This is the lamest attempt at blaming the Government I've ever seen. Where did the planes if not commercial. Where are the people who where on these planes at, if not dead. The claim is the Government took Military aircraft and painted them to look like commercial aircraft. The Military planes look nothing like commercial aircraft. What Military aircraft did they use; C-131, C141, C-5, C-17, which one. I would like to know. Fill us in on what you know about Military aircraft, which one used.
@jrwilson98 You don't think the government can make you disappear, example, witness protection program...
Actually, the military does have aircraft that are also used as civilian aircraft, for example, Air Force Two, a Boeing C-32, which is a variant of the 757...
Can't be a C131 as it's a propeller based aircraft. The C141 is 4 engined aircraft. The C-5 is also a large 4 engined aircraft, as well as the C-17.
I believe the aircraft that hit the WTC was a 767-200, but not a civilian one.
@Airportchris2 If your claims are true. Them this present administration is continuing and Congress is continuing the lie. This next Presidential Administration and Congress will have to continue with this lie and so on and so forth, until everyone involved is dead. This is a ridiculous conclusion you and people who think like you are making. It would mean that everyone involved in someway in the government are some of the most evil people on the planet. We would need to rid ourselves to them.
@jrwilson98 Well, even with this event aside, the government is already corrupt, overstepping it's Constitutional powers, invading countries, and more.
Also, if you think that 9/11 would be the first instance of the government lying, you're sadly mistaken... the government has kept secrets from the dawn of it's forming... the government hides crap now, using the good old "Matters of National Security" excuse...
Personally, I don't think it was the government in and of itself, but rather the...
... CIA, which perform operations, in which even the government, even the President will not be made aware of... however, Bush and other high officials have made to many slip ups and their reluctance to provide information into this matter, from what is supposed to be a transparent government, is what is making their position hard to accept, even if they are telling the truth, every fiber in my being says that a 757 did not impact the Pentagon, and those 767's didn't cause the WTC to collapse.
Nor did a plane hit WTC7, but yet it collapsed, starting from the ground floor, straight down into it's own footprint... which wouldn't have happened if it was the result of as they say structural failure by damage of the other towers collapse, and it just so happened to be the only building outside the main WTC complex to collapse... and the only way a building comes straight down like WTC7 did, is to remove all the supports at the same time, or else the building will collapse sideways...
Until I see clear video of the Pentagon impact, the same way I saw the WTC impacts, a 757 didn't hit the Pentagon, especially at the speed they claim, it's structurally impossible for that 757, to travel at or above cruise speed which for a 757-200 is approximately 530MPH, which is impossible to maintain control at sea level, the air is to thick, the engines would be cutting through the air like a bucket through molasses, & the accuracy they did it, would even make fighter pilots unsure of it...
@Airportchris2 It is one thing to claim the Government is over stepping their Constitutional powers. It is a whole other thing to claim the Government conspired to kill thousands of citizens, waste trillions of dollars and kill millions of Iraqi's and Afghans, so then could place the blame on a particular terrorist organization and Saddam Hussein. What would be the reason the other conspiracies of the NWO and FEMA camps. It's all BS and every reasonable person knows it.
@jrwilson98 Yes, but the government has shown initiatives in the past, to stage events, to achieve a goal... look up Project Northwoods, was a plan to stage an event during the Kennedy Presidency, but Kennedy said no to it.
The thing is we helped Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda... many years prior to 9/11...
I don't believe in the whole NWO and FEMA stuff, but 9/11 just puts up a red flag in my book, put up a red flag to my dad, more so about the Pentagon...
..., as he's worked in the aviation field since the 70s, he's worked for Boeing, Northwest, Delta, and a few others... and all of the pilots I've talked to, including 757 pilots find the Pentagon explanation, completely ludicrous.
@Airportchris2 Anyway, I'm off, my new channel is CJCA915... I spend most of my time there, not so much on 9/11 stuff as I used to, because well, it was hindering my channel here.
@treyanator09 How do you know this. Did you plant the bombs yourself or did someone you do it or were just part of the planning in planting the bombs. Your claim is completely baseless and ridiculous.
@jrwilson98 The flash occurs on the face of the building, prior to impact, about 6 feet to the side of the airframe... the flashes occurred as a result of something inside the building, or something was fired from the aircraft, you can see a faint what looks to be gas trail right next to the fuselage prior to the flash... which leads me to believe something was fired from the aircraft at the last second...
@Airportchris2 I've watched this video over and over and what I see is the nose to the fuselage enter the building, their is a small flash, which I would say is the beginning of the plane exploding or something that has been added by the poster of the video. It's not a rocket being fired and it certainly is not a bomb. Tomahawk Cruise Missile is 18' long with a booster it is 20' long. It has a 1000lb conventional warhead. If this was attached to the plane we would easily recognize it.
@jrwilson98 I've watched a video from another angle, and the flash is about 6 feet to the right of the fuselage... and only in that one spot, if it was the fuselage impact, it would be logical to assume that it would occur all around the fuselage...
The flash is visible in all the shots of the impact... it's even visible in the first impact of Flight 11 into the other tower...
Who said it had to be a Tomahawk? I never said it had to be a Tomahawk, there are other types of missiles...
We could easily see it? Or could we, as it's hard to make out the bottom of the planes details in this video, and given the quality of all the videos, it's unlikely to see it regardless, especially if it's in a housing that matches or is close to the dark blue color used on United Airlines aircraft at this time...
to me it looks like something fired from under the belly of the plane just before it crashed in to the building, which caused the flash and enabled the plane to go straight through the building the way it did, just my thoughts on it.
Had UA 175 been a real airliner, loaded with fuel for a cross country trip, as soon as it IMPACTED WTC 2, wouldn't there have been a CRASH & EXPLOSION on the OUTSIDE of the tower?
Had this been a military aircraft, wouldn't there have been a CRASH & EXPLOSION on the OUTSIDE of the tower?
Airplanes are NOT designed for crashing into things, they are designed for FLYING. But all the videos show UA 175 flying THROUGH WTC 2 without first CRASHING INTO IT.
@lmfecher I'm more in line with the idea that they were enhanced military aircraft... and we have to assume they were traveling at the speed we were told... if they were traveling slower than what we were told, it's quite likely that they could have impacted the towers... the only issue with the speed they told us, is that at that speed, it would be hard to hit the tower, granted, Flight 175 just hit the tower, had it not banked to the left at the last second, it would have impact the corner.
I hear what you're saying, I really do. But the problem with that is even if they were military aircraft, the crash and explosion still would have occurred upon impact on the outside of the towers. Instead, they flew THROUGH the steel frame walls and exploded on the inside of the towers. There are weapons designed for penetration like JASSM/bunker buster missiles, and it just so happens that JASSM missiles look like a small aircraft in flight.
Your right, You can see that the mysterious objects seen under the fuselage of these planes actually fire something into the building just before contact. Nice work
While I disagree with a lot of 9/11, that's not one of my disagreements, I do believe they did hit the towers, I know people who were there, and can confirm they were planes.
The plane is made of more than just skin, it has a internal skeleton in which you can't see, which is made of steel, which the skin is wrapped around, have you ever seen a aircraft being made?
It's walls are a lot thicker than 1mm, it's not an really a flying aluminum can, it's described as such due to it's design, but it's got a stronger frame work than a 1mm piece of aluminum skin.
Well maybe it would, and an engineer of what, and a recreational pilot doesn't say much, now if you said airline pilot, I might believe you a little more, but recreational pilot doesn't make me trust you as much, and regardless of what you think, the common theory accepted by most is that this aircraft was not the airliner we were told, and it was a re-enforced aircraft.
You can believe something other than a 767 hit it, but I believe it was a 767, just not a average passenger 767.
Well, technically it's a skeleton, it may not be called that, but it acts as a skeleton, like our bones and stuff hold up our skin, well the frame work of a plane does the same thing, my dad worked for Boeing, Northwest, and currently Delta, of course he worked for others that escape me, but he has been working on aircraft since the 70s, so he knows his stuff.
somebody needs to show this to President Obama. What the phuck is on the bottom of this plane. I doubt the American Airlines ground crew attached it on the plane on the tarmac. Van Jones shouldn't have backed down from his TRUE BELIEFS. We are being lied to. A bunch of towelheads didn't do this. WAKE UP AMERICA! THE TRUTH IS UGLY and NEEDS TO BE INVESTIGATED. We have waited long enough.
It's a missile i think that they fire just before the plane makes contact with the building. This is a military plane for sure. No one gets on a passenger plane with a missile attached underneath
Well, the plane itself is there, and quite possibly a missile attached, but that would immediately tell you that the plane is not a commercial airliner.
Your right, I saw it too. IF these planes were actually military planes like many witnessess said they looked like then it would not be to hard to fight a missile underneath
I accept that planes hit the WTC, but they were not the cause for their collapse, and I don't believe the planes were the airliners we were told they were, and I find it interesting that a drill of this exact incident was going on at the same time, did you see my 4 part video on 50 reasons 9/11 was an inside job, making some key points or coincidences about that day and there after.
This is the lamest attempt at blaming the Government I've ever seen. Where did the planes if not commercial. Where are the people who where on these planes at, if not dead. The claim is the Government took Military aircraft and painted them to look like commercial aircraft. The Military planes look nothing like commercial aircraft. What Military aircraft did they use; C-131, C141, C-5, C-17, which one. I would like to know. Fill us in on what you know about Military aircraft, which one used.
jrwilson98 8 months ago
@jrwilson98 You don't think the government can make you disappear, example, witness protection program...
Actually, the military does have aircraft that are also used as civilian aircraft, for example, Air Force Two, a Boeing C-32, which is a variant of the 757...
Can't be a C131 as it's a propeller based aircraft. The C141 is 4 engined aircraft. The C-5 is also a large 4 engined aircraft, as well as the C-17.
I believe the aircraft that hit the WTC was a 767-200, but not a civilian one.
Airportchris2 8 months ago
Most military 767s are derived from the 767-200ER. Which United Airlines Flight 175 was a Boeing 767-222, tail numbers N612UA.
In fact here is a picture of UA175, before it got it's new UA paint scheme:
airliners. net/aviation-photos/photos/0/5/0/1182050.jpg
With scheme seen on 9/11:
airliners. net/aviation-photos/photos/7/6/8/0844867.jpg
Airportchris2 8 months ago
@Airportchris2 If your claims are true. Them this present administration is continuing and Congress is continuing the lie. This next Presidential Administration and Congress will have to continue with this lie and so on and so forth, until everyone involved is dead. This is a ridiculous conclusion you and people who think like you are making. It would mean that everyone involved in someway in the government are some of the most evil people on the planet. We would need to rid ourselves to them.
jrwilson98 8 months ago
@jrwilson98 Well, even with this event aside, the government is already corrupt, overstepping it's Constitutional powers, invading countries, and more.
Also, if you think that 9/11 would be the first instance of the government lying, you're sadly mistaken... the government has kept secrets from the dawn of it's forming... the government hides crap now, using the good old "Matters of National Security" excuse...
Personally, I don't think it was the government in and of itself, but rather the...
Airportchris2 8 months ago
... CIA, which perform operations, in which even the government, even the President will not be made aware of... however, Bush and other high officials have made to many slip ups and their reluctance to provide information into this matter, from what is supposed to be a transparent government, is what is making their position hard to accept, even if they are telling the truth, every fiber in my being says that a 757 did not impact the Pentagon, and those 767's didn't cause the WTC to collapse.
Airportchris2 8 months ago
Nor did a plane hit WTC7, but yet it collapsed, starting from the ground floor, straight down into it's own footprint... which wouldn't have happened if it was the result of as they say structural failure by damage of the other towers collapse, and it just so happened to be the only building outside the main WTC complex to collapse... and the only way a building comes straight down like WTC7 did, is to remove all the supports at the same time, or else the building will collapse sideways...
Airportchris2 8 months ago
Until I see clear video of the Pentagon impact, the same way I saw the WTC impacts, a 757 didn't hit the Pentagon, especially at the speed they claim, it's structurally impossible for that 757, to travel at or above cruise speed which for a 757-200 is approximately 530MPH, which is impossible to maintain control at sea level, the air is to thick, the engines would be cutting through the air like a bucket through molasses, & the accuracy they did it, would even make fighter pilots unsure of it...
Airportchris2 8 months ago
@Airportchris2 It is one thing to claim the Government is over stepping their Constitutional powers. It is a whole other thing to claim the Government conspired to kill thousands of citizens, waste trillions of dollars and kill millions of Iraqi's and Afghans, so then could place the blame on a particular terrorist organization and Saddam Hussein. What would be the reason the other conspiracies of the NWO and FEMA camps. It's all BS and every reasonable person knows it.
jrwilson98 8 months ago
@jrwilson98 Yes, but the government has shown initiatives in the past, to stage events, to achieve a goal... look up Project Northwoods, was a plan to stage an event during the Kennedy Presidency, but Kennedy said no to it.
The thing is we helped Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda... many years prior to 9/11...
I don't believe in the whole NWO and FEMA stuff, but 9/11 just puts up a red flag in my book, put up a red flag to my dad, more so about the Pentagon...
Airportchris2 8 months ago
..., as he's worked in the aviation field since the 70s, he's worked for Boeing, Northwest, Delta, and a few others... and all of the pilots I've talked to, including 757 pilots find the Pentagon explanation, completely ludicrous.
Airportchris2 8 months ago
@Airportchris2 Anyway, I'm off, my new channel is CJCA915... I spend most of my time there, not so much on 9/11 stuff as I used to, because well, it was hindering my channel here.
Airportchris2 8 months ago
The flash came from bombs on the fuselage.
treyanator09 9 months ago
@treyanator09 If that's the case, why do they appear on the face of the building, before impact?
Airportchris2 9 months ago
@treyanator09 How do you know this. Did you plant the bombs yourself or did someone you do it or were just part of the planning in planting the bombs. Your claim is completely baseless and ridiculous.
jrwilson98 8 months ago
@jrwilson98 The flash occurs on the face of the building, prior to impact, about 6 feet to the side of the airframe... the flashes occurred as a result of something inside the building, or something was fired from the aircraft, you can see a faint what looks to be gas trail right next to the fuselage prior to the flash... which leads me to believe something was fired from the aircraft at the last second...
Airportchris2 8 months ago
... the event would have happened so fast, no one would have noticed, but you can see it in this video.
Airportchris2 8 months ago
@Airportchris2 I've watched this video over and over and what I see is the nose to the fuselage enter the building, their is a small flash, which I would say is the beginning of the plane exploding or something that has been added by the poster of the video. It's not a rocket being fired and it certainly is not a bomb. Tomahawk Cruise Missile is 18' long with a booster it is 20' long. It has a 1000lb conventional warhead. If this was attached to the plane we would easily recognize it.
jrwilson98 8 months ago
@jrwilson98 I've watched a video from another angle, and the flash is about 6 feet to the right of the fuselage... and only in that one spot, if it was the fuselage impact, it would be logical to assume that it would occur all around the fuselage...
The flash is visible in all the shots of the impact... it's even visible in the first impact of Flight 11 into the other tower...
Who said it had to be a Tomahawk? I never said it had to be a Tomahawk, there are other types of missiles...
Airportchris2 8 months ago
We could easily see it? Or could we, as it's hard to make out the bottom of the planes details in this video, and given the quality of all the videos, it's unlikely to see it regardless, especially if it's in a housing that matches or is close to the dark blue color used on United Airlines aircraft at this time...
Airportchris2 8 months ago
@jimjones2012 Well, flying at it's supposed speed, it wouldn't really do anything on impact...
I've never seen a high speed impact with water... at least a real video...
Airportchris2 9 months ago
to me it looks like something fired from under the belly of the plane just before it crashed in to the building, which caused the flash and enabled the plane to go straight through the building the way it did, just my thoughts on it.
mjwible27 10 months ago
Had UA 175 been a real airliner, loaded with fuel for a cross country trip, as soon as it IMPACTED WTC 2, wouldn't there have been a CRASH & EXPLOSION on the OUTSIDE of the tower?
Had this been a military aircraft, wouldn't there have been a CRASH & EXPLOSION on the OUTSIDE of the tower?
Airplanes are NOT designed for crashing into things, they are designed for FLYING. But all the videos show UA 175 flying THROUGH WTC 2 without first CRASHING INTO IT.
The planes were CGI.
lmfecher 1 year ago
@lmfecher I won't go as far as to say they were added digitally.
Airportchris2 11 months ago
@Airportchris2
Really? So if the airliners weren't added digitally, how did they get there?
lmfecher 11 months ago
@lmfecher I'm more in line with the idea that they were enhanced military aircraft... and we have to assume they were traveling at the speed we were told... if they were traveling slower than what we were told, it's quite likely that they could have impacted the towers... the only issue with the speed they told us, is that at that speed, it would be hard to hit the tower, granted, Flight 175 just hit the tower, had it not banked to the left at the last second, it would have impact the corner.
Airportchris2 11 months ago
@Airportchris2
I hear what you're saying, I really do. But the problem with that is even if they were military aircraft, the crash and explosion still would have occurred upon impact on the outside of the towers. Instead, they flew THROUGH the steel frame walls and exploded on the inside of the towers. There are weapons designed for penetration like JASSM/bunker buster missiles, and it just so happens that JASSM missiles look like a small aircraft in flight.
lmfecher 11 months ago
Something fishy going on here!
pitchingwedge1 1 year ago
Your right, You can see that the mysterious objects seen under the fuselage of these planes actually fire something into the building just before contact. Nice work
dobberdoss 1 year ago
There were n planes.The video is fake.That penetration is impossible.
machfron 2 years ago
While I disagree with a lot of 9/11, that's not one of my disagreements, I do believe they did hit the towers, I know people who were there, and can confirm they were planes.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
Could you introduce me to one or more of these witnesses ?
machfron 2 years ago
If it were possible, according to your channel, you live half a world away.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
You could give me their names and phone numbers.
machfron 2 years ago
You really think I am going to divulge their personal information?
Airportchris2 2 years ago
I'm disappointed that you lied,Chris2.
machfron 2 years ago
lol, because I am not going to divulge their personal information?
I am disappointed in you, for asking for such information in the first place.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
That penetration is obviously impossible.The plane's skin is only 1 mm thick.
machfron 2 years ago
The plane is made of more than just skin, it has a internal skeleton in which you can't see, which is made of steel, which the skin is wrapped around, have you ever seen a aircraft being made?
It's walls are a lot thicker than 1mm, it's not an really a flying aluminum can, it's described as such due to it's design, but it's got a stronger frame work than a 1mm piece of aluminum skin.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
I've worked it all out.The fuselage would buckle at 127 tons.I'm an engineer and a former recreational pilot.
machfron 2 years ago
Well maybe it would, and an engineer of what, and a recreational pilot doesn't say much, now if you said airline pilot, I might believe you a little more, but recreational pilot doesn't make me trust you as much, and regardless of what you think, the common theory accepted by most is that this aircraft was not the airliner we were told, and it was a re-enforced aircraft.
You can believe something other than a 767 hit it, but I believe it was a 767, just not a average passenger 767.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
It's my engineering qualifications that count.There is no skeleton,just stringers and circular frames.
machfron 2 years ago
Engineering what?
Well, technically it's a skeleton, it may not be called that, but it acts as a skeleton, like our bones and stuff hold up our skin, well the frame work of a plane does the same thing, my dad worked for Boeing, Northwest, and currently Delta, of course he worked for others that escape me, but he has been working on aircraft since the 70s, so he knows his stuff.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
The stringers and circular frames are made from 1.27 mm thick alclad.
machfron 2 years ago
The plane fired a missile.
Remote controlled operation.
We live in a time of unprecedented evil.
seekYEthetruth 2 years ago
Great job on this. It clearly shows the initial explosion or flame had nothing to do with fuel. The cone ignited before the fuselage!
MsLuckee1 2 years ago
@MsLuckee1,
take another look. It appears the strange object underneath the plane fired into the building just before impact
dobberdoss 1 year ago
somebody needs to show this to President Obama. What the phuck is on the bottom of this plane. I doubt the American Airlines ground crew attached it on the plane on the tarmac. Van Jones shouldn't have backed down from his TRUE BELIEFS. We are being lied to. A bunch of towelheads didn't do this. WAKE UP AMERICA! THE TRUTH IS UGLY and NEEDS TO BE INVESTIGATED. We have waited long enough.
socaltrick 2 years ago
@socaltrick,
It's a missile i think that they fire just before the plane makes contact with the building. This is a military plane for sure. No one gets on a passenger plane with a missile attached underneath
dobberdoss 1 year ago
Comment removed
ramptondayrelease 2 years ago
Well, the plane itself is there, and quite possibly a missile attached, but that would immediately tell you that the plane is not a commercial airliner.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
Comment removed
ramptondayrelease 2 years ago
@ramptondayrelease,
Your right, I saw it too. IF these planes were actually military planes like many witnessess said they looked like then it would not be to hard to fight a missile underneath
dobberdoss 1 year ago
the flash want off away from the plan it was a site up
rainbowpagan 2 years ago
yes some say it's a premature detonation.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
"What is the flash from?"
Probably the plane hitting the building.
Patrickisreallygreat 2 years ago
It's a little deceiving from this angle, but it's in fact about 6 feet to the right of plane, and occurs just prior to contact with the building.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
i dont get you,you watch videos like this and you still think it was fake,wtf?
rileyturkey 2 years ago
I never said it was fake, I was just pointing out the flash, and how it appears in the only video of the first impact as well.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
I accept that planes hit the WTC, but they were not the cause for their collapse, and I don't believe the planes were the airliners we were told they were, and I find it interesting that a drill of this exact incident was going on at the same time, did you see my 4 part video on 50 reasons 9/11 was an inside job, making some key points or coincidences about that day and there after.
Airportchris2 2 years ago