MISSING: Well over 125,000 POUNDS of debris in the PA field.
MISSING: Well over 125,000 POUNDS of debris at the Pentagon.
Never mind how the Twin Towers were BUILT TO WITHSTAND AN IMPACT FROM A JUMBO JET! And the heat from the jet fuel was not high enough to melt the structural steel of the towers. And how you put in things and then claim "No one said that." with your annotations. Want EXPERT opinions? Architects and Engineers for 9-11 truth. Pilots for 9-11 truth. Physicists even doubt it.
Why would they need a missle to hit the pentagon? Wouldn't the 2 planes that hit the trade center be enough? Do you think people would really say: "Hey, it's just the world trade center, let's just let it slide, now if the pentagon was damaged that would be a different story"? Do you know what a simple conspiracy would be? Loading a warehouse in Iraq with WMDs. That would've been the easiest part of the plan to pull off.
How anyone can argue for the Pentagon being was hit by a jet liner when they flat out refused to release the videos under the freedom of information request by now are just faithful sheep unable to question or think critically.
These are the same people who say the USA should stay in IRAQ even tho they are no threat and never had WMDs. Heck the evil dictator has been gone for years so what are they really their for i wonder.....
I have just watched another one of your vidoe. Ok the mistake you make here is to believe that this plane can fly at 510 knots at almost ground level! IT CANNOT! Why did they make a 270 degree turn rather than just nose dive staight into the Pentagon? Going around the long way around? Why do both official reports conflict its flight path bases on 14 witness testimonies! Why do all 4 crash sites have enomlies that the goverment cannot openly explain? There are so many unanswered questions! Try!
@roquefortfiles it's funny that you refer to others as twit when you're just as guilty. forget the dualities that exist concerning whether it WAS a plane or WASN'T: you need to open your eyes and LOOK closely. Missile or plane, there are innacuracies on both sides. I line up somewhere in between. Having a flight data recorder doesn't really account for much since we don't have those flight specific details. If this didn't happen (along with the WTC), do you think we would have went to war?
@roquefortfiles more importantly, WHY do we go to war? to understand the concept of why we go to war other than textbook definition is to understand why certain people would want these events to happen. Profit. so whether it was a plane or a missile, one thing is for sure: our government allowed all of this to happen. Whether partly or entirely, directly or indirectly involved, the explanation (paradox rather) of events that happened that day do not add up, 1 way or another.
@jaygio Oh but of course PROFIT!! Mmmhm. Are you kidding? These wars have cost the USA BILLIONS. It was put on the credit card dude. And if you are talking about it being based on oil (like everyone does).
Since 2001 Oil prices have sky rocketed. And the USA BUYS IT!! they don't sell it.
So to go to war and pay a fortune for it and then be forced to buy oil at inflated prices..
Those plane pieces were not from a jet airliner.They're nice plants.The Feds did a good cover-up job;most folks are lobotomized,and wouldn't know the difference. Ever been up close to a jet airliner?Ever touched the plane?The guy in the video is walking away,with a piece of freaking tinfoil;airliner metal is a tad bit heavier-- thicker than these fake govt. props.Where's the burn-marks on these metal-prop-pieces? When jets hit lamp-poles,they break-up on contact.Lots of phony fed-crap goin on.
Very lame arguments. Why did our government release a video showing a missile hitting the Pentagon and claim it is Flight 77? A 2,3 TRILLION heist, maybe? By the way, where is our 2.3 Trillion tax dollars gone, Mr. Know It All? Notice there is no investigation on that, anymore. The evidence is destroyed by the missile.and maybe bombs. The plane did a fly by.
The plane should have been shot down long before it entered the DC 50 mile diameter airspace.Unless it had a military transponder.
I love when sheep make videos for their masters. Showing absolutely nothing to support the government story. Now the families of the victims are speaking up loud and clear. New 911 investigation.
If Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, the FBI would have been all too happy to release the videos that recorded it. To date, NO PLANE HAS EVER BEEN SHOWN ON ANY VIDEO of the "hit." Ipso facto, NO PLANE HIT THE PENTAGON.
I can't Believe all you Childish, "I don't like this story so I want to make it interesting" "My father never loved me" Tin-Foil hat-Wearing, mentally retarded traitor Conspiracy Bastards believe this kid (the 20 Year old kid who probably doesn't major in Physics, Engineering, or Aviation) XD This is too good... did I hear last resort?
Great way to have a conversation, just insult me, I see you're new to this. So the whole world should just take the word of two people that told you but nobody else? They should disregard the hundreds of witnesses that all saw something completely different than your two friends? They should just disregard the hundreds of witnesses? All of the plane debris? The passengers bodies and DNA? The hundreds of rescue workers? The personal effects of the passengers? Move on Champ!
You just sent a message to my page saying the "My gov't was responsible for 9/11"
Really???? Canada was the one that planned 9/11? Why would they do that exactly? This should be good. You don't think that if Canada had planned 9/11 that someone would have caught on by now? In 9 yrs, I think that you are the first person to ever claim that Canada was the cause of 9/11. So how exactly did Canada get a plane into Washington to shoot missles at the Pentagon?
Is this video a goof, or what. I tell ya, your a few years late and way off base. Most people with any sense are way past this point and onto other things. Why don't you check out chemtrails?
Go screw yourself this is bullshit you can't prove there was a plane there have you ever been on a 757 before I don't think so your probably another bush puppet who takes orders and don't ask any questions
If it wasn't a plane, then all you have to do is prove that the plane still exists and so do the people that were supossed to be on the plane, the same goes for the other crashes that day. If you believe that missles hit these buildings then those people who were on those planes should be alive and well somewhere right? One more thing these terrorists were only taught how to land a plane so crashing without touching the ground is what I think they would have been good at.
This video makes me angry. That fucking BS DOC LOOSE STOOL is such a rampant, poorly researched conspiracy jerk off tool. People who give this Jason Bermas twerp any credibility really need to step back and look at FACTS, HARD FACTS such as is done here.
The plane bottomed out before it hit the building that is why it hit the generator and the holes punched in the concrete were made from the landing gear bogeys. Regardless its all a moot point anyway. The plane wreckage was recovered from that location so all this talk of a missile is irrelevant.
Not Possible? So if I fly an Airplane 10 Feet off the Ground I'll blow up because flying a few feet off the Ground is impossible... I didn't know that, when was that added to the Laws of Nature? Disintegrated on contact... so explain how the Missile got through all those layers... the aircraft disintegrated and the debris and fireball along with it paved a hole through the wall...
Are you always this hostile in a discussion? Way to go, it says you're 36 years old, I hope that's a lie because clearly you have the mouth of a 14 year old thinking cursing and being condescending helps his case. It doesn't.
So Cheney ordered a stand down, what does that tell you? Do you realize how many people would be behind 9/11 if it was an inside job? A LOT! And someone always talks, and no one legitimate has done that yet.
I don't particularly like america, so you're quite wrong. But they didn't stand behind 9/11. You're blind. And go ahead and fuck my flag all you want, if that makes you feel better. I wouldn't recommend it though
I'm not the one who's brainwashed, I'm the one who wants hard evidence before I make up my mind. Truthers seem to have locked their mind on whatever they wish to believe, and no one can tell them otherwise. And what does my flag has to do with 9/11? dumb shit
This is a very good video. and you can tell tthat every moron leavin comments below is brainwashed by loose change. even thought u conpletely just like. debunked his ass. they still wanna belive him. great vid. 5/5 atleast someone here has common sense.
O.K., but how did a novice pilot, how had never actually been behind the controls of a commercial airliner before, manage to skim the ground at several hundred miles an hour and then successfully strike its target only a couple of stories high.
I'm no pilot, but that would have to be difficult even for a veteran pilot. At that speed if the trajectory was off by even a little bit the plane would have crashed short or over flown the building. I think questions are warranted here
You are a BOOB...if you had a brain in your idiotic head you could see the hole is not large enough for an airplane of that size to fit into. DID IT DESENTIGRATE BEFORE IT HIT!!??? =o Nice 16 ft hole. Must be the same size as the one in your ass. Also you SHOULD look at photos and film of other airliner disasters and tell the world a plane crashed there. You right wing conservative douchebag!!!! Admit your "dream administration" was nothing but a pack of common thieves....=) Nice video...
Ha ha I looked this guy is a shill ! So is Edgebitchll2 he is a Oy Boy schlept acting like a maven. Oy Vey ! Too funny the whole group talk to one another even though told NOT to ! You should be put on fence patrol at noon private! lol You need MK-ULtra training you stink! Totally ineffective work,... read the responses!
This was more lame than any other "debunk" MK-ULtra Mousad lies I've ever seen. As if this "proves" anything !
The "evidence" was handled BY the PERPS. Shadow Forensics disprove
many "gubermint photos" BUSTED !
LOL nobody said a global hawk did this!
why waste a global hawk? This was bad/lame MK-ULtra you should be punished by you're superiours YOU MADE THINGS WORSE...lol bonehead Oy-boy ! lol convert now, you are desposable (any "friends" missing?")
Your comment from 2 months back about minor mistakes and not bothering to check them.....that says it all to me..."believe what youre told and shut the fuck up"....sorry I cant live my life that way
O really? You think so? that the "airspace is some of the most well secured in the world".. May i direct you to look at the pentagon on google earth.. and then look to the south east bout a mile.. notice anything? LIKE A MOJOR INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT WITH THE APPROACH FOR RUNWAY 33 COMING RIGHT IN OVER THE PENTAGON???? A little oversight? fuckwit
@2JOHNNYT All you have to do is google image it. It will show you multiple of photos showing plane debris and those steel and titanium engines. All you have to do is spend a couple of seconds to type in "9/11 pentagon plane parts." Simple as that. It seems your purposely being that stupid.
@phlyegles43 Do u think the way they PLANTED the terrorists passports at the WTC and the bag of Korans and flight manuals at Boston Logan is they way they PLANTED those parts? Geez Louise Son wakey wakey, stop eating the crap they feed u in the pen with the rest of the sheep (NBC, CNN, FOX, NY SLIMES), run out and start thinking for yourself, here DEAD JFK might give you a laugh while giving u the dope on 911 watch?v=8DQp0QxkBCU
This video fails. If a plane did hit the pentagon then why wasn't there any pictures of the wide damages the wings should have caused. If they're able to cut through steel then the wall of the pentagon should be much of a challenge.
This video made me look at things different from what people say happened on 9/11. Still, I am not so sure about the pieces that where left. I think they are too small coming from such huge plane. But like it says, the concrete walls actually worked. Thanks for this video 911, it was really good.
These "Screw Loose Change" people crack me up, lol. My dad works on aircraft, and sorry a Boeing 757 didn't crash into the Pentagon, sorry, and completely break apart, sry, don't happen, and if it could even happen b/c physics won't allow a plane that big to get that close to the ground at that speed, it still wouldn't break apart.
He used to work for Boeing now he works for Delta, but I shouldn't have to try to explain shit, if people would realize that a 757 can not do what it says it would have done. sry. Defies more laws of physics than shit.
Sure have, my dad laughs at that line of reasoning, for one, an F-4 Phantom is an old ass a/c, its not even in service anymore, maybe for show, but not military, and another thing is, its bolted to the track, so it can't go up or down, its like on a track, and the F4 is made of older materials, than a 757, so, that whole this F4 phantom flying into a solid concrete block is a shitty reason, and plus, if it exploded like that, how come the Pentagon was pentrated all the way to the third ring.
only one ring was reinforced concrete on the first floor. and that's where the plane hit. and that video is only one example of how it is possible for steel or any material to be shredded into dust or little crunches or whatever. I realize it's an excessive example. the reality is there were enough intact pieces found that are totally consistent with the thought that a plane crashed into the building at FULL speed
ok, w/e you say man, my dad works on aircraft, for 20yrs, his friends, pilots whom I have talked to, flight engineers, etc, have all said the same thing about the Pentagon, its not possible, even my Physics teacher says it wasn't possible, due to ground effect, maybe you should learn about Ground effect, and if you really read it, you will learn that its impossible to fly a 757 that fast that low, and thats not a lie, thats physics.
so when it is so easily explained that there is really no chance in hell that the mainstream version of the events on 9/11 are physically possible, why the fuck doesn't any expert with some influence do something about it and actually achieves something. face it. the cters have done nothing but convincing gullible teenagers and gave some people a new hobby.
Actually there are many experts, that done studies, that prove a plane didn't hit the Pentagon, b/c for one its physically impossible, I have been told by many pilots of Boeing 757s, on youtube, that its not possible. Lol, teenagers, half the fucking US doesn't believe the official events, and I don't think all of them are teenagers.
APC. Then your physics teacher is a MORON. Whatever you are paying for the class, youre paying too much.
Taking your (fake) conversation with the physics teacher to its logical conclusion, it would be impossible for a plane to ever crash at high speeds.
Obvious Bullshit.
But, on the issue of Ground Effect ("GE"), and how it would apply to a 757 hitting the pengaton, here is what people who actually KNOW WTF they are talking about know.
1) GE is NOT a magical "cusion of air" that follows each Aiplane around, directly beneath it, at ground level.
2) GE occurs generally when the wing is within (approx) one to 1/2 wingspan of the ground.
3) GE forms from the wing tip voticies (Google that, Chris, since you have no idea what they are, im sure) are prevented from forming, due to proximity to the ground.
4) A reduction or elimination of votices reduces the induced drag on the airplane
5) As induced drag is reduced, a lower Angle of Attack or AOA(Google that too, Chris) is needed to fly a level altitude
6) consequently, if a plane descends into GE, and the AOA remains the same, the plane will have increased lift, and "float" as the reduction in induced drag results in a greater lift coefficient.
7) Vorticies are "strongest" when the plane is at a higher AOA. Example, landing and taking off. Slowest speeds require highest AOA's to provide lift.
8) By extention, a low AOA profile will have very weak, small, "tight" vorticies. Smaller GE would be experienced in that case.
9) smaller, tighter vorticies means that during a high speed, low AOA profile A) Youd have to fly a lot lower than normal before entering GE, and 2) the GE "strength" itself is greatly reduced.
10) At high speeds, the ratio of induced drag to parasitic drag lowers greatly--such that any change in inudeced drag has very little effect, since its a smaller % of total drag at high speed.
A) the total GE is a lot weaker at high- speed/low-AOA
B) youd have to fly a lot lower than normal to get into GE at high speed/low AOA
c) the GE itself will be weaker
d) the much weaker GE will also affect the airplane less. Because at higher speeds, the airframe is less susceptible to GE because the ratio between induced drag and parasitic drag is much lower than at landing.
13) The 757 (and 767 for that matter) is equipped with flight management systems, a central air data computer, and their AP/Flight director systems all combine to damp out any aero instabilities due to GE.
While the systems would not be programmed conteplating GE at high speed/low AOA, its still going to assist to the limits of its programming.
The GE (given 77s profile) would have been a minute, barely perceptible (if at all) split second event that would have done ZERO to prevent 77 from hitting the pentagon as it OBVIUOSLY DID.
Chris, you can take this to your physics teacher. Maybe he will give you extra credit for it! haha <----(Nelson Munz laugh)
But the fact is, that a high speed, low-nose descent (flight 77 profile) would have small, weak votricies. The airframe would me much less sesceptible to any GE. The GE itself will be much weaker. And to what extent the GE would try to effect the airplane, the FMS is programmed to cancel it out.
There might have been a split second, blink-of-an-eye moment where GE made a small sliver of difference. But not enough to alter the outcome.
No, my physics teacher and my dad who has worked on large aircraft, at Boeing the 747, 757, Delta CRJ-200, NWA RJ85, said its not possible, the resistance from the air compressed under the aircraft at that speed, could not allow it to fly that low, no lower than about 60 feet.
He is not imaginary he is a real pilot, I have met in person, thank you very much.
Ummm, the official story has the plane flying level over the ground at 4 about feet, when it passed over the highway, and made its signature level down, to the first floor, at over 500mph, its not possible, but more power to you if you can see it happening.
LOL, Ok, cite me a source where the official story says "level for severaql seconds at 4 feet above the ground!" LOLOLOL
watch?v=DzR-q0ijbV0
Thats the recreation of the FAA data done by the pilots for 911 truth--so obviously, they are part of the kookspiracy--so you KNOW they wont be covering up for the govt.
And as even THEY admit, it is a descent the WHOLE way down. There was no leveling off.
Yea, its funny, the flight path is off, the official path. I have seen a video which shows where the the poles positions are in this video, and its way off.
Well, according to the governments released Pentagon footage, its pretty level to me, and according to all the 9/11 truth debunkers, like that 9/11 Case Study based on the offical story, its level to the ground.
Also, I just email Boeing asking them if a Boeing 757 flying at over 450 kias, at rougly 4-5 above the ground, is possible.
So, because the speed was so fast, it covered a hell of a lot of ground, just to drop one foot.
Or, to simplify it. Gragh a line that is runs 60 units long, while rising only 1 unit high.
Thats the approx glid path. Now, because the speed of 77 was so high, the vid you see (or the 77 case study) is 1/1ooth of the first unit on your grapgh. Since it represents such a small fraction in time, its not a discrenable descent for such a small fraction of a second.
"""Despite Hanjour's poor reviews, he did have some ability as a pilot, said Bernard of Freeway Airport. "There's no doubt in my mind that once that [hijacked jet] got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it," he said."""
Thats one of HH's instructors. So much for the LIE that he was incompetent to the task.
Yea, well, someone who had bad reviews on a little piss ant aircraft, flying a 757, nicely like that, takes more than Cessna skill, and certainly more than half ass cessna skill.
Explain why the FDR shows the aircraft way off the said path to have hit the poles, and still over 300 feet, above the ground, when it passes over the highway.
Ummm, the information displayed on the right side of presentation, and the light pole info, was added in, as well, as the official flight path before the FDR was released.
The FDR data is inadequate for making exact ground tracks measurments. For example, the data stamped from the heading indicator: Heading indicator can show one heading (which is recorded in the FDR) when (by xwind, or rudder inputs) the actual ground track is entirely different.
Regarding the ALtimeter, there is no FDR data that tells us to what value the Atlimeter was set. So, cant say for sure what the true alt was at any point in time.
cont..Also, what the pilots for "truth" dont tell is is that
1) the last second of recorded data is not ALWAYS the moment of the crash. There can be several seconds of flight subsequent to the last recorded entry.
2) MOST importantly, there was a blank time stamp one second after the last set of data. As such, the last entry is assured to not be the last instant of flight.
None of what you say makes sense; for example: That little video clip that you showed has a little plane, probably only a 1-2 tons at most. Not only that, but think about what it is crashing into; that cement block, for the size of the plane, is way more think and solid then the pentagon. You seem to rant on the fact that they plane wasn't vaporized. If it wasn't then where is it? and even if it was, the engines would not have been. Either way, it don't make sense.
care to follow the links in this videos description box and look at the photos to avoid lokking like a complete dumbass and making the "truth" movement look even crappier than it does without you?
oh wow, youre entire acount is dedecated to debunking everything that happened on 9/11
You don't explain anything, you just add to the confusion.
And when you don't get your way, you start calling people nazis? Fuuck you.
Proffessionals on the scene that day said that that was THE Aircrafts engine, not "An engine part"
and wings don't make a large impact? Okay other than that being physicaly impossible, it still doesn't tell us why there was absolutely Zero impact on the pentagon.
the entire account of lc is dedicated to manipulate people into thinking the us govt is all evil, and killed 3000 of its own citizens on complete daylight. when you think that's not adding confusion to the topic of 9/11 then think again.
this actually explains a lot. it proves that lc lied. then you can understand the whole deal with 9/11 better.
the wings were damaged by 5 lightpoles and "folded" back and went right into the pentagon, and it went into the first floor! not where lc suggests
The poles are made to break right off at the ground,so as to cause hardly any damage to the cars that hit them,but they're supposed to have "folded" back wings,like the ones that practically cut Tower Two in half?Hmmm...
Predator missiles do not leave wing prints, you moron. Explosive warheads do not make a cone of destruction inside the building that is narrower on the out-bound side. Get a freaking clue, punk.
Everything that exploded exploded outside. Nothing exploded inside. The damage patterns do not suggest or support any such theory, to the idea of anyone with a clue how munitions work. A bunker buster would also not print wing marks on the facade, nor carry enough fuel to produce such a large fireball and set so many Class A fires inside the building. Any detonation would, further, have spread debris back out the entrance hole and spread the bricks at the punch-out over a wider area.
One problem with your theory, djgraph. Bunker buster would leave only a small round hole on the in-bound side. But the small round hole is out-bound. Learn something about explosives bfore you make an ass of yourself in public.
And I am still waiting for one of these drooling twoofers to tell me how anything but a 757 could have left those wing marks on the facade of the pentagon or in the ground at Shanksville.
Well, you have to remember that the conspiracy was so thurough, that they probably had Cheney himself run out and paint the wing marks on the facade of the building right after the missle hit. He then took his light-saber, Judy Wood has more on the magical star wars weapons of the NWO, and sliced down all the light poles.
w w w . question 911 . com / linkout . p h p? file name = File % 20911 % 20 Unsolved % 201of2. w m v Remove all the spaces in the link above. Here's my proof on Flight 93, at 3:00 in the video.
Q. What happened to Flight 93 in Shanksville? Where's the wreckage?? You can't explain that. And you can't explain Flight 77 either. Where are pics of the supposed plane inside the Pentagon?? What punctured the hole in the inner ring?
u asked them before and some friendly debunkers on the net gave u links and videos all u can do is : ask questions not comprehending the answers annoy people evade logical questions whose answers conclude that U r full of crap, by asking other questions instead of answering them offend people insult people use cut and paste ignore explanations reject answers call people who give u answers liars calling someone who tell u he's german a Nazi
There you go...more cut & paste's. Nice. At this point, I'm confused as to how you manage to feed yourself on a daily basis. Because you are a complete idiot.
Guess I'll ask again: (knowing you still won't answer)
Q. What happened to Flight 93 in Shanksville? Where's the wreckage??
You can't explain that. And you can't explain Flight 77 either. Where are pics of the supposed plane inside the Pentagon?? What punctured the hole in the inner ring?
Ok. done. No plane inside the Pentagon pics. No plane wreckage of Flight 93. Even the Mayor of Shanksville said there was no plane wreckage there. No bodies, no seats, no luggage, no plane parts whatsoever. "Nothing" he said. No what? You holding top secret pics or something?
That's it, try to get out of facing the facts by telling me to go do something that's completely impossible. It'll take a hell of a lot more people than me to bring this administration to justice for their terrorist acts on 9-11. As far as shouting at the memorials....do you not realize that a LARGE part of those people shouting are from the FAMILIES of 911 victims?? The one's who wouldn't take the government's money to shut them up? WAKE UP!
then call your friend steven jones to take his "irrefutible" evidence to court
and u say it yourself it's impossible! so why do u still bother convincing people that 2+2 is 5?
and the families aren't a large part I doubt that. and even if it is. when it's easier for them to deal with their loss THAT way I have nothing but pity for them
There you go making assumptions again, as if the government would offer money to families to shut them up. You base this on nothing and this would be the worst idea in the world anyway, seeing as that would be ADMISSION of guilt and don't you think 100% of the families would turn on the government, not just a few? your story is just full of holes.
Jlaw- no assumptions. They offer more than money to shut families up. They went as far as to BRIBE THEM in their weakest time. Their time of mourning! And I have proof. It's a known, admitted FACT that they would only allow the families of Flight 93 victims to listen to the blackbox recordings 'IF' they signed sworn statements that they would not discuss what they heard on them, EVER. And that's not cover up and bribery??
Do you know how many families don't get along in this country? How many could honestly care less if their family member was dead or not? Yet, would JUMP at the chance for a multi-gazillion dollar insurance payout once they're dead. And of those, who would say, "well, I hadn't talked to my son/daughter in yrs cuz I hated him/her, but I could sure use a few million!". That's part of why 100% of the families don't rebel. Many others have though, because the truth is worth more than the money.
u can thank hillary clinton and her friends from the insurance and drug companies for that they are the reason that no Universal Health Care System has been set up. USA is the only western country which has no Universal Health Care
u should get your facts straight! it seems like I know more about the USA than u who is an american;)
You know what sales, your a sick fuck...You can't make an assertion that the families are that immoral that they would not care. You are lumping the VAST MAJORITY of the families into that category. sorry but your an asshole for saying such nonsense. go fuck yourself.
Prove it! just because you say so or some stupid conspriacy website says so does not make is a fact. Wheres the paper work? who was the person who contacted them from the government? Does not matter if they just let the families listen, that is not proof of anything. It only says that it could be to graphic and horrible for the publics ears. Your full of it.
I bet the "ctrl" and "c" is completely worn off your keyboard. Because all you do is repeat the same shit over and over. "your stupid theories...your stupid theories...blah, blah, blah". If there weren't so many unanswered questions and lies about 9-11, there wouldn't be so many conspiracy theories. FWIW, you are among the 20% or less of americans that actually believe our govt about 9-11. FACT.
u dont have a clue about wheter what I believe or where I come from. I'm german not american;)
the world isnt black or white as u seem to think. to think "either u are a guy that believes every word the gov says or a guy that believes every word they say is a lie" is wrong. u understand that?
there are things in between
that's the way the world goes. kind of like stereotypes. they dont apply to every person;) u understand that now?
Oh, a Nazi. That explains everything. And like I said, you'll be right at home soon enough. The U.S. is quickly on its' way to becoming Nazi Germany. Sig Heil!
u think all germans are Nazis? u really lack comprehension of the reality if that's what u think. as well u dont understand that the world isnt black and white. your an intolerant fuck that has its stereotypes and his conspiracy theories with which he can feel like a hero exposing the vile government, while in reality you are exposing yourself as a retard. that's just a heads up for when u dare to go on the streets with those claims;)
Again, you LIE and put words in mouth! Does it ever end with you people?? Did I say "all Germans are Nazi's"??? NO! But you obvioulsy are one. All you ever do is say people like me "stereotype". Another favorite cut and paste of yours. And I'm about ready to make my own cut and paste for you. It's probably gonna be something like, "dumbfuck". Or "ignorant-ass". Or "communist". "Bush Admin Flunky". Regardless, just keep ignoring the TRUTH and FACTS. I'll keep throwing them in your face.
Oh yea, about the "dare u go on the streets" statement to me....you really are a Nazi! Isn't that what they used to say over there? Well, that and "may I see your papers?" You've been out'd little Hitler. You're communist fuck.
Building 7 was hit by an invisible plane... No matter what Larry Silverstein said it was NOT controlled demo.
DonLeoMarin 2 months ago
MISSING: Well over 125,000 POUNDS of debris in the PA field.
MISSING: Well over 125,000 POUNDS of debris at the Pentagon.
Never mind how the Twin Towers were BUILT TO WITHSTAND AN IMPACT FROM A JUMBO JET! And the heat from the jet fuel was not high enough to melt the structural steel of the towers. And how you put in things and then claim "No one said that." with your annotations. Want EXPERT opinions? Architects and Engineers for 9-11 truth. Pilots for 9-11 truth. Physicists even doubt it.
Secundinius 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why would they need a missle to hit the pentagon? Wouldn't the 2 planes that hit the trade center be enough? Do you think people would really say: "Hey, it's just the world trade center, let's just let it slide, now if the pentagon was damaged that would be a different story"? Do you know what a simple conspiracy would be? Loading a warehouse in Iraq with WMDs. That would've been the easiest part of the plan to pull off.
giuffre714 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
How anyone can argue for the Pentagon being was hit by a jet liner when they flat out refused to release the videos under the freedom of information request by now are just faithful sheep unable to question or think critically.
These are the same people who say the USA should stay in IRAQ even tho they are no threat and never had WMDs. Heck the evil dictator has been gone for years so what are they really their for i wonder.....
megamogx 4 months ago
I have just watched another one of your vidoe. Ok the mistake you make here is to believe that this plane can fly at 510 knots at almost ground level! IT CANNOT! Why did they make a 270 degree turn rather than just nose dive staight into the Pentagon? Going around the long way around? Why do both official reports conflict its flight path bases on 14 witness testimonies! Why do all 4 crash sites have enomlies that the goverment cannot openly explain? There are so many unanswered questions! Try!
Gavin0403 6 months ago
Okay you answer few of my question, however show me the video of the Airplane impacting the Pentagon.
Snipervenomaz 7 months ago
So why someone or entities have the machine that can create money, need to make modification and camouflage to a Hawk
(dot)freedomfiles(dot)org/war/pentagon(dot)htm
and buy people and bombs
use an small military aircraft instead of a 757 for simulate testing?
What about this one?; youtube: THE PENTAGON SECRET TO THE BOEING 757
TheChosenPR 8 months ago
Um.. the simple fact that the NTSB have the flight data recorder should be enough for you twits. Kind of screams AIRPLANE!!!
And if that is not enough you can look on the front lawn and see the wreckage lying there...
WITH AMERICAN AIRLINES written on it.
roquefortfiles 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles it's funny that you refer to others as twit when you're just as guilty. forget the dualities that exist concerning whether it WAS a plane or WASN'T: you need to open your eyes and LOOK closely. Missile or plane, there are innacuracies on both sides. I line up somewhere in between. Having a flight data recorder doesn't really account for much since we don't have those flight specific details. If this didn't happen (along with the WTC), do you think we would have went to war?
jaygio 8 months ago
@roquefortfiles more importantly, WHY do we go to war? to understand the concept of why we go to war other than textbook definition is to understand why certain people would want these events to happen. Profit. so whether it was a plane or a missile, one thing is for sure: our government allowed all of this to happen. Whether partly or entirely, directly or indirectly involved, the explanation (paradox rather) of events that happened that day do not add up, 1 way or another.
jaygio 8 months ago
@jaygio Oh but of course PROFIT!! Mmmhm. Are you kidding? These wars have cost the USA BILLIONS. It was put on the credit card dude. And if you are talking about it being based on oil (like everyone does).
Since 2001 Oil prices have sky rocketed. And the USA BUYS IT!! they don't sell it.
So to go to war and pay a fortune for it and then be forced to buy oil at inflated prices..
Of course LETS GO TO WAR!!!
Logic fail?
roquefortfiles 8 months ago
Those plane pieces were not from a jet airliner.They're nice plants.The Feds did a good cover-up job;most folks are lobotomized,and wouldn't know the difference. Ever been up close to a jet airliner?Ever touched the plane?The guy in the video is walking away,with a piece of freaking tinfoil;airliner metal is a tad bit heavier-- thicker than these fake govt. props.Where's the burn-marks on these metal-prop-pieces? When jets hit lamp-poles,they break-up on contact.Lots of phony fed-crap goin on.
chuckolove 10 months ago
Very lame arguments. Why did our government release a video showing a missile hitting the Pentagon and claim it is Flight 77? A 2,3 TRILLION heist, maybe? By the way, where is our 2.3 Trillion tax dollars gone, Mr. Know It All? Notice there is no investigation on that, anymore. The evidence is destroyed by the missile.and maybe bombs. The plane did a fly by.
The plane should have been shot down long before it entered the DC 50 mile diameter airspace.Unless it had a military transponder.
Jackblind1000 1 year ago
I love when sheep make videos for their masters. Showing absolutely nothing to support the government story. Now the families of the victims are speaking up loud and clear. New 911 investigation.
MILLSTREETMED 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ABSOLUTELY NO PLANE HIT THE PENTAGON.
MILLSTREETMED 1 year ago
If Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, the FBI would have been all too happy to release the videos that recorded it. To date, NO PLANE HAS EVER BEEN SHOWN ON ANY VIDEO of the "hit." Ipso facto, NO PLANE HIT THE PENTAGON.
SkyBlueAugust 1 year ago
I can't Believe all you Childish, "I don't like this story so I want to make it interesting" "My father never loved me" Tin-Foil hat-Wearing, mentally retarded traitor Conspiracy Bastards believe this kid (the 20 Year old kid who probably doesn't major in Physics, Engineering, or Aviation) XD This is too good... did I hear last resort?
Iceman5164 1 year ago
Comment removed
ChilloutSessionZ 1 year ago
@ChilloutSessionZ
Haha, now THAT is funny. So this former Pentagon police officer tells you this, but doesn't bother to tell anyone else? Too funny.
jeffmay1 1 year ago
Comment removed
ChilloutSessionZ 1 year ago
@ChilloutSessionZ
Great way to have a conversation, just insult me, I see you're new to this. So the whole world should just take the word of two people that told you but nobody else? They should disregard the hundreds of witnesses that all saw something completely different than your two friends? They should just disregard the hundreds of witnesses? All of the plane debris? The passengers bodies and DNA? The hundreds of rescue workers? The personal effects of the passengers? Move on Champ!
jeffmay1 1 year ago
@ChilloutSessionZ
You just sent a message to my page saying the "My gov't was responsible for 9/11"
Really???? Canada was the one that planned 9/11? Why would they do that exactly? This should be good. You don't think that if Canada had planned 9/11 that someone would have caught on by now? In 9 yrs, I think that you are the first person to ever claim that Canada was the cause of 9/11. So how exactly did Canada get a plane into Washington to shoot missles at the Pentagon?
jeffmay1 1 year ago
how do you know which rolls royce he called?
AntiVenomFangX 1 year ago
Is this video a goof, or what. I tell ya, your a few years late and way off base. Most people with any sense are way past this point and onto other things. Why don't you check out chemtrails?
yankeepedaler 1 year ago
Go screw yourself this is bullshit you can't prove there was a plane there have you ever been on a 757 before I don't think so your probably another bush puppet who takes orders and don't ask any questions
vee85 1 year ago
Comment removed
Brutananadilewski007 2 years ago
Comment removed
Brutananadilewski007 2 years ago
If it wasn't a plane, then all you have to do is prove that the plane still exists and so do the people that were supossed to be on the plane, the same goes for the other crashes that day. If you believe that missles hit these buildings then those people who were on those planes should be alive and well somewhere right? One more thing these terrorists were only taught how to land a plane so crashing without touching the ground is what I think they would have been good at.
lawnman05 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
9/11 was an inside job!
Bloodlustjr 2 years ago
This video makes me angry. That fucking BS DOC LOOSE STOOL is such a rampant, poorly researched conspiracy jerk off tool. People who give this Jason Bermas twerp any credibility really need to step back and look at FACTS, HARD FACTS such as is done here.
roquefortfiles 2 years ago
Then what made the holes through 90 ft of spaced concrete walls if the plane "disintegrated" on contact??
What happen to the the several ton steel and titanium engines??
The generator was 12 ft tall so the plane had to have been at the most 10 ft off the ground!
Not possible!
XxRymenxX 2 years ago 9
The plane bottomed out before it hit the building that is why it hit the generator and the holes punched in the concrete were made from the landing gear bogeys. Regardless its all a moot point anyway. The plane wreckage was recovered from that location so all this talk of a missile is irrelevant.
roquefortfiles 2 years ago
@XxRymenxX
Not Possible? So if I fly an Airplane 10 Feet off the Ground I'll blow up because flying a few feet off the Ground is impossible... I didn't know that, when was that added to the Laws of Nature? Disintegrated on contact... so explain how the Missile got through all those layers... the aircraft disintegrated and the debris and fireball along with it paved a hole through the wall...
Iceman5164 1 year ago
What about the confiscated videos around the pentagon?
Why would the FBI do that?
TABOOVSKNOWLEDGE 2 years ago 2
When they say holocaust denier that is supposed to support their case!
The Jews are the holocaust deniers, OF THE PALESTINIANS!
TABOOVSKNOWLEDGE 2 years ago
no.
Desertphile 2 years ago
Are you always this hostile in a discussion? Way to go, it says you're 36 years old, I hope that's a lie because clearly you have the mouth of a 14 year old thinking cursing and being condescending helps his case. It doesn't.
So Cheney ordered a stand down, what does that tell you? Do you realize how many people would be behind 9/11 if it was an inside job? A LOT! And someone always talks, and no one legitimate has done that yet.
Krygeryo 2 years ago
A standdown? Link me
Krygeryo 2 years ago
I don't particularly like america, so you're quite wrong. But they didn't stand behind 9/11. You're blind. And go ahead and fuck my flag all you want, if that makes you feel better. I wouldn't recommend it though
Krygeryo 2 years ago
I'm not the one who's brainwashed, I'm the one who wants hard evidence before I make up my mind. Truthers seem to have locked their mind on whatever they wish to believe, and no one can tell them otherwise. And what does my flag has to do with 9/11? dumb shit
Krygeryo 2 years ago
Except an engine, but whatever right? Fuck truthers, you're delusional, worse than fucking creationists
Krygeryo 2 years ago
A 757 did not hit the pentagon.
SidJustice1 2 years ago 2
This is a very good video. and you can tell tthat every moron leavin comments below is brainwashed by loose change. even thought u conpletely just like. debunked his ass. they still wanna belive him. great vid. 5/5 atleast someone here has common sense.
911letsroll 2 years ago
O.K., but how did a novice pilot, how had never actually been behind the controls of a commercial airliner before, manage to skim the ground at several hundred miles an hour and then successfully strike its target only a couple of stories high.
I'm no pilot, but that would have to be difficult even for a veteran pilot. At that speed if the trajectory was off by even a little bit the plane would have crashed short or over flown the building. I think questions are warranted here
Crimble67 2 years ago 2
The 16ft hole was on the second floor where the tale section hit the building. The hole in the first floor was 90ft, plenty of room for a plane.
xxBIGKINGxx 2 years ago
They just did a thumb down to you, it's like they WANT it to be an inside job, and will ignore any proof that says otherwise.. sad
Krygeryo 2 years ago
You are a BOOB...if you had a brain in your idiotic head you could see the hole is not large enough for an airplane of that size to fit into. DID IT DESENTIGRATE BEFORE IT HIT!!??? =o Nice 16 ft hole. Must be the same size as the one in your ass. Also you SHOULD look at photos and film of other airliner disasters and tell the world a plane crashed there. You right wing conservative douchebag!!!! Admit your "dream administration" was nothing but a pack of common thieves....=) Nice video...
TheMexicanJulio 2 years ago
The fuesalage of the aircraft was only 12 feet 4 inches wide, its completely possible it fit into a 16 foot hole (btw it was bigger then 16 feet)
Laysoles 2 years ago
check out the video response it is a video of the of the light poles that the PLANE cut in half on sept 11
LILJINXXXXXXX 3 years ago
Ha ha I looked this guy is a shill ! So is Edgebitchll2 he is a Oy Boy schlept acting like a maven. Oy Vey ! Too funny the whole group talk to one another even though told NOT to ! You should be put on fence patrol at noon private! lol You need MK-ULtra training you stink! Totally ineffective work,... read the responses!
(Other than edgebitchLL2 she's a shill also)
SAYYOURROSARY 3 years ago
This was more lame than any other "debunk" MK-ULtra Mousad lies I've ever seen. As if this "proves" anything !
The "evidence" was handled BY the PERPS. Shadow Forensics disprove
many "gubermint photos" BUSTED !
LOL nobody said a global hawk did this!
why waste a global hawk? This was bad/lame MK-ULtra you should be punished by you're superiours YOU MADE THINGS WORSE...lol bonehead Oy-boy ! lol convert now, you are desposable (any "friends" missing?")
SAYYOURROSARY 3 years ago
NO, it is very obvious that it was a missile, the shape and size of the damage was nothing a plane could have done.
uhohamby 3 years ago
At 2:30 it says "This is a Boeing 757." That's not a Boeing 757. So no ones facts are correct.
walt2988 3 years ago 2
it's a minor mistake I don't even bother checking wether it is really a mistake or you're just talking trash ;-)
911MmRy 3 years ago
Your comment from 2 months back about minor mistakes and not bothering to check them.....that says it all to me..."believe what youre told and shut the fuck up"....sorry I cant live my life that way
TheMexicanJulio 2 years ago
@911MmRy i mean if you want your *credibility* to stand..... you'd get your facts straight.... oh wait you're 17 ;D
IHateYourFaceYo 1 year ago
2:34 -> It isnt a 757..
its a 767!
osmosi 3 years ago
A test plane flys into a concrete wall which explains how 6 ton steel/titanium engines could have been pulverized beyond identification at impact?
How then did the Army supposedly identify almost all the supposed people on the flight?
The impact was powerful enough to pulverize 6 tons of titanium/steel engines, but not human remains? LMFAO
How'd a jet ever got remotely close to the Pentagon given that that airspace is some of the most well secured in the world? A little oversight? LOL
ghostzapper2006 3 years ago 2
O really? You think so? that the "airspace is some of the most well secured in the world".. May i direct you to look at the pentagon on google earth.. and then look to the south east bout a mile.. notice anything? LIKE A MOJOR INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT WITH THE APPROACH FOR RUNWAY 33 COMING RIGHT IN OVER THE PENTAGON???? A little oversight? fuckwit
cjnewson88 3 years ago
correction - Approach for 15
cjnewson88 3 years ago
Of course it was a plane. There were 4 planes that day only we couldnt find any, LOL!
We'd rather rely on HEARSAY THAT THERE WERE PLANES (fake witnesses) THAN SOLID EVIDENCE -PHYSICAL OR VIDEO (which is being withheld, hmm I wonder y?).
LIKE JERRY MCGUIRE SAID: SHOW ME THE PLANES!
2JOHNNYT 3 years ago 7
@2JOHNNYT All you have to do is google image it. It will show you multiple of photos showing plane debris and those steel and titanium engines. All you have to do is spend a couple of seconds to type in "9/11 pentagon plane parts." Simple as that. It seems your purposely being that stupid.
phlyegles43 1 year ago
@phlyegles43 Do u think the way they PLANTED the terrorists passports at the WTC and the bag of Korans and flight manuals at Boston Logan is they way they PLANTED those parts? Geez Louise Son wakey wakey, stop eating the crap they feed u in the pen with the rest of the sheep (NBC, CNN, FOX, NY SLIMES), run out and start thinking for yourself, here DEAD JFK might give you a laugh while giving u the dope on 911 watch?v=8DQp0QxkBCU
2JOHNNYT 1 year ago
Comment removed
2JOHNNYT 1 year ago
This video fails. If a plane did hit the pentagon then why wasn't there any pictures of the wide damages the wings should have caused. If they're able to cut through steel then the wall of the pentagon should be much of a challenge.
Typhoon07 3 years ago 2
Twoofers fail. There are plenty of pics.
oilempire*us/bogus*html
And this is a kookspiracy site. So dont pretennd there is an agenda.
Just click on the pentagon section. All the proof you need. All one needs now is to be man enough to believe what you see.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago 2
This video made me look at things different from what people say happened on 9/11. Still, I am not so sure about the pieces that where left. I think they are too small coming from such huge plane. But like it says, the concrete walls actually worked. Thanks for this video 911, it was really good.
Agownsrs2 3 years ago
These "Screw Loose Change" people crack me up, lol. My dad works on aircraft, and sorry a Boeing 757 didn't crash into the Pentagon, sorry, and completely break apart, sry, don't happen, and if it could even happen b/c physics won't allow a plane that big to get that close to the ground at that speed, it still wouldn't break apart.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
you don't give any reasons at all to support your claims other than your dad works at boeing.
911MmRy 3 years ago
He used to work for Boeing now he works for Delta, but I shouldn't have to try to explain shit, if people would realize that a 757 can not do what it says it would have done. sry. Defies more laws of physics than shit.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
so you think they should have pulled out the plane in one piece or the plane should have lain in front of the pentagon?
911MmRy 3 years ago
Not in one piece, but in more 757 like sized pieces.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
watch?v=asZa3w9Tuo8
have you ever seen this plane how it gets shredded?
911MmRy 3 years ago
Sure have, my dad laughs at that line of reasoning, for one, an F-4 Phantom is an old ass a/c, its not even in service anymore, maybe for show, but not military, and another thing is, its bolted to the track, so it can't go up or down, its like on a track, and the F4 is made of older materials, than a 757, so, that whole this F4 phantom flying into a solid concrete block is a shitty reason, and plus, if it exploded like that, how come the Pentagon was pentrated all the way to the third ring.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
only one ring was reinforced concrete on the first floor. and that's where the plane hit. and that video is only one example of how it is possible for steel or any material to be shredded into dust or little crunches or whatever. I realize it's an excessive example. the reality is there were enough intact pieces found that are totally consistent with the thought that a plane crashed into the building at FULL speed
911MmRy 3 years ago
ok, w/e you say man, my dad works on aircraft, for 20yrs, his friends, pilots whom I have talked to, flight engineers, etc, have all said the same thing about the Pentagon, its not possible, even my Physics teacher says it wasn't possible, due to ground effect, maybe you should learn about Ground effect, and if you really read it, you will learn that its impossible to fly a 757 that fast that low, and thats not a lie, thats physics.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
so when it is so easily explained that there is really no chance in hell that the mainstream version of the events on 9/11 are physically possible, why the fuck doesn't any expert with some influence do something about it and actually achieves something. face it. the cters have done nothing but convincing gullible teenagers and gave some people a new hobby.
911MmRy 3 years ago
Actually there are many experts, that done studies, that prove a plane didn't hit the Pentagon, b/c for one its physically impossible, I have been told by many pilots of Boeing 757s, on youtube, that its not possible. Lol, teenagers, half the fucking US doesn't believe the official events, and I don't think all of them are teenagers.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
"Actually there are many experts, that done studies, that prove a plane didn't hit the Pentagon, b/c for one its physically impossible"
why haven't they achieved anything but laughter and confusion amongst the people that call themselves "truthers"?
"I don't think all of them are teenagers"
I meant and gave some other people a new hobby. I know not only teenagers are gullible;-)
911MmRy 3 years ago
The only gullible people are the people who don't believe the government lies.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
APC. Then your physics teacher is a MORON. Whatever you are paying for the class, youre paying too much.
Taking your (fake) conversation with the physics teacher to its logical conclusion, it would be impossible for a plane to ever crash at high speeds.
Obvious Bullshit.
But, on the issue of Ground Effect ("GE"), and how it would apply to a 757 hitting the pengaton, here is what people who actually KNOW WTF they are talking about know.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
cont...
1) GE is NOT a magical "cusion of air" that follows each Aiplane around, directly beneath it, at ground level.
2) GE occurs generally when the wing is within (approx) one to 1/2 wingspan of the ground.
3) GE forms from the wing tip voticies (Google that, Chris, since you have no idea what they are, im sure) are prevented from forming, due to proximity to the ground.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
4) A reduction or elimination of votices reduces the induced drag on the airplane
5) As induced drag is reduced, a lower Angle of Attack or AOA(Google that too, Chris) is needed to fly a level altitude
6) consequently, if a plane descends into GE, and the AOA remains the same, the plane will have increased lift, and "float" as the reduction in induced drag results in a greater lift coefficient.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
7) Vorticies are "strongest" when the plane is at a higher AOA. Example, landing and taking off. Slowest speeds require highest AOA's to provide lift.
8) By extention, a low AOA profile will have very weak, small, "tight" vorticies. Smaller GE would be experienced in that case.
9) smaller, tighter vorticies means that during a high speed, low AOA profile A) Youd have to fly a lot lower than normal before entering GE, and 2) the GE "strength" itself is greatly reduced.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
10) At high speeds, the ratio of induced drag to parasitic drag lowers greatly--such that any change in inudeced drag has very little effect, since its a smaller % of total drag at high speed.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
11) combine 9 and 10 together and it means
A) the total GE is a lot weaker at high- speed/low-AOA
B) youd have to fly a lot lower than normal to get into GE at high speed/low AOA
c) the GE itself will be weaker
d) the much weaker GE will also affect the airplane less. Because at higher speeds, the airframe is less susceptible to GE because the ratio between induced drag and parasitic drag is much lower than at landing.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
13) The 757 (and 767 for that matter) is equipped with flight management systems, a central air data computer, and their AP/Flight director systems all combine to damp out any aero instabilities due to GE.
While the systems would not be programmed conteplating GE at high speed/low AOA, its still going to assist to the limits of its programming.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
In summary,
The GE (given 77s profile) would have been a minute, barely perceptible (if at all) split second event that would have done ZERO to prevent 77 from hitting the pentagon as it OBVIUOSLY DID.
Chris, you can take this to your physics teacher. Maybe he will give you extra credit for it! haha <----(Nelson Munz laugh)
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
But the fact is, that a high speed, low-nose descent (flight 77 profile) would have small, weak votricies. The airframe would me much less sesceptible to any GE. The GE itself will be much weaker. And to what extent the GE would try to effect the airplane, the FMS is programmed to cancel it out.
There might have been a split second, blink-of-an-eye moment where GE made a small sliver of difference. But not enough to alter the outcome.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
No, my physics teacher and my dad who has worked on large aircraft, at Boeing the 747, 757, Delta CRJ-200, NWA RJ85, said its not possible, the resistance from the air compressed under the aircraft at that speed, could not allow it to fly that low, no lower than about 60 feet.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
I dont care who told it to you, they are WRONG. I have explained why.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
ok, w/e you say.
I was also told by a NWA airlines 757 copilot.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
LOL< then dont fly NWA, since their pilots are IDIOTS.
You can keep expanding the lie all you want to. You can expand the lie and claim that all 60k ALPA members personally emailed you to confirm it.
Lies dont overcome facts. People who actually KNOW what GE is, know my preveious explanation is correct.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
ok, w/e, you keep believing the wonderful official scifi that has been told to you.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
Better still, go fly with that (imaginary) 757 pilot who you claim told you this.
Then go ahead and dive the plane down a 1k fps at 500 mph.
Then assure him its OK, because planes cant crash into the gound at 500 mph. LOLOLOLOLOL.
When he freaks out and levels the plane off to avoid the crash, youll KNOW the youre whole line of BS is BS!
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
He is not imaginary he is a real pilot, I have met in person, thank you very much.
Ummm, the official story has the plane flying level over the ground at 4 about feet, when it passed over the highway, and made its signature level down, to the first floor, at over 500mph, its not possible, but more power to you if you can see it happening.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
He is not imaginary he is a real pilot, I have met in person, thank you very much.""
Then never fly with him, because hes a MORON without any clue about the aerodynamics that effect his airplane.
Either that, ot hes lying to you, because he thinks its funny to make you look soooo follish on YT. One of the other.
It doesnt take much for YOU To even go to a library, or go online and purchase flight manuals for CFI's
They will tell you, everything I said is correct.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
ok, I will personally email Boeing, and ask them.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
Since he is real, put it to the test.
Go fly with him and dive the plane at 1000 fpm.
If he pulls it out, then you KNOW hes lying to you. If not, Ill send flowers to your famly.
LOLOL.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
And again, the official story has it flying level into the Pentagon, not in a dive, but level at 4 feet above the ground, at max thrust.
But, I will email Boeing, the makers of the aircraft, and see what they say.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
LOL, Ok, cite me a source where the official story says "level for severaql seconds at 4 feet above the ground!" LOLOLOL
watch?v=DzR-q0ijbV0
Thats the recreation of the FAA data done by the pilots for 911 truth--so obviously, they are part of the kookspiracy--so you KNOW they wont be covering up for the govt.
And as even THEY admit, it is a descent the WHOLE way down. There was no leveling off.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
Yea, its funny, the flight path is off, the official path. I have seen a video which shows where the the poles positions are in this video, and its way off.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
OK, well, if youve seen it before, then you KNOW the official story is not level flight, at 4 feet agl.
So, why lie and pretend that was the official stroy--when you admit you knew better?
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
ok, well, then tell it to all the ppl who are trying to prove that a 757 hit the Pentagon, like that 9/11: Case Study video.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
Ummm, the official story has the plane flying level over the ground at 4 about feet...""
incorrect. the last split second that that low and fast. But it was in a descent the whole way.
when you are traveling at 780 fps, its a blink of an eye from the lightpoles to the pentagon.
As such, you can still hit the poles and the pentagon, since your GS is still 780 fps.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
Well, according to the governments released Pentagon footage, its pretty level to me, and according to all the 9/11 truth debunkers, like that 9/11 Case Study based on the offical story, its level to the ground.
Also, I just email Boeing asking them if a Boeing 757 flying at over 450 kias, at rougly 4-5 above the ground, is possible.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
Translation, there is no "official story" that says the plane was 4 feet above the ground, flying level.
In contrast, we do have the FDR data (which is the official release) that shows the descent all the way down.
Further
1) you cant judge motion from a still picture. Duh.
2) at 780 fps, and -1000 fpm, the plane is moving horizonatlly much faster than its descending.
As such, a last split second foto can look level, even when its a descent.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
ok, well, then tell it to all the ppl who are trying to prove that a 757 hit the Pentagon, like that 9/11: Case Study video.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
APC, critical piece you are missing. Lets assume -800 fpm descent (estimated from FDR). with 780 fps ground speed thats a glide ration of approc 58-1.
Meaning the plane has traveled forward 58 feet for every foot of descent.
So, even if what we see is the last 160 feet of the flight, thats only 2 feet of descent.
Thats going to look basically level. 2 feet of descent is immesurable to the eye.
Thats going to appear very level
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
So, because the speed was so fast, it covered a hell of a lot of ground, just to drop one foot.
Or, to simplify it. Gragh a line that is runs 60 units long, while rising only 1 unit high.
Thats the approx glid path. Now, because the speed of 77 was so high, the vid you see (or the 77 case study) is 1/1ooth of the first unit on your grapgh. Since it represents such a small fraction in time, its not a discrenable descent for such a small fraction of a second.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
ok, and its amazing that in the FDR, a man that couldn't pilot a Cessna for shit, can pilot this massive aircraft so nicely.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
Actually he had a commercial and ATP cert. Ask your fake 757 co-pilot friend what that means.
Also, its hardly an act of an expert to CRASH an airplane.
He was refused rental in a Cessna, because the owners of the plane werent sure of his SA, Terminal procedures, and landing the AC.
NOT because he didnt understand "up down left right."
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
Well, the guy that trained him, said he couldn't fly the aircraft, he always had the instructor take over, etc.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
Umm, no, I just quoted the instructor--here it is again.
There's no doubt in my mind that once that [hijacked jet] got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it," he said."""
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
"""Despite Hanjour's poor reviews, he did have some ability as a pilot, said Bernard of Freeway Airport. "There's no doubt in my mind that once that [hijacked jet] got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it," he said."""
Thats one of HH's instructors. So much for the LIE that he was incompetent to the task.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
Yea, well, someone who had bad reviews on a little piss ant aircraft, flying a 757, nicely like that, takes more than Cessna skill, and certainly more than half ass cessna skill.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
flying yes. Crashing no.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago 2
ok, explain the perfect grassy lawn, to which these at max thrust engines passed over.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
LOL, whats there to explain? You can chain and chock a plane STANDING STILL and thrust over grass and it dont bother it.
Sure not going to bother it being flown-over for a mircosecond.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
ok, dude.
Explain why the FDR shows the aircraft way off the said path to have hit the poles, and still over 300 feet, above the ground, when it passes over the highway.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
Im not sure that it shows that. What is your basis for the claim?
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
Ummm, the information displayed on the right side of presentation, and the light pole info, was added in, as well, as the official flight path before the FDR was released.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
Ahh, I can see youre confuse here.
The FDR data is inadequate for making exact ground tracks measurments. For example, the data stamped from the heading indicator: Heading indicator can show one heading (which is recorded in the FDR) when (by xwind, or rudder inputs) the actual ground track is entirely different.
Regarding the ALtimeter, there is no FDR data that tells us to what value the Atlimeter was set. So, cant say for sure what the true alt was at any point in time.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
cont..Also, what the pilots for "truth" dont tell is is that
1) the last second of recorded data is not ALWAYS the moment of the crash. There can be several seconds of flight subsequent to the last recorded entry.
2) MOST importantly, there was a blank time stamp one second after the last set of data. As such, the last entry is assured to not be the last instant of flight.
Ergo, its a innacurate bases to back track from.
2)
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
cont2...
Plus, because data is recorded on once per second that last recorded ALT reading could have been as much as 1.99 seconds before the crash.
So, at any point in the FDR presentation, the plane could have been, in reality, almost 1500 feet behind the depiction in the presentation.
EdgemanLL2 3 years ago
Actually to show how much they know, this "Screw Loose Change" @ 2:31, that is Boeing 767, I can tell by the nose gear, and even the nose.
Airportchris2 3 years ago
None of what you say makes sense; for example: That little video clip that you showed has a little plane, probably only a 1-2 tons at most. Not only that, but think about what it is crashing into; that cement block, for the size of the plane, is way more think and solid then the pentagon. You seem to rant on the fact that they plane wasn't vaporized. If it wasn't then where is it? and even if it was, the engines would not have been. Either way, it don't make sense.
LucyGriffithsfan 3 years ago
care to follow the links in this videos description box and look at the photos to avoid lokking like a complete dumbass and making the "truth" movement look even crappier than it does without you?
911MmRy 3 years ago
sorry but your argument is full of Ad hominem fallacies
viaesta 3 years ago
oh wow, youre entire acount is dedecated to debunking everything that happened on 9/11
You don't explain anything, you just add to the confusion.
And when you don't get your way, you start calling people nazis? Fuuck you.
Proffessionals on the scene that day said that that was THE Aircrafts engine, not "An engine part"
and wings don't make a large impact? Okay other than that being physicaly impossible, it still doesn't tell us why there was absolutely Zero impact on the pentagon.
JustSigningIn 3 years ago
the entire account of lc is dedicated to manipulate people into thinking the us govt is all evil, and killed 3000 of its own citizens on complete daylight. when you think that's not adding confusion to the topic of 9/11 then think again.
this actually explains a lot. it proves that lc lied. then you can understand the whole deal with 9/11 better.
the wings were damaged by 5 lightpoles and "folded" back and went right into the pentagon, and it went into the first floor! not where lc suggests
911MmRy 3 years ago
The poles are made to break right off at the ground,so as to cause hardly any damage to the cars that hit them,but they're supposed to have "folded" back wings,like the ones that practically cut Tower Two in half?Hmmm...
Taranau 3 years ago
who said tower two was cut in half by the wings?
911MmRy 3 years ago
You don't think the govt. would kill its own people, hehe, get a clue!
Airportchris2 3 years ago
google that guy or folow the links in this videos description. he is a holocaust denier;-)
911MmRy 3 years ago
It was hit by a predator missile - see video response
9114freedom 3 years ago
Predator missiles do not leave wing prints, you moron. Explosive warheads do not make a cone of destruction inside the building that is narrower on the out-bound side. Get a freaking clue, punk.
leftysergeant 3 years ago
Amen.
Seikeii 3 years ago
if it was hit, it was hit with a bunkers buster...designed to smash then blow several feet in
djgraph404 3 years ago
Everything that exploded exploded outside. Nothing exploded inside. The damage patterns do not suggest or support any such theory, to the idea of anyone with a clue how munitions work. A bunker buster would also not print wing marks on the facade, nor carry enough fuel to produce such a large fireball and set so many Class A fires inside the building. Any detonation would, further, have spread debris back out the entrance hole and spread the bricks at the punch-out over a wider area.
leftysergeant 3 years ago
One problem with your theory, djgraph. Bunker buster would leave only a small round hole on the in-bound side. But the small round hole is out-bound. Learn something about explosives bfore you make an ass of yourself in public.
leftysergeant 3 years ago
And I am still waiting for one of these drooling twoofers to tell me how anything but a 757 could have left those wing marks on the facade of the pentagon or in the ground at Shanksville.
leftysergeant 3 years ago 2
Well, you have to remember that the conspiracy was so thurough, that they probably had Cheney himself run out and paint the wing marks on the facade of the building right after the missle hit. He then took his light-saber, Judy Wood has more on the magical star wars weapons of the NWO, and sliced down all the light poles.
TBlake34 3 years ago
That actually makes more sense than the crap that Nazis like Bollyn or psychotics like Killtown or Avery try to sell us.
leftysergeant 3 years ago
Thanks for an informative, well made video.
litxlit 3 years ago 2
w w w . question 911 . com / linkout . p h p? file name = File % 20911 % 20 Unsolved % 201of2. w m v Remove all the spaces in the link above. Here's my proof on Flight 93, at 3:00 in the video.
upssales 3 years ago
tell me why should I watch a link from someone that can't even answer ONE SIMPLE question from me, whose answer is that everything u say is a HOAX?
911MmRy 3 years ago
Q. What happened to Flight 93 in Shanksville? Where's the wreckage?? You can't explain that. And you can't explain Flight 77 either. Where are pics of the supposed plane inside the Pentagon?? What punctured the hole in the inner ring?
upssales 4 years ago
911MmRy 4 years ago
There you go...more cut & paste's. Nice. At this point, I'm confused as to how you manage to feed yourself on a daily basis. Because you are a complete idiot.
upssales 4 years ago
cause u won't understand nor properly address what I say
u cant give a reasonable answer for why NOT ANY MOTHERFUCKIN CTER GETS HIS FRICKIN EVIDENCE TO COURT
u understand that?
the only answer is because they suck as much as their evidence and thats really hard;)
911MmRy 4 years ago
Guess I'll ask again: (knowing you still won't answer)
Q. What happened to Flight 93 in Shanksville? Where's the wreckage??
You can't explain that. And you can't explain Flight 77 either. Where are pics of the supposed plane inside the Pentagon?? What punctured the hole in the inner ring?
upssales 4 years ago
type in google pic search "flight 93 wreckage"
type in google pic search "flight 77 wreckage"
type in youtube search "Debunk WTC"
type in google search "how to think logically"
911MmRy 4 years ago
Ok. done. No plane inside the Pentagon pics. No plane wreckage of Flight 93. Even the Mayor of Shanksville said there was no plane wreckage there. No bodies, no seats, no luggage, no plane parts whatsoever. "Nothing" he said. No what? You holding top secret pics or something?
upssales 4 years ago
so u cant even research the internet using google
and no wonder that u didnt find anything in 15 min
911MmRy 4 years ago
That's it, try to get out of facing the facts by telling me to go do something that's completely impossible. It'll take a hell of a lot more people than me to bring this administration to justice for their terrorist acts on 9-11. As far as shouting at the memorials....do you not realize that a LARGE part of those people shouting are from the FAMILIES of 911 victims?? The one's who wouldn't take the government's money to shut them up? WAKE UP!
upssales 4 years ago
then call your friend steven jones to take his "irrefutible" evidence to court
and u say it yourself it's impossible! so why do u still bother convincing people that 2+2 is 5?
and the families aren't a large part I doubt that. and even if it is. when it's easier for them to deal with their loss THAT way I have nothing but pity for them
911MmRy 4 years ago
There you go making assumptions again, as if the government would offer money to families to shut them up. You base this on nothing and this would be the worst idea in the world anyway, seeing as that would be ADMISSION of guilt and don't you think 100% of the families would turn on the government, not just a few? your story is just full of holes.
JLaw012 4 years ago
Jlaw- no assumptions. They offer more than money to shut families up. They went as far as to BRIBE THEM in their weakest time. Their time of mourning! And I have proof. It's a known, admitted FACT that they would only allow the families of Flight 93 victims to listen to the blackbox recordings 'IF' they signed sworn statements that they would not discuss what they heard on them, EVER. And that's not cover up and bribery??
upssales 3 years ago
Do you know how many families don't get along in this country? How many could honestly care less if their family member was dead or not? Yet, would JUMP at the chance for a multi-gazillion dollar insurance payout once they're dead. And of those, who would say, "well, I hadn't talked to my son/daughter in yrs cuz I hated him/her, but I could sure use a few million!". That's part of why 100% of the families don't rebel. Many others have though, because the truth is worth more than the money.
upssales 3 years ago
u can thank hillary clinton and her friends from the insurance and drug companies for that they are the reason that no Universal Health Care System has been set up. USA is the only western country which has no Universal Health Care
u should get your facts straight! it seems like I know more about the USA than u who is an american;)
911MmRy 3 years ago
You know what sales, your a sick fuck...You can't make an assertion that the families are that immoral that they would not care. You are lumping the VAST MAJORITY of the families into that category. sorry but your an asshole for saying such nonsense. go fuck yourself.
JLaw012 3 years ago 3
Upssales says:
"They went as far as to BRIBE THEM in their weakest time. Their time of mourning!"
And then says:
"How many could honestly care less if their family member was dead or not?"
LMAO, you contradict yourself you fool. You are the easiest person to call out as you call yourself out. Open mouth, insert foot eh!! LMAO
KnowledgeIsPowr 3 years ago 2
U R GULLIBLE
u have that shit from Loose Change and all they do is LIE! get that in your head!
Loose Change even uses an article saying "Families say Flight 93 tapes prove heroism"
how can they say that if they arent allowed to talk about it?
watch?v=x15ebMS3wtQ
I even uploaded that video just for u;)
911MmRy 3 years ago
Prove it! just because you say so or some stupid conspriacy website says so does not make is a fact. Wheres the paper work? who was the person who contacted them from the government? Does not matter if they just let the families listen, that is not proof of anything. It only says that it could be to graphic and horrible for the publics ears. Your full of it.
JLaw012 3 years ago
I bet the "ctrl" and "c" is completely worn off your keyboard. Because all you do is repeat the same shit over and over. "your stupid theories...your stupid theories...blah, blah, blah". If there weren't so many unanswered questions and lies about 9-11, there wouldn't be so many conspiracy theories. FWIW, you are among the 20% or less of americans that actually believe our govt about 9-11. FACT.
upssales 4 years ago
u dont have a clue about wheter what I believe or where I come from. I'm german not american;)
the world isnt black or white as u seem to think. to think "either u are a guy that believes every word the gov says or a guy that believes every word they say is a lie" is wrong. u understand that?
there are things in between
that's the way the world goes. kind of like stereotypes. they dont apply to every person;) u understand that now?
911MmRy 4 years ago
Oh, a Nazi. That explains everything. And like I said, you'll be right at home soon enough. The U.S. is quickly on its' way to becoming Nazi Germany. Sig Heil!
upssales 4 years ago
k that was you proving your stupidity!
u think all germans are Nazis? u really lack comprehension of the reality if that's what u think. as well u dont understand that the world isnt black and white. your an intolerant fuck that has its stereotypes and his conspiracy theories with which he can feel like a hero exposing the vile government, while in reality you are exposing yourself as a retard. that's just a heads up for when u dare to go on the streets with those claims;)
911MmRy 4 years ago
Again, you LIE and put words in mouth! Does it ever end with you people?? Did I say "all Germans are Nazi's"??? NO! But you obvioulsy are one. All you ever do is say people like me "stereotype". Another favorite cut and paste of yours. And I'm about ready to make my own cut and paste for you. It's probably gonna be something like, "dumbfuck". Or "ignorant-ass". Or "communist". "Bush Admin Flunky". Regardless, just keep ignoring the TRUTH and FACTS. I'll keep throwing them in your face.
upssales 4 years ago
u know the fuction of this symbol:"?"?
911MmRy 4 years ago
Oh yea, about the "dare u go on the streets" statement to me....you really are a Nazi! Isn't that what they used to say over there? Well, that and "may I see your papers?" You've been out'd little Hitler. You're communist fuck.
upssales 4 years ago