny explosion the bomb created compared to the 25 story fire ball the plane made. You people are fucking fantastic. You morons should really start writing books, you would be great fiction writers

[AXKNAX]

I would like to add a little notice. Please take a look onto the youtube video:  "Second plane hit, FOX, 9/11, 21:16" During the 6th second of that video You will see suddenly a rocket trail on the underside of the plane. A second later the plane crashes into the building and cuts through the steel girders of the building as they were only matches. And two seconds later the spike of the plane or of the missile appears on the other side of the building undamned with high speed. That's curious.

[NafffRespect]

@AXKNAX A rocket trail? And may I ask you what drugs you take? Geez!

[KelvongKlein]

just imagine the wtc front steel walling and the wings tips made of aluminum was swiftly cut-through with no resistance to the building, just like a cartoon movie. there should be at least we can see from the clip that wing tips will not go inside the building and will bounce to the air some parts of it. man this is absurd really absurd!! there no such in this world an aluminum wing tip to cut thick metal frame even you fired it with cannon!!!

[NANOFORGE]

@KelvongKlein Planes are not just made from aluminium. They have traces of iron in the airframe and they also have Uranium which is one of the heaviest elements in the universe to act as counter weights to balance the aircraft during flight. All of this plus the added weight of cargo and passagers would make 300 tons, traveling at about 900 kph would produce more energy than over a dozen RPG's. Each plane hitting the building would release about 10 Gigajoules which is, ALOT of energy.

[MaxCarnage1]

911 Has way too many flaws

[puppynamedmoleson100]

that white smoke trail was part of the planes engine that ricocet off the core and exited the tower

[puppynamedmoleson100]

that piece WAS PART OF THE PLANES ENGINE

[aifammafiaaifam]

do they have nucular warhead s on commercial planes? dont think so

[littlehank404]

they could, why not

[Miko5000]

They could, they just didn't.

Duh.

[mlavigne71]

Wow.....Shockingly identical... They are both explosions...So All of those panic-filled good-bye to my family phone-calls must have been made from the wing of a bunker-buster ??

[lewisthecollard]

Oh I get it.

A bunker buster makes explosions. Whatever hit the WTC exploded. THEREFORE THE WTC WAS THE SAME THING AS A HARDENED MILITARY BUNKER AND SO A BUNKER BUSTER HIT THE WTC. QED GODDAMNIT.

FUCK LOGIC LETS SEE SOME MORE EXPLOSIONS HURRRRR

[xapha]

nope. didnt notice any similarities.

especially, since the warhead was not jet detonated when visible while the other thing clearly was "pushed" out by the explosion...

[checkster12]

Stupid. People.

[real1abcda]

why are these idiots still arguing against detonation testomonials . still want to believe theyre corrupt america is the lightbringer of the the wolrd, you ppl are a joke. youre concrete bunker faced two variables that flaw this theory,

1) the projectile is a small piecing weight thats not only going way faster ... its hitting with its speed plus the force of gravity.

2) the towers where made of a steel that was way over a normal melting point (i dont remember the metal)

[Miko5000]

@real1abcda - "still want to believe theyre corrupt america is the lightbringer of the the wolrd"

Hahah. Written from Canada, who consistently brings nothing to the table.

[real1abcda]

thats the point what makes you think you can bring something to the world? last time i checked zionism is only bringing war, drugs, terror,murder and covert operation to what were before peacefull places.

AMERICA BRINGS SHIT TO THE TABLE

[Miko5000]

First, the video is about the 'no plane theory.' Your post basically said if you don't believe in CD you're an idiot, and then went on to arbitrarily bash America (with the writing skill of a 5th grader.) Next, you randomly bring up Zionism?

Canada supports a Jewish state, so I don't get your point. Do you pay taxes? If so, you're a Zionist.

"...to what were before peacefull places."

lol - which ones?

[tomsim22]

when did this happen? ?

[krazymonkey8905]

your retarded

[lgnlint]

"your" lol

[Zaxxon2008]

conspiracies make the simple minded feel safe.

its odd, but true. it is easier for some people to believe a grand conspiracy could cause so much chaos in their lives than to believe a small group of nuts could do the same.

its like JFK. people feel better thinking it took a huge govt conspiracy to take down such a powerful man, than to think it only took 1 nut with a rifle

[kinga303]

well it was 3 shots in like 2 seconds with an old Italian bolt action, so i think "1 nut" might not be the case

ironic though as nuts usually come in pairs

[chiklitz]

actually it was 3 shots in just over 8 seconds

[chiklitz]

i show NO RESPECT for a "movement" based on inhaling gas fumes & watching "Loose Change"

LOL @ U

[Miko5000]

@chiklitz - hahahaha! Exactly.

[gjsemlow]

Do you people seriously not think a commercial jet traveling at the speed it hit these buildings at would penetrate the walls? Did you expect it to just bounce off? Have none of you ever seen a car smash through a brick wall? Think about the fact that a normal passenger car traveling at less than 100 mph can bust through a block wall with ease, then compare that to a jet liner going several 100 mph and see if you still think it couldn't make it through the wall of the WTC.

[kinga303]

then say tour right, massive Boeing was it not? flies through the core severing the core structure, why didn't the top just keel over and fall off? why did it all just decintegrate vertically?

u expect a plane of that size to not topple the building instantly? the buildings were built to withstand that sort of attack

[gjsemlow]

Yeah, actually sky scrapers are designed to not fall over instantly in the event they get hit by a plane. What is it with you conspiracy nuts? It's all one extreme or the other. Either you believe that the plane should just bounce off the building, or that it should have magically cut the building in half. How about finding the middle ground called reality?

[RussianAssassin21]

The strange thing about the collapse of the three WTC buildings is that all three fell into their own footprint, which is the path of most resistance. When a building gets hit by a plane and/or experiences structural damage from fire, the damage done to the building is not spread out evenly. This would cause the building to collapse (if it does) towards the path of least resistance, such as near the impact zone. However, none of the three buildings did this; they all fell straight down.

[Jbiff110]

It wasn't the damage done by the plane that caused the collapse... the building stood up to that, as it was designed to do. What caused the collapse was the impact blew the fire retardant coating off of the steel trusses leaving them exposed to 98 octane fuel... pretty hot shit. The trusses buckled at their attachment to the steel columns and at the core. once enough of them buckled the floor gave way and they all pancaked. That is the reason they came straight down.

[fjh1616]

@Jbiff110 This is also a good point, and what these 'truthers' don't realise. The towers did the job, and it should have been long enough to get people out. What they didn't account for, was the fire beyond the impact. Well said.

[Miko5000]

"The strange thing about the collapse of the three WTC buildings is that all three fell into their own footprint"

That's absolutely not true. Look at an arial view of ground zero post-collapse. People act like it was just dust in neat piles. It took 8 months of round the clock work to remove the debris. The steel, concrete, etc., was stacked hundreds of feet high.

What controlled demolition have you ever seen that started from the top?

[fjh1616]

@Miko5000 True. Also, the dust from the towers reached as far as east 34th street, on 5th avenue (aka, corner of ESB). That's not exactly in it's footprint. Good point you made there.

[lmonroy94]

so wats that thing supposed to be?

[kinga303]

i always thought it was a controlled demolition, ie blow the basement then obliterate the core with thermite.

just think, that would explain the heat and the molten metal, also all that powder that went everywhere when the towers went straight down at near free fall speed. i think the plane was real to make it look legit.

i mean I've no idea why the US Government would kill thousands of there own people but there's allot of things that governments do that i can only ask why

[swazoid]

to generate fear, and to increase security is why they did it. also to enter iraq and steal the oil resources

[kinga303]

yep that's what i thought :)

i like being sarcastic

[tyton1234]

i agree jet fuel

[64floz]

Commercial jet + jet fuel + high velocity = a big boom.

Does the math settle in enough for 'ya? Jet fuel burns pretty damn hot.

[antiswattt]

nah... its just parts of the plane going through the building.. you dont need a bunker buster warhead to do that... (:

[italainmobster6]

Who ever believes this is a fucking retard the bunker buster went through the reinforced concrete then blew up. When you showed '''' it''' hit the WTC it blew up and then when through the other side get fucking real.

[sasuke123417]

Hate to tell you this but the plane didn't MELT threw the tower. Maybe you should take a basic class in both physics and chemistry that way you can grasp that a plane with all its weight traveling at such a high speed FILLED WITH JET FUEL would have enough inertia and explosive potential to destroy an object such as the WTC.

[1200strong]

This is fucking retarded, the bomb that is shown is a SDB or Small Diameter Bomb. It weighs a measly 250 pounds. To compare this to the COMMERCIAL AIRLINER that hit WTC is just dumb.

[The0Burger0King]

Ok then what happened to all the people who died or "disappeared" (as they would have to for this to work) on the planes that crashed? Was everyone lying about the cell phone calls from the one that crashed in Pen? And it looked like too much fire for it to be a bunker buster. It looked like exploding jet fuel to me. And why would you need a bunker buster to get through a non-hardened target like the side of an office building? Sounds like BS to me.

[tommysch]

Just for fun do you know that a 757 traveling at cruise speed have 189,108,00 joules of kinetic energy? Based on a 123600Kg plane traveling at 3060m/s (850km/h).

If its a missile, are all the videos of a 757 hitting both WTC towers fake?

[missvidabom]

You know, I would have to say that you should do more research into this. Just because there are similarities does not mean that the projectile you saw was a warhead and not a part of the plane. I would have to disagree completely with your statements.

[maxeemcom]

hm. seems more likely than the frame-skipping plane graphics. good idea!

[mysticalgroove]

yup i agree, modified plane / bunker buster hit the towers, anything less wouldn't penetrate those outer steel walls.

[mckennydarryl]

if you throw a 50cal bullet at someone it wont do anything but shoot it at high speed and it will blow your head apart same thing here the plane had high velocity when it hit thats how it penetrated.

[mysticalgroove]

if you'd asked me a few years ago I would have to agree with you, however bullets are harder than heads, planes are not harder than steel and concrete towers.

[italainmobster6]

Steel walls WTF are you talking about try looking up information before sounding like a retard. The tube frame design using steel core and perimeter columns protected with sprayed-on fire resistant material created a relatively lightweight structure that would sway more in response to the wind compared to traditional structures such as the Empire State Building that have thick, heavy masonry for fireproofing of steel structural elements.

[springman22]

idiots

[blackArt2000]

fired a moment before inpact-this was to blow a hole for the weaker cockpit area to enter - the wings and nose also had depleted uranium coating on the leading edge allowing full penetration right down to the wing tips, otherwise known as a Bunker Buster.depleted uranium shatters after inpact blowing radioactive dust all over the area,one of the reasons why many 911 helper have developed lung cancer and other cancer related illness.

[blackArt2000]

Europe has been tell The US people this for years only to be spat back at in the name of the "USA" - hopefully one day you will relise that the USA isnt the country that u believe it is.

[01DOGG01]

funny video

[ve240]

what about the fuel? Its traveling forward ----> as it has momentum. If the building was hit by a missile the ball of fire spread evenly. Intead the fireball travels travels through the building and out the other side.

[U4IKST8]

"Anyone who disagrees, please explain what the projectile is and how it would be possible for an aircraft to achieve what is shown."

Ok, I'll try... The projectile, I believe, is just another piece of the plane, what part I do not know and will not guess. How could a plane achieve what we saw? There are many, mant ways. And if you were smart enough to raise questions I'm sure you are smart enough to think it up on your own.

[U4IKST8]

So yeah, I think when someone who has "SUBSCRIBE NOW !!!" as the first line in their description has another "agenda" apart from finding out what _really_ happened that day.

[U4IKST8]

First I'd like to say I believe 911 was an inside job. Second I believe there were planes used.

Now onto this video. Notice any similarities, emm no, why? Because, you expect us to believe the projectile coming from the tower is similar to the warhead? Its impossible, why? Because, if the projectile from the tower was the warhead, the tower wouldnt blow because it went straight through, just like the warhead went straight through the bunker then blew.

So this video wasnt very well thought out.

[13REIGN]

ever heard of debris??

[jointopsfan]

it was a plane

[fafnir242]

Here's a hypothetical for you. A plane crashes into a building at 500 miles per hour. Does it remain intact? HELL NO! How about you slam an airliner into a building at 500+ mph, you see if it stays completely intact. That's part of the damn plane, not a bunker buster missile!

[palasta]

"a solid steel building"

Should this imply that this 'special' building type is capable of sustaining any force?

"a straight line and has the distinct white smoke trail tail of a Bunker Buster"

A bunker buster doesn't travel and leaves a smoke trail, it breaks through and releases his explosive energy immediatly as seen in the given example.

The plane could achieve this, because of the vast amount of energy it had accumulated on impact (weightxspeed).

[PottersHouseOz]

"Anyone who disagrees, please explain what the projectile is and how it would be possible for an aircraft to achieve what is shown."

A bunker buster doesn't travel and leaves a smoke trail

No but the warhead does, as shown in the example.

[palasta]

In which example? Have you watched the same video as ì did?

.oO(Oh surprise, at a high speed impact something smoky got ejected...)

[IZAKDAVID911]

Nice vid eh?

[mysticalgroove]

i like this theory, it is very possible and realistic. 5 stars, thanks.

[PollenB]

Kimmo Timmonen from Kuopio, Finland plays hockey for some faggot team in Philadelphia! They have a forum!! I think it's time we paid them a visit!

[ZZUnderground]

Kimmo Timmonen played for the Nashville Predators prior to going to the Flyers.

[meewsic]

Cool stuff.

Check out my weekly conspiracy video blog.

Brian

[Robyne13xXx]

will do mate.

[coolblk]

fantastic video :)

[AnaMurida]

great video again

[Robyne13xXx]

This video needs to be seen by many who don't believe that it was a US Government conspiracy!

[PollenB]

If airplanes can do this sort of damage why did they ever bother inventing "bunker buster" missiles? Why would the Germans have spent billions developing their V2 rockets when a rusty old Messerschmitt would have done nicely?

I have never discounted missile(s).

[IZAKDAVID911]

Thank You.

[PollenB]

I'd like to see an airplane diving at that arched bunker! Squashed flat in an instant I'll bet! I doubt if the arch would even show a crack!

[Robyne13xXx]

I'll ask Izak to upload the clip he has of a jet crashing into a solid wall. That will show what happens whn an aircraft hits a solid wall , like say um... the pentagon!

[911GANG]

This Would Explain How an Aluminium 'Plane' could Melt through a solid steel building, and cause the damage that it did.

The Projectile exiting the building travels in a straight line and has the distinct white smoke trail tail of a Bunker Buster Type warhead.

Anyone who disagrees, please explain what the projectile is and how it would be possible for an aircraft to achieve what is shown.

[pjackel]

"solid steel building" That phrase right there shows how much of a moron you really are. a skyscraper is not a hardened bunker. you wouldn't need a bunker buster. also the explosion is immediate. it doesn't even match the delay of the bunker buster explosion in your only example

the projectile could be any number of things on fire being propelled by the explosion of jet fuel.

now explain to me how the all of the different angles of home video showing the planes hitting was fake.

[NANOFORGE]

@911GANG It is because of energy, energy if there is enough of it would damage or destroy just about anything. The plane weighed about 300 Tons moving at about 900 Kph. The Impacts probally released about 10 Gigajoules per plane which is about the same as deotnating about 2.5 tons of TNT. Look at it another way. 10 square meters of water weighs 10 tons, if that was propelled to the same speed as an asteroid (30 Kilometers per second) It would produce the same energy as 1,000 tons of TNT.