People on the inside of The Pentagon were killed and therefor dead bodies.No passengers or crew were ever found.The lies which identifies passengers can not be substantiated,especially Barbara Olsen.I wonder what really happenned to them.Ted Olsen is either going along or is delusional.
If terrorist can cause this much death and distruction in one day with 4 planes, why have they not done it again in the last 10 years. So much about Sept 11 just doesn't add up. Will we ever know the truth or at least see the evidence on which the government based its offical story.
I also do not think it was a plane that hit the pentagon, but you should get your facts straight. There were bodies you can see pics that were submitted as evidence at the moussai ( sorry not sure of spelling) trial. You can find online. Please be more careful when putting forth info that is incorrect, it discredits the people who are trying to find the truth. Warning, the pics are quite graphic and disturbing.
did you pay attention in school? uranium doesnt explode in flames. u235 goes critical mass and explodes in nuclear bombs -________- the only reason depleted uranium is put onto some munitions is simply for the density for it to punch through armor. there is no incindiary effect, other than the rest of the round turning to liquid metal.
What happened to taking things into your own hands???? After everything YOU have done to show them....they do nothing. I am seriously scared for what is to come because your government is silent and turns a blind eye to YOU!!! They dont give a fuck what any of you think. Stand up and destroy your government because they are killing you without you fighting back!!! FIGHT BACK!!!! GO OVERTHROW YOUR GOVERNMENT BEFORE THEY HAVE YOU ALL KILLED.
With all of this evidence, all of these movies on youtube, why have the people of the United States not completely STORMED the white house, knocked the front door down PHYSICALLY grab whoever the fuck is in power and tossed them into the river (or burn at the stake) OBVIOUSLY your government WILL DO NOTHING TO HELP YOU, THEY WILL CRASH PLANES INTO YOU AND SEND YOU TO FIGHT THERE WAR FOR WHATEVER PURPOSE IT IS THAT THEY WANT YOU IN THERE FOR!!!
i will penetrate this guys ass with some heavy uranium. mark my words the moment this guy steps out of cover BOOM global hawk with heavy uranium striaght into his ass leaving his melted skin covering all entry holes. mark my words and mark them well. just kiddin not a bad video, mostly a pile a crap but some good starter questions for the new 911 arrival. overall the effort was good but you sounded like your really into getting a good mark for a school project. ok hit the showers
This seems to me more like the truth ! I also noticed at WTC laser target beams and flashes before the hit - possibly done the same way. Many thanks for this vid ! Excellent work. It has to be stated that if you crash a plane into a solid building (without prior blasting of masonry) you would be left with considerable wreckage, - particularly the tail fins - left outside on the ground below.
Free inexhaustible energy is real!But a few ppl make too many billions from our energy needs to let this technology be known,Get the blueprints for a free energy motor at LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM ,Be a part of the energy revolution!
Here's my conclusion on 9/11 conspiracies: The people who create these theories are extremists who want YOU to be afraid of the government. This fits their agenda that involves eventually overthrowing the US government. If you investigate their political stance on issues like taxation and social idealisms you will see that they fit that mold perfectly. Please don't be a sucker. It's just a political ploy.
Inside Job ! ....passenger planes dont melt away at crashes, but on 9-11 the rules of nature changed, a very special day for scientists and a worst day for democracy !
fail, global hawk or missile is impossible ! it was a plane !
global hawk dont explode if its crash, see this : /watch?v=xj7wuCXkiLU
missile cant destroy 5 lamp poles and hit the generator, the generator was hit by the right engine of flight 77, there is the print of the right engine that hit the generator, a missile cant make a such big print of a plane engine
I was at a crash site too soon! and ended up with atomized human skin remains on my flight suit that smelled like A person who just hugged you with perfume scent and no body insight! No fuslage or wings any where. Just a large gold sink in a burn out spot. Also there was no crater!
This is rediculous. Whether or not it was a conspiracy isn't the point. The point is that it happened, people died and there's nothing anyone can do to change that. People are so wrapped up in finding someone to blame that they forget the most important things in life.
@inamonianim you want to just throw your hands up and say "oh well...it's a wash" The fact is, we know who to blame, people understand this. You obviously don't. There were warnings abound about this attack yet no one did anything? People need to be punished for this.
@Poonard Okay, people need to be punished. So how are we going to go about doing that? Invade a country under false pretences? Lock up innocent people in guantanamo bay (I'm aware it's been closed) just for looking like they're from the middle east? Until our governments come up with an effective method of detecting the guilty parties, these videos and theories will always be pointless and empty.
Oh my God... are people still talking about this?? This was 9 years ago.. Get over it. Pissed off terrorists hijacked some airliners and crashed them into national landmarks.. It's been proven over, and over, and over, and over, regardless of what the idiots making one-sided conspiracy videos on youtube will dupe you into thinking. The physics, the investigations, everything... It adds up. It's been done. It fucking adds up. Get a life.
People can talk about what they want to in this world. What do you care? Why don't you go turn on a game a pay your cable to watch a movie or something, And let thinkers think about what they want to. It also adds up that Glide bombs were an important military item the government wanted to keep under wraps and so lied about the largest loss of the U.S. military at sea in history aboard the TroopShip Rhona. And where were you while they were giving young men at Tuskeegee Syphillis. Kool Aid
have you watched the servailence camera that is accross the street from the pentagon ???a cop drives by then shortly after the ''plane'' hit and you can clearly see the front of this OBJECT AND IT IS NO BIG AIRCRAFT IT IS POINTED AT THE END,, WAY TO SMALL TO BE AND POINTED to be any airliner, thats real talk !!!if 1engine melted the other would have done the same,, you cant even see it hit it just explodes pause it at the right time and you can see the missle or drone
You crazy conspiracy theorists should quit asking questions! Whatever the government says is the gospel truth! Anyone who questions the government is a domestic terrorist!
Stop asking questions and believe what the government says!
Next thing ya know these crazy people will start saying that Kennedy was shot by some guy on the Grassy Knoll and that a group of globalist bankers control the flow of money!
I seen in the wikileaks 9/11 pagers on the morning of the attack CNN was posting the story of a Drone being shot down by the Iraq army, when I seen that it was very interesting. They just happend to lose one that day in Iraq.
And they just happen to find some of the hijackers' passports in the fucking streets after crashing into a building and blowing up? Now that sounds worse than these conspiracies. Its magic. LOL Fucking sheep!
2 words for you sheep: Operation Northwoods. Read up and ask yourself "Does this sound like 9/11"? Would our government stage a terrorist attack to have a pretext for war? And we still haven't found Osama Bin Laden after 9 years? WMD in Iraq? Nope
@leadzhead Opperation Northwoods... oh I get it! The fact that the government was willing to FAKE the deaths of 4 colledge students means that they're willing to ACCUALLY KILL 3000 people. That makes PERFECT sence.
@bbtrader, that's what I asked. Then I found out that there were no families that went to LAX airport. That's a true fact. I want someone to explain it to me and someone in gov't, not leaving it up to the rest of us to try and figure out.
Both security cameras and eyewitnesses saw a 757 hit the Pentagon on 9/11. And you idiots think it was staged. The evidence stares you in the face and you're too stupid to see it.
those "eyewitnesses" get paid to lie you DUMBFUCK!!!! 60tons of aircraft, where da fuck are the wreck parts???? WHERE IS THE HOLE IN THE WALL?? WHERE ARE THE HUMAN REMAINS????? GO BACK TO SCHOOL YOU DIPSHIT
So the govt paid hundreds of witnesses to lie. The holes in the building made by the plane werent made by the plane. The wreckage was never there, except in dozens of photos and videos. The bodies that were there werent there. I bet you truthers sleep with the lights on at night, because youre scared of the boogeyman. And good point bbtrader. Exactly what did happen to those 64 passangers?
@stavlaft EXACTLY someone comes to you with 500 million Federal Reserve Notes and you'll have no problem saying a quick line or two. Plus the money is easily printed and how would we know its been printed? we dont and thats why its so simple
@stavlaft thank you. common sense seems to be a rare commodity these days. are people really so stupid? if so, i think we're doomed. this piece of crap is going to turn out like JFK, remember? but unlike JFK, in which the only "eyewitness" account of the murder was the Zapruder film which didn't go public for 12 YEARS!. this is right in front of the public's eyes. all they have to do is open them. the WTC 1 & 2 are blown to kingdom come. WTF. Planes going right thru steel. it's just stupid.
All Global Hawks were at Edwards AFB on 9/11. I was part of the Global Hawk test and evaluation team at the time. Up through the summer of '02 when I retired from the USAF there was no capability to outfit any bombs/munitions on the GH. Now??? Who knows. Trust the gov't??? Hell no. But any speculation of Global Hawk involvement on 9/11 is absolutely paranoid lunacy with zero research into the early stages of the Global Hawk Development. MSgt W.
Decontamination, the use of dogs, prtoective clothings. It's crime scene stuff, if there was uranium those guys would be in Hazmat gear, not puny little jackets. Scrubbing is to remove possible incriminating evidence for innocent people's clothing.
This not being a boeing 757 I agree with, however my guess is placed to a smaller jet, chartered possibly, not your global hawk theory. As for photos, guess what, they censor those for the public, and don't picture everything unlike 24 hour video.
No, what is BS is to believe that 2 six ton titanium engines can be completely by a few thousand gallons of jet-grade kerosene. Dont you think its strange that the damage at the pentagon is totally inconsistent with the damage at the twin towers? 2 steel towers turned to dust compared to a concrete building with a little 15 foot hole that a jet could not possibly fit in. Also this is covered in "loose change 911" when they contact manufacturers of the APU.
@911REICHSTAG "Dont you think its strange that the damage at the pentagon is totally inconsistent with the damage at the twin towers? "
Not at all.
Twin towers are low quality commercial building build for prestige with anything that fits the goal (yeah, capitalism), pentagon is concrete made to withstand limited nuclear blast, from reinforced concrete of highest quality. A plane is huge but much less dense overall than any car. Titanium is strong per weight, but under pressure can vaporize.
"Dont you think its strange that the damage at the pentagon is totally inconsistent with the damage at the twin towers?"
Nothing strange. twin towers are typical low-cost magalithic construction from late phase of capitalism. Unlike pentagon, designed to withstand remote nuclear blast of limited strenght, made of reinforced concrete.
@krbosak hmm yes government "official" we believe you. we believe that this craft got through protected air space to the pentagon without nay one noting this. Yeah they usually let people in area air they are not suppose to be be. Just las t week when I went to Washington, I was off track a little and found my self over the white house, oops! I saw Michele getting dressed oh well it happens
@krbosak hmm yes government "official" we believe you. we believe that this craft got through protected air space to the pentagon without nay one noting this. Yeah they usually let people in area air they are not suppose to be be. Just last week when I went to Washington, I was off track a little and found my self over the white house, oops! I saw Michele getting dressed oh well it happens
@911REICHSTAG 2 things, 1, the plane may actually have sustained engough damage hitting the ground to not make a big impact so also making wreckage hard to find, as it more than likely disentigrated. 2 the plane probably didn't make a large hole beacause if it is the building that houses all American defenses and intelligence THEY'D FUCKING PROTECT IT!
If a plane of the supposed official weight grounded in front of the building before impact, there would be no ground or grass left in front of building.
I am Mr. McDonnel and I say this is BS unless you prove otherwise.
This is an apu like in hunderts similar crashes, this is a plain fact that anybody from aviation recognize in seconds, a fact so doesnt depends on what anybody said, and if one said one is unprofessional (or has secondary goals).
@krbosak This is from an AGM-34 that was one of 4 launched from C130 at targets in D.C. and NYC. The component is not a 757 APU or engine part. The landing gear part found is not a 757. It's ILLEGAL for people to pickup debris at a crash site till it's been marked and photographed. There was no 757 wreakage. The FOIA videos show no 757 wreakage and no wall collapse. This was a very sloppy and illegal classified orders. They violated the constitution and the trust of the people.
@krbosak the only thing that wasn't melted completely?? nickel steel and titanium from the engines melted so much they were unrecoverable and completely unrecognizable? what drugs are you on cause I want some. and what about the punch out hole in C-ring of the pentagon? i'm pretty sure superman would have trouble going through three rings of the pentagon. i could keep going but i'm not wasting anymore time questioning and correcting morons like you.
Over 20 people clearly saw the commercial airplane but most described it as almost pure white (not AA). 1 saw it flying over the south parking lot of the Pentagon at a right right bank (within range of runway 15 at Reagan) moments after the explosion.
Other witnesses claim to have seen an AA plane but it was very small (8-12) passengers and others claim a missile. If these two crafts flew nearly simultaneously, its logical that most people would have the faster, smaller aircraft.
A few photos online (likely photoshopped) of an RQ-4 UAV painted to look like an American Airlines plane show how easy it might be, at a high rate of speed, to confuse the drone for a small AA plane.
I believe it is possible that the RQ-4 was fitted with an augmenting charge warhead and an internal explosive payload similar to a Tomahawk missile.
Uranium sounds far fetched but why the use of protective gear and decontamination? WTF?
Those bright spots are propably caused by kinetic energy from the impact.
That pentagon thing really troubles me. There's really nothing pointing towards a big plane but still there are so many witnesses (no actual interviews just quotes) and DNA samples of the passengers. This is not an ordinary conspiracy theory, this is a crime scene.
The pentagon is an old building - and quite a bit of asbestos was used in the pipe insulation and ductwork jacketing when it was constructed - standard procedure is to wash down after exposure to asbestos dust - so as not to take it home with you and expose others to it. - the wash down protocol has nothing to do with a crime scene. DU? I think not...
I did my own research as well. I compared the photos of all of the wreckage found on the Pentagon. I even compared the Global Hawk to the 757.
Back in 2001, the Global Hawk existed. Comparing the damage done to the Pentagon when they first aired it showed no large impact of an aircraft hitting the pentagon. We're talking about hundreds of thousands of tons in kinetic force here... it should obliterate the Pentagon, even if it was designed to withstand nuclear attacks.
So you don't trust the NTSB? They are the ones that made the animation, lol.
Of course you can contact Pilots for 9/11 truth, they got the raw CSV file via a FOIA request, and ironically, the NTSB called them and said it was a mistake, but by then, they had already seen the CSV file, etc.
No I do not trust 9/11 pilots for truth as a credible source of information. You can say the animation came from the NTSB but you said it came from the 9/11 pilots for truth.
Which quite simply I do not trust THEM.
As for the discrepancies in the animation I do not believe at all that that is a sign of some sort of ungodly complicated conspiracy theory that has no evidence to support it.
The fact that we are arguing over the fdr shows that you were flat out wrong about your no plane.
lol, you don't trust pilots, that's sad. Also, the animation came from the NTSB, Pilots for 9/11 truth got the original CSV Excel spreadsheet file, that was used to create the animation from the NTSB.
lol, well, the FDR shows where the plane was, and the FDR doesn't show it on the official flight path, so yes, it is already different from the official story.
No I trust real pilots. I do not trust 9/11 pilots for truth. Way to take what I said out of context like a true truther.
Just because pilots for 9/11 truth say they used the original NTSB data does not mean they did that was why I was asking for the original data without the animation.
In case you are not aware the truth movement is constantly telling people to find out the truth for themselves.
And finally the proof where your ground effect theory falls apart.
Ground effect roughly starts 1-1.5x the length of the wing span or (for 757) 124 ft-186ft from the ground. The experts agree that at the very most (keyword most) there is a maximum of only 2 seconds missing.
That means that the plane would have only experienced ground effect for a maximum of 2 seconds, and given its sharp descent there is not enough time for ground effect to lift the plane out of its descent.
lol, according to the offficial story, which doesn't match even the FDR animation, the plane wasn't in a deep as a descent, also, they said if Hanjour did a more nose dive approach it would have been impossible to pull back level in time to be show like it is in the shitty footage from the Pentagon.
The part mentioning the victims and remains is extremely repugnant. It shows the complete and utter ignorance of the author, about biohazard decontamination. The passengers were fragmented and burned almost to incineration in most cases. Burned jet fuel residue also permeated the entire area. If you've ever been at a plane crash you know the smell is acrid and it's not surprising the dogs were not reacting actively. The entire area, to the dog's nose, was probably thick with odor.
To CJSellers, Exactly, there are video security cameras at the Citgo Station, the Marriot hotel, etc, etc, Oh and the Virginia DOT cameras for the freeway section there. All were confiscated immediately by FBI teams. Gee , I thought it was just an AA 757, why all the secrecy then?
Saying there were witnesses who saw a plane is not scientific or conclusive, because they are people like Greta Van Susteren who is obviously an inside person to the knowledge of what is going on, Operatives plain & simple. There were plenty of actual non inside witnesses like the guy who was out on his boat who gave testimony which refuted the official story of the operatives. The ATC controllers at KDCA said the aircraft was a military craft not an airliner due to the hi performance actions
Remember Payne Stewart's jet being intercepted? There is absolutely no such thing as 4 hijacked airliners flying across several states without being intercepted by fighter jets unless there is some intentional sabotage or trickery, aka DICK Cheney giving orders to NORAD. When I was doing my flight training years ago one of the student pilots from our school accidently got off his flight plan path just a relatively small amount, there were 2 armed to the teeth fighter jets there in 10 minutes
ok the theory tht the U.S government fired a rocket into the pentagon is STUPID why fire a rocket into the building knowing that the damage wouldnt be like tht of a plane,
also if they flew 2 planes into the twin towers why not also the pentagon all the inpmortant instillations r underground in nuke proof bunkers
wheres the plane? simple question never mind name calling, point out the engines left after the collision. you are suposed to believe that the 'victims' were identified through their dna but these two steel and titanium engines vapourised on impact! come on you need a better arguement than your stupid. also see if you can find a pilot anywhere who could fly a 757 at 6 meters at 400+ mph for 1000 feet, good luck as it is not aerodynamicaly possible.
the people on the ground said they found engines, nose, wing parts and torso parts of the plane. e pics everyone points 2 as proof were taken a few days after the crash.
but the question is motive. why use a rocket if everyone knows it doesnt look like an aircraft crash. if the u.s gov is so good at 'false flage operations' then why is it so easy 4 people with no experience in engineering and all relevant industrys able 2 pull the theory apart
don't be so easily taken in, the internet is full of pics of the pentagon through all stages of the incident except funnily enough not the impact, in an area with reputidly 80 or so cctv cameras. some pics show small pieces of debrit lying on the grass and what looks like the remains of a small engine much too small to be from a 757 which has two engines around 9ft across. The US government is not good at false flag op's they are consistantly bad but the biggest lie is easiest to believe!
Unless I've missed some evidence, and I've been looking at this for years; You can't actually PROVE that an airliner did hit the pentagon...
there was a much photographed bit of unburnt fuselage debree which looks suspiciously placed... its just not enough from a scientific point of view
all the other evidence actually points to something else, especially that fan section which has nothing to do with a 757, including its APU... look it up.
Alright buddy lets review the evidence. Witnesses saw the aircrafts, there are pictures of the aircrafts, there was debris of aircrafts, there were human remains that were positively identified through DNA, there are 4 jets that were destroyed, the people on board those jets are clearly dead. The physical damage done to the buildings is consistant with large jets, and the debris recovered is also.
and the official story is that the hijackers only had basic training flying Cessna's and light aircraft and small amount of training in a flight simulator???
wen did they become so good at target practice with 747s lol
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
By the way it is not that difficult to fly a plane that low to the ground, hell they did not even have to worry about pulling out or anyting all they had to do was go fast along the ground.
Commercial pilots do it, military pilots do it and land their aircraft on aircraft careers and even do it in turbulent seas.
TBH yu stupd prick i'm a pilot.......never in my life have i seen ANY plane fly that low along the ground.....it's impossible unless your landing......get bent prick
I do not believe your a real pilot. A real pilot could do it. I know 6 pilots all of them say they could do it.
A few of them even brought up the point that the reason it is "impossible" is becuase most people don't have the death wish to do it. You do not need to even pull up all you do is crash.
Ever heard of ground effect? Its impossible to fly that low that fast. Air trapped between the wing and the ground generates more lift and trying to control it results in a MASSIVE pitch ocillation.
You dont even have to land the plane you just control it enough to crash into something.
You make it sound like these hijackers were courteous to the passangers, making for a smooth flight and a nice enjoyable comfortable flight. And I am sure they did not forget to turn on the fasten seatbelts sign either.
Again they werent trying to land the plane or make for a comfortable ride. Even with ground effect, they werent that low for that long.
Doesnt matter how long. They would lose control instantly. Only the alleged Pentagon aircraft would have to deal with this issue. Passenger comfort? LOL!! Give it up. Traitors are going to swing. The 911 evidence is about as subtle as a wheelbarrow full of cement falling off a scaffold.
You know there are many ways of dampening ground effect, and it does not mean a pilot would lose control.
And again I pointed out that they DO NOT CARE WHAT THE END RESULT OF THEIR FLIGHT WAS. They were not trying to survive that plane was going to crash regardless.
hey everyone, Laysoles is a stooge, he is here just to piss off people who rightly believe 9/11 was an inside job, sorry buddy, but your argument about the pentagon is retarded, the hole wasn't even REMOTELY LARGE ENOUGH, and what about the lawn? Ah, I don't even know why I waste my time with people like you, you'd would have been a good little nazi in a past life, huh?
For a plane that only has a 12 foot 4 inch fuselage a plane could easily fit in the original hole before the building collapse.
Maybe you should go look at the pictures damage to the pentagons surviving structure from the wings is evident. More over considering that building was built to be blast resistant with blast resistant windows it does not surprise me that the buildings structure held up as well as it did.
Please educate yourself before you run your mouth.
Your obviously not a pilot. A 757 at that speed, close to the ground would not be possible due to ground effect and natural flucuation. Even the most experienced pilots would tell you it's impossible to hold the plane perfectly smooth and level along that lateral and vertical navigation path. Now take an inexperienced pilot who was failing his flight checks in small G.A. aircraft, Get X-Plane or Flight Simulator and post your video recreating the crash. Tee Hee, Good Effing Luck!
Thing is my neighbor is a pilot for United Airlines and he says "the aircraft would experience some ground effect but ground effect is only really a big problem on small, light aircraft, but not much of a problem for a large jet.
I got that information from 20-30 year veteren pilots. As pilots who have flown those aircraft for 20-30 years, I think they would know ground effect and how it effects aircraft.
I changed the subject because it is obvious that I'm not going to convince you otherwise. The ground would be a mess because if a plane that big, flew that low, it would rip up the lawn with the force it was creating.
No you changed the subject because your argument can't stand. Your grass argument is garbage. It is one of those things that you just throw out there to distract from the original topic
Why don't you prove to me how it was not a plane.
Where are the pictures of missile debris? There is not a single one. Where are the witnesses who saw a missile? What kind of missile strikes lights that are spread apart?
No I changed the subject for the reason I said. And the grass argument is weak but it would be torn up if a plane going that fast,that low were to hit the pentagon. Im not saying a missle hit it, but it was not a plane. But whatever, believe what you want. I won't waste my time on you.
According to your logic of the grass than there should still be torn up grass and signs in the grass. A missile travels faster and has more exhaust heat.
Hmm. So that would seem to suggest no missile either. And in all honesty since when does an aircraft performing a strike, fire their missile at such a shallow angle that it punched a whole in the wall? Missiles come from above not from sideways, and for good reason too.
Not if the missile was traveling down at an angle, and a AGM-86C has the same max speed as a 757s cruise speed, of 530MPH.
Yes, the round hole, i have never seen a jet crash into a building and leave a round hole 3 rings into the pentagon, it seems Flight 77 was more advanced than your average 757.
I love how the only thing you could address was the angle of attack. I will give you that it could have been shot at a shallower angle but you couldn't explain anything else.
Please explain to me how NO ONE said they saw a missile? When was the last time a person mistook a 757 for a missile? Go to Iraq and ask some of the Iraqis whose homes were destroyed which ones where hit by a 757?
Also explain why there is no missile debris at all. There is plenty of aircraft debris.
The grass would show more distress than it does, b/c the thrust from these engines would have blow the grass down, etc, and the heat, etc, it wouldn't have caught the grass on fire, but the grass would be affected none the less, and a 757 can't fly this low at this speed, it's not possible, unless the aircraft was doing a nose dive, even then it begin to over stress and it would literally rip the plane apart.
I am not really convinced of your claims about the grass (or if you could even see it in the pictures provided. I will look into it further though.
The 757 can't fly that fast claim however is outright wrong.
My cousin for lockheed, and 2 friends of mine that work for boeing (all 3 are aerospace engineers) all agree that the 757 can travel that fast at a low altitude.
It would be dangerous(fly into low structures trees ect). and it would also age the planes parts, but it is possible.
I don't care, a 757 can't fly 5 feet of the ground, if these people you claim say it's possible, get them on camera, & ask them to explain how it's possible.
I didn't say it couldn't fly at low altitude, but at 530 MPH it would not be possible to get it below 50 feet, & thats if you really push the nose down, which according to the FDR animation made from the FDR data, shows the plane on a different flight path, and still 400+ feet in the air, it originally said 100+ ft, but that was corrected.
"A 757 can fly at that hight at that speed. The pilot would be experiencing ground effect and if the pilot wished to remain in control they would need to be constantly adjusting. In otherwords it would probably look like the plane was rocking back and forth badly."
"It would not be a comfortable ride and it would be dangerous but they were not concerned about either."
Airport Chris you have no argument other than my daddy said it was impossible. When clearly he is wrong.
lol, and in FDR their is no sign of rocking back and forth, a nice controlled approach into the Pentagon, by a guy who couldn't rent his own C172 without more lessons.
It is harder to fly a plane safely and controlled than it is to fly it erratically.
Multiple witnesses state the plane was rocking back and forth. Multiple witnesses also state the plane came in at a very steep angle towards the ground going fast.
Would you mind citing your source on the FDR claim because I am pretty sure I saw to the contrary.
I don't have raw data, I been trying to find it, but no luck, why would need raw data, that's what the animation is based off of.
Granted, but explain the way off official flight path, I know the altitude is incorrect b/c the altimeter wasn't set, but Pilots for 9/11 truth corrected it, using a software program, in which they put in the correct pressure, and even temperature for that day, and it showed the plane was actually even higher than in that animation, almost 300+ feet higher.
So let me get this straight, because 2 different explainations do not exactly match up that is somehow proof that it was a conspiracy? That makes on a little bit of sense.
A more plausable explaination is that it is just roughly approximated in the official story.
I do not care if the 2 animations are not exactly the same, it is not proof that it is a conspiracy.
I would like to point out that truthers are not even close to being on the same page as each other.
I laugh my ass off now about how stupid you are and others like you. You have completely failed at providing any legitimate point.
Start laughing now because the truth is out there already. Oh you meant when truthers are "right"? lol you will spend the rest of your days waiting for that one to happen.
I don't think its Uranium, i think its Thermite. Its easier to handle and much easier to make it melt steel. Just like you see Yellow Liquid Steel falling off the Twin Tower. I know people say that fire can melt steel but not in 2 hours, not that much so its still hot days later. Thermite was used in towers as well as it was packed in the airplanes.
the flash is the transfer of kynetig energy, idk how u spell that in english coz my 1st langauge is welsh. But I know it's its the transfer of kynetig energy transfering
Within the rubble of two of the largest skyscrapers in the world, DNA from victims and attackers, alike, was recovered. Does anyone know if any similar such DNA was found at the Pentagon?
If Hijackers can blow up the 2 largest building in the world (pentagon and WTC) on the same day. Or the U.S. govt (much more plausible) can stage it to make it seem like they did. Dna can be planted, people can be made up, and erased alot easier than either than the two only possible 9/11 explanations... So DNA at ground zero is irrelevant
makes sense for pentagon and actually the black blob on twin tower footage. The footage of the plane hitting the pentagon was a black plane not a boeing 767
"launched by a weaponized UAV, like the Global Hawk"
The Global Hawk is not a weaponized UAV. You have some facts wrong.
JustinPM 3 days ago
:D
You guys are hilarious!
How can you be so stupid idiots?
Cant you see?
It was the aliens who did this.
Fucking ignorant sheep...
kicsiqki 2 months ago
give my 5:02 ass hole!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :-@
TheSuperComments 4 months ago
People on the inside of The Pentagon were killed and therefor dead bodies.No passengers or crew were ever found.The lies which identifies passengers can not be substantiated,especially Barbara Olsen.I wonder what really happenned to them.Ted Olsen is either going along or is delusional.
GGE47 5 months ago
If terrorist can cause this much death and distruction in one day with 4 planes, why have they not done it again in the last 10 years. So much about Sept 11 just doesn't add up. Will we ever know the truth or at least see the evidence on which the government based its offical story.
dozer3955 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Who comes up with this stuff? If you want to know who to point the finger at then check out my profile
FacesofNewWorldOrder 7 months ago
I also do not think it was a plane that hit the pentagon, but you should get your facts straight. There were bodies you can see pics that were submitted as evidence at the moussai ( sorry not sure of spelling) trial. You can find online. Please be more careful when putting forth info that is incorrect, it discredits the people who are trying to find the truth. Warning, the pics are quite graphic and disturbing.
michaeljfo 7 months ago
@michaeljfo The people in the photos are the ones who were inside the Pentagon that died. It was a fucking missile.
SecretActivator 5 months ago
60 tons !!!!!!!!!!! whollyyy fuck then that plane shudda knocked the whole pentagon over
limewireb 8 months ago
did you pay attention in school? uranium doesnt explode in flames. u235 goes critical mass and explodes in nuclear bombs -________- the only reason depleted uranium is put onto some munitions is simply for the density for it to punch through armor. there is no incindiary effect, other than the rest of the round turning to liquid metal.
KymeraGR7 9 months ago
Inside Job
Born2Flesh 9 months ago
its just a shame that no one with power has the balls to arrest the true guilty ones.....
opposition13 11 months ago
That looks like the center hub of a 9' engine missing its titanium rotors.
13thLabyrinth 11 months ago
No they use Kerosene pulse drive engines like the German V2s
13thLabyrinth 11 months ago
mossad did it
=nIH50KhpVWg
voodoowichdoctor 11 months ago
AL-QAEDA TOTES 4 LIFE GUYZ. xoxox
Robertiskool100 11 months ago
I think it was more likley a cruse missile. A one eyed monkey can tell that damage was not done by a 767.
chaosad09 1 year ago
What happened to taking things into your own hands???? After everything YOU have done to show them....they do nothing. I am seriously scared for what is to come because your government is silent and turns a blind eye to YOU!!! They dont give a fuck what any of you think. Stand up and destroy your government because they are killing you without you fighting back!!! FIGHT BACK!!!! GO OVERTHROW YOUR GOVERNMENT BEFORE THEY HAVE YOU ALL KILLED.
ReAveRv 1 year ago
With all of this evidence, all of these movies on youtube, why have the people of the United States not completely STORMED the white house, knocked the front door down PHYSICALLY grab whoever the fuck is in power and tossed them into the river (or burn at the stake) OBVIOUSLY your government WILL DO NOTHING TO HELP YOU, THEY WILL CRASH PLANES INTO YOU AND SEND YOU TO FIGHT THERE WAR FOR WHATEVER PURPOSE IT IS THAT THEY WANT YOU IN THERE FOR!!!
ReAveRv 1 year ago
i will penetrate this guys ass with some heavy uranium. mark my words the moment this guy steps out of cover BOOM global hawk with heavy uranium striaght into his ass leaving his melted skin covering all entry holes. mark my words and mark them well. just kiddin not a bad video, mostly a pile a crap but some good starter questions for the new 911 arrival. overall the effort was good but you sounded like your really into getting a good mark for a school project. ok hit the showers
derpotni3riots 1 year ago
This seems to me more like the truth ! I also noticed at WTC laser target beams and flashes before the hit - possibly done the same way. Many thanks for this vid ! Excellent work. It has to be stated that if you crash a plane into a solid building (without prior blasting of masonry) you would be left with considerable wreckage, - particularly the tail fins - left outside on the ground below.
snakeskin2u2 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Free inexhaustible energy is real!But a few ppl make too many billions from our energy needs to let this technology be known,Get the blueprints for a free energy motor at LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM ,Be a part of the energy revolution!
breeannaqktjbl 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Here's my conclusion on 9/11 conspiracies: The people who create these theories are extremists who want YOU to be afraid of the government. This fits their agenda that involves eventually overthrowing the US government. If you investigate their political stance on issues like taxation and social idealisms you will see that they fit that mold perfectly. Please don't be a sucker. It's just a political ploy.
AMagicalUsername 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Oil companies are trying their best to stop free energy ideas from spreading to common people.
We need to put an end to this corruption ,start generating your own electricity now.
Visit LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM and get the blueprints . Join the Revolution!!
glennjgd 1 year ago
Inside Job ! ....passenger planes dont melt away at crashes, but on 9-11 the rules of nature changed, a very special day for scientists and a worst day for democracy !
monzinator 1 year ago 6
Good video thanks. The best is the "Sept. Clues" series.
73849309378 1 year ago
Comment removed
daviddevall 1 year ago
the voice is something to laugh out
MrShimonhe 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
fail, global hawk or missile is impossible ! it was a plane !
global hawk dont explode if its crash, see this : /watch?v=xj7wuCXkiLU
missile cant destroy 5 lamp poles and hit the generator, the generator was hit by the right engine of flight 77, there is the print of the right engine that hit the generator, a missile cant make a such big print of a plane engine
9/11 was no inside job, it was a terrorist attack
KRussa1994 1 year ago
I was at a crash site too soon! and ended up with atomized human skin remains on my flight suit that smelled like A person who just hugged you with perfume scent and no body insight! No fuslage or wings any where. Just a large gold sink in a burn out spot. Also there was no crater!
nipponhouseplayer 1 year ago
Global Hawks dont carry weapons, they arnt engineered to. They are strictly recon planes
zabertootchchicken 1 year ago
this video is so stupid i cant even take it seriously. i lol at the narrators voice because its gay
DPL1146 1 year ago
"9/11 CONSPIRACY: Did the Global Hawk drones use Uranium?"
ANSWER: NO!
LecceDiPane 1 year ago
911REICHSTAG, get a fucking life, maybe try getting laid.
agus2001 1 year ago
Comment removed
alexmbroyles 1 year ago
TYI @Reichstag some people are blind, and there's people that you show them the truth and do not want to listen. IGNORANCE IS A BLISS! God bless you!
bravone1 1 year ago 2
I want proof not speculations. Get a life!
00MrPanda00 1 year ago
This is rediculous. Whether or not it was a conspiracy isn't the point. The point is that it happened, people died and there's nothing anyone can do to change that. People are so wrapped up in finding someone to blame that they forget the most important things in life.
inamonianim 1 year ago
@inamonianim you want to just throw your hands up and say "oh well...it's a wash" The fact is, we know who to blame, people understand this. You obviously don't. There were warnings abound about this attack yet no one did anything? People need to be punished for this.
Poonard 1 year ago
@Poonard Okay, people need to be punished. So how are we going to go about doing that? Invade a country under false pretences? Lock up innocent people in guantanamo bay (I'm aware it's been closed) just for looking like they're from the middle east? Until our governments come up with an effective method of detecting the guilty parties, these videos and theories will always be pointless and empty.
inamonianim 1 year ago
Oh my God... are people still talking about this?? This was 9 years ago.. Get over it. Pissed off terrorists hijacked some airliners and crashed them into national landmarks.. It's been proven over, and over, and over, and over, regardless of what the idiots making one-sided conspiracy videos on youtube will dupe you into thinking. The physics, the investigations, everything... It adds up. It's been done. It fucking adds up. Get a life.
poopjuice0 1 year ago
proven..really?
TheMarcelproust 1 year ago
People can talk about what they want to in this world. What do you care? Why don't you go turn on a game a pay your cable to watch a movie or something, And let thinkers think about what they want to. It also adds up that Glide bombs were an important military item the government wanted to keep under wraps and so lied about the largest loss of the U.S. military at sea in history aboard the TroopShip Rhona. And where were you while they were giving young men at Tuskeegee Syphillis. Kool Aid
MaxwellVigant 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dont waste yr time here go to:
thepetitionsiteDOTcom/takeacti on/929981172#body
jefri53 1 year ago
The same aluminum wings here had no problems severing huge steel columns in the twin towers.
zenoist2 2 years ago
have you watched the servailence camera that is accross the street from the pentagon ???a cop drives by then shortly after the ''plane'' hit and you can clearly see the front of this OBJECT AND IT IS NO BIG AIRCRAFT IT IS POINTED AT THE END,, WAY TO SMALL TO BE AND POINTED to be any airliner, thats real talk !!!if 1engine melted the other would have done the same,, you cant even see it hit it just explodes pause it at the right time and you can see the missle or drone
1sickmc1 2 years ago
Freaks. Get off the computer and go and experience life. Make some friends FFS!
channelboomer 2 years ago
Why you want friends if you dont have a brain? geez.
ssbbmesias09 2 years ago
You crazy conspiracy theorists should quit asking questions! Whatever the government says is the gospel truth! Anyone who questions the government is a domestic terrorist!
Stop asking questions and believe what the government says!
Next thing ya know these crazy people will start saying that Kennedy was shot by some guy on the Grassy Knoll and that a group of globalist bankers control the flow of money!
TheAmazingJimmy 1 year ago
I seen in the wikileaks 9/11 pagers on the morning of the attack CNN was posting the story of a Drone being shot down by the Iraq army, when I seen that it was very interesting. They just happend to lose one that day in Iraq.
DewkChronic 2 years ago
And they just happen to find some of the hijackers' passports in the fucking streets after crashing into a building and blowing up? Now that sounds worse than these conspiracies. Its magic. LOL Fucking sheep!
leadzhead 2 years ago
2 words for you sheep: Operation Northwoods. Read up and ask yourself "Does this sound like 9/11"? Would our government stage a terrorist attack to have a pretext for war? And we still haven't found Osama Bin Laden after 9 years? WMD in Iraq? Nope
leadzhead 2 years ago 14
@leadzhead Osama is dead, stfu
dougpowers2 8 months ago
@leadzhead Opperation Northwoods... oh I get it! The fact that the government was willing to FAKE the deaths of 4 colledge students means that they're willing to ACCUALLY KILL 3000 people. That makes PERFECT sence.
PostalCode74 2 weeks ago
isnt uranium highley nuclear thus saying part of newyork would be gone?!?!??!?!
xsheildandswordx 2 years ago
How does one explain the disappearance of 64 people that were on board? Where are they? I am QUITE certain their families would like to know. :)
bbtrader 2 years ago
@bbtrader, that's what I asked. Then I found out that there were no families that went to LAX airport. That's a true fact. I want someone to explain it to me and someone in gov't, not leaving it up to the rest of us to try and figure out.
marcpinke 2 years ago
Both security cameras and eyewitnesses saw a 757 hit the Pentagon on 9/11. And you idiots think it was staged. The evidence stares you in the face and you're too stupid to see it.
skyrider1957 2 years ago
those "eyewitnesses" get paid to lie you DUMBFUCK!!!! 60tons of aircraft, where da fuck are the wreck parts???? WHERE IS THE HOLE IN THE WALL?? WHERE ARE THE HUMAN REMAINS????? GO BACK TO SCHOOL YOU DIPSHIT
stavlaft 2 years ago 20
So the govt paid hundreds of witnesses to lie. The holes in the building made by the plane werent made by the plane. The wreckage was never there, except in dozens of photos and videos. The bodies that were there werent there. I bet you truthers sleep with the lights on at night, because youre scared of the boogeyman. And good point bbtrader. Exactly what did happen to those 64 passangers?
skyrider1957 2 years ago
@stavlaft EXACTLY someone comes to you with 500 million Federal Reserve Notes and you'll have no problem saying a quick line or two. Plus the money is easily printed and how would we know its been printed? we dont and thats why its so simple
SecretActivator 5 months ago
@stavlaft thank you. common sense seems to be a rare commodity these days. are people really so stupid? if so, i think we're doomed. this piece of crap is going to turn out like JFK, remember? but unlike JFK, in which the only "eyewitness" account of the murder was the Zapruder film which didn't go public for 12 YEARS!. this is right in front of the public's eyes. all they have to do is open them. the WTC 1 & 2 are blown to kingdom come. WTF. Planes going right thru steel. it's just stupid.
jerjr49 4 months ago
All Global Hawks were at Edwards AFB on 9/11. I was part of the Global Hawk test and evaluation team at the time. Up through the summer of '02 when I retired from the USAF there was no capability to outfit any bombs/munitions on the GH. Now??? Who knows. Trust the gov't??? Hell no. But any speculation of Global Hawk involvement on 9/11 is absolutely paranoid lunacy with zero research into the early stages of the Global Hawk Development. MSgt W.
bwhittakerful 2 years ago
I was behind the attack!
I fired an invisible missile cloaked as a jet airliner.
AS far as the passengers, well, we brainwashed them into thinking their are Icelandic band members.
Now. mystery solved!
jasong19711 2 years ago
Decontamination, the use of dogs, prtoective clothings. It's crime scene stuff, if there was uranium those guys would be in Hazmat gear, not puny little jackets. Scrubbing is to remove possible incriminating evidence for innocent people's clothing.
This not being a boeing 757 I agree with, however my guess is placed to a smaller jet, chartered possibly, not your global hawk theory. As for photos, guess what, they censor those for the public, and don't picture everything unlike 24 hour video.
whatthepeanuts 2 years ago
total bullshit.. it all american fault make this to find excuse to blame muslim!!!!
arewish 2 years ago
Total BS.
teh small engine is APU unit at the tail of the plane, wn the only that wasnt melted completely.
krbosak 2 years ago
No, what is BS is to believe that 2 six ton titanium engines can be completely by a few thousand gallons of jet-grade kerosene. Dont you think its strange that the damage at the pentagon is totally inconsistent with the damage at the twin towers? 2 steel towers turned to dust compared to a concrete building with a little 15 foot hole that a jet could not possibly fit in. Also this is covered in "loose change 911" when they contact manufacturers of the APU.
911REICHSTAG 2 years ago 4
when do laypeople become crash investigation specialists?
SensaiChris 2 years ago
@911REICHSTAG
Lol "a few thousand gallons of jet-grade kerosene"
LecceDiPane 1 year ago
@911REICHSTAG "Dont you think its strange that the damage at the pentagon is totally inconsistent with the damage at the twin towers? "
Not at all.
Twin towers are low quality commercial building build for prestige with anything that fits the goal (yeah, capitalism), pentagon is concrete made to withstand limited nuclear blast, from reinforced concrete of highest quality. A plane is huge but much less dense overall than any car. Titanium is strong per weight, but under pressure can vaporize.
krbosak 1 year ago
@911REICHSTAG
"Dont you think its strange that the damage at the pentagon is totally inconsistent with the damage at the twin towers?"
Nothing strange. twin towers are typical low-cost magalithic construction from late phase of capitalism. Unlike pentagon, designed to withstand remote nuclear blast of limited strenght, made of reinforced concrete.
krbosak 1 year ago
@krbosak hmm yes government "official" we believe you. we believe that this craft got through protected air space to the pentagon without nay one noting this. Yeah they usually let people in area air they are not suppose to be be. Just las t week when I went to Washington, I was off track a little and found my self over the white house, oops! I saw Michele getting dressed oh well it happens
wakeupanddo 1 year ago
@krbosak hmm yes government "official" we believe you. we believe that this craft got through protected air space to the pentagon without nay one noting this. Yeah they usually let people in area air they are not suppose to be be. Just last week when I went to Washington, I was off track a little and found my self over the white house, oops! I saw Michele getting dressed oh well it happens
wakeupanddo 1 year ago 2
@911REICHSTAG 2 things, 1, the plane may actually have sustained engough damage hitting the ground to not make a big impact so also making wreckage hard to find, as it more than likely disentigrated. 2 the plane probably didn't make a large hole beacause if it is the building that houses all American defenses and intelligence THEY'D FUCKING PROTECT IT!
reddenbawker 1 year ago
@reddenbawker
Yes, but there is little ground damage seen.
If a plane of the supposed official weight grounded in front of the building before impact, there would be no ground or grass left in front of building.
snakeskin2u2 1 year ago 3
@krbosak Boeing said that was not a 757 APU. The dimensions don't match.
vashguud 1 year ago 2
@vashguud "Boeing said that was not a 757 APU"
I am Mr. McDonnel and I say this is BS unless you prove otherwise.
This is an apu like in hunderts similar crashes, this is a plain fact that anybody from aviation recognize in seconds, a fact so doesnt depends on what anybody said, and if one said one is unprofessional (or has secondary goals).
krbosak 1 year ago
Comment removed
vashguud 1 year ago
@krbosak This is from an AGM-34 that was one of 4 launched from C130 at targets in D.C. and NYC. The component is not a 757 APU or engine part. The landing gear part found is not a 757. It's ILLEGAL for people to pickup debris at a crash site till it's been marked and photographed. There was no 757 wreakage. The FOIA videos show no 757 wreakage and no wall collapse. This was a very sloppy and illegal classified orders. They violated the constitution and the trust of the people.
vashguud 1 year ago
@vashguud Then one of inner rings of the motor. You got a dozen of them, all varieties.
krbosak 1 year ago
@krbosak the only thing that wasn't melted completely?? nickel steel and titanium from the engines melted so much they were unrecoverable and completely unrecognizable? what drugs are you on cause I want some. and what about the punch out hole in C-ring of the pentagon? i'm pretty sure superman would have trouble going through three rings of the pentagon. i could keep going but i'm not wasting anymore time questioning and correcting morons like you.
mrwizard319 1 year ago
omg amazing how they can just get away with all this
CarnifexAaron 2 years ago 2
Have you investigated to see if Cobra was behind the attack ???
Maccabeus1897 2 years ago
Drone explains why ppl saw an airplane.
A drone launched a missile. Radiation was detected downwind of the pentagon hit.
With a thousand camera's focused on the world's most heavily guarded, enforced bldg., we get a fuzzy shot of something nearing the bldg.
As in cases where missiles strike, split seconds before impact is a blast...
This is a must watch - The Pentagon Bullshit:
watch?v=A3yPQ6W8Irk
Yoetah 2 years ago
Over 20 people clearly saw the commercial airplane but most described it as almost pure white (not AA). 1 saw it flying over the south parking lot of the Pentagon at a right right bank (within range of runway 15 at Reagan) moments after the explosion.
Other witnesses claim to have seen an AA plane but it was very small (8-12) passengers and others claim a missile. If these two crafts flew nearly simultaneously, its logical that most people would have the faster, smaller aircraft.
SemperServiam 2 years ago
A few photos online (likely photoshopped) of an RQ-4 UAV painted to look like an American Airlines plane show how easy it might be, at a high rate of speed, to confuse the drone for a small AA plane.
I believe it is possible that the RQ-4 was fitted with an augmenting charge warhead and an internal explosive payload similar to a Tomahawk missile.
SemperServiam 2 years ago
Alien's...!!!!!
insfree 2 years ago
Uranium sounds far fetched but why the use of protective gear and decontamination? WTF?
Those bright spots are propably caused by kinetic energy from the impact.
That pentagon thing really troubles me. There's really nothing pointing towards a big plane but still there are so many witnesses (no actual interviews just quotes) and DNA samples of the passengers. This is not an ordinary conspiracy theory, this is a crime scene.
Martiaali 2 years ago
@Martiaali
The pentagon is an old building - and quite a bit of asbestos was used in the pipe insulation and ductwork jacketing when it was constructed - standard procedure is to wash down after exposure to asbestos dust - so as not to take it home with you and expose others to it. - the wash down protocol has nothing to do with a crime scene. DU? I think not...
evilsnuffalupagus 1 year ago
I did my own research as well. I compared the photos of all of the wreckage found on the Pentagon. I even compared the Global Hawk to the 757.
Back in 2001, the Global Hawk existed. Comparing the damage done to the Pentagon when they first aired it showed no large impact of an aircraft hitting the pentagon. We're talking about hundreds of thousands of tons in kinetic force here... it should obliterate the Pentagon, even if it was designed to withstand nuclear attacks.
ArcanineKing 2 years ago
wtc 7 - freefall, the smoking gun.
vengencefrom1979 2 years ago
By the way I wanted to raw data because I do not trust the animation to accurately depict the data.
I would like to point out that I think it is funny you have now given up on the ground effect B.S. and are now arguing with filler information.
More strawman theories please :)
Laysoles 2 years ago
So you don't trust the NTSB? They are the ones that made the animation, lol.
Of course you can contact Pilots for 9/11 truth, they got the raw CSV file via a FOIA request, and ironically, the NTSB called them and said it was a mistake, but by then, they had already seen the CSV file, etc.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
No I do not trust 9/11 pilots for truth as a credible source of information. You can say the animation came from the NTSB but you said it came from the 9/11 pilots for truth.
Which quite simply I do not trust THEM.
As for the discrepancies in the animation I do not believe at all that that is a sign of some sort of ungodly complicated conspiracy theory that has no evidence to support it.
The fact that we are arguing over the fdr shows that you were flat out wrong about your no plane.
Laysoles 2 years ago
lol, you don't trust pilots, that's sad. Also, the animation came from the NTSB, Pilots for 9/11 truth got the original CSV Excel spreadsheet file, that was used to create the animation from the NTSB.
lol, well, the FDR shows where the plane was, and the FDR doesn't show it on the official flight path, so yes, it is already different from the official story.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
No I trust real pilots. I do not trust 9/11 pilots for truth. Way to take what I said out of context like a true truther.
Just because pilots for 9/11 truth say they used the original NTSB data does not mean they did that was why I was asking for the original data without the animation.
In case you are not aware the truth movement is constantly telling people to find out the truth for themselves.
Ok so I am.
Laysoles 2 years ago
And finally the proof where your ground effect theory falls apart.
Ground effect roughly starts 1-1.5x the length of the wing span or (for 757) 124 ft-186ft from the ground. The experts agree that at the very most (keyword most) there is a maximum of only 2 seconds missing.
That means that the plane would have only experienced ground effect for a maximum of 2 seconds, and given its sharp descent there is not enough time for ground effect to lift the plane out of its descent.
;)
Laysoles 2 years ago
lol, according to the offficial story, which doesn't match even the FDR animation, the plane wasn't in a deep as a descent, also, they said if Hanjour did a more nose dive approach it would have been impossible to pull back level in time to be show like it is in the shitty footage from the Pentagon.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
The part mentioning the victims and remains is extremely repugnant. It shows the complete and utter ignorance of the author, about biohazard decontamination. The passengers were fragmented and burned almost to incineration in most cases. Burned jet fuel residue also permeated the entire area. If you've ever been at a plane crash you know the smell is acrid and it's not surprising the dogs were not reacting actively. The entire area, to the dog's nose, was probably thick with odor.
kirkmach32 2 years ago
Comment removed
kirkmach32 2 years ago
in that picture doesn't the water from the firetruck kind of block out a lot of where the hole would be?
McConsumer 2 years ago
To CJSellers, Exactly, there are video security cameras at the Citgo Station, the Marriot hotel, etc, etc, Oh and the Virginia DOT cameras for the freeway section there. All were confiscated immediately by FBI teams. Gee , I thought it was just an AA 757, why all the secrecy then?
TommScholz 2 years ago
Saying there were witnesses who saw a plane is not scientific or conclusive, because they are people like Greta Van Susteren who is obviously an inside person to the knowledge of what is going on, Operatives plain & simple. There were plenty of actual non inside witnesses like the guy who was out on his boat who gave testimony which refuted the official story of the operatives. The ATC controllers at KDCA said the aircraft was a military craft not an airliner due to the hi performance actions
TommScholz 2 years ago
Remember Payne Stewart's jet being intercepted? There is absolutely no such thing as 4 hijacked airliners flying across several states without being intercepted by fighter jets unless there is some intentional sabotage or trickery, aka DICK Cheney giving orders to NORAD. When I was doing my flight training years ago one of the student pilots from our school accidently got off his flight plan path just a relatively small amount, there were 2 armed to the teeth fighter jets there in 10 minutes
TommScholz 2 years ago
I bet all you conspiracy loons also believed david koresh was jesus christ. All you paranoid schizophrenics remind me of timothy mcveigh.
chief1tooth 2 years ago
And where is all the CCTV footage? That would be an easy way to prove it was a 757 but alas, they won't release it.... something to hide maybe?
in fact I think you would have to have your own wool pulled over your eyes to believe that a 757 hit the pentagon and that this wasn't an inside job.
cjsellers 2 years ago
I without a doubt have reason to believe it was a drone. no bs.
youtub3suck 2 years ago
Laysoles is a FUNNY, FUNNY guy!
Bongofury361 2 years ago
a turbo fan in a engine would lose all it's blades in a crash
JTtheDevilDog 2 years ago
ok the theory tht the U.S government fired a rocket into the pentagon is STUPID why fire a rocket into the building knowing that the damage wouldnt be like tht of a plane,
also if they flew 2 planes into the twin towers why not also the pentagon all the inpmortant instillations r underground in nuke proof bunkers
u people jus need 2 think better
HandOfChaos7719 2 years ago
wheres the plane? simple question never mind name calling, point out the engines left after the collision. you are suposed to believe that the 'victims' were identified through their dna but these two steel and titanium engines vapourised on impact! come on you need a better arguement than your stupid. also see if you can find a pilot anywhere who could fly a 757 at 6 meters at 400+ mph for 1000 feet, good luck as it is not aerodynamicaly possible.
beenblindtillnow 2 years ago
the people on the ground said they found engines, nose, wing parts and torso parts of the plane. e pics everyone points 2 as proof were taken a few days after the crash.
but the question is motive. why use a rocket if everyone knows it doesnt look like an aircraft crash. if the u.s gov is so good at 'false flage operations' then why is it so easy 4 people with no experience in engineering and all relevant industrys able 2 pull the theory apart
HandOfChaos7719 2 years ago
don't be so easily taken in, the internet is full of pics of the pentagon through all stages of the incident except funnily enough not the impact, in an area with reputidly 80 or so cctv cameras. some pics show small pieces of debrit lying on the grass and what looks like the remains of a small engine much too small to be from a 757 which has two engines around 9ft across. The US government is not good at false flag op's they are consistantly bad but the biggest lie is easiest to believe!
beenblindtillnow 2 years ago
Modus operandi not motive. No airliner at the Pentagon. No airliner in Penn. No airliners struck the towers.
izzysykopth 2 years ago
You can easily say there was no airliner lol but you can not prove there was none.
The evidence STRONGLY suggest BEYOND a shadow of a doubt that there were airliners at ALL 3 Sites (4 if wtc towers considered 2 different sites)
Laysoles 2 years ago
Unless I've missed some evidence, and I've been looking at this for years; You can't actually PROVE that an airliner did hit the pentagon...
there was a much photographed bit of unburnt fuselage debree which looks suspiciously placed... its just not enough from a scientific point of view
all the other evidence actually points to something else, especially that fan section which has nothing to do with a 757, including its APU... look it up.
not to mention the lack of damage overall...
cjsellers 2 years ago
ROFL OH GOD YOUR COMMENT IS SO DAMN FUNNY.
Alright buddy lets review the evidence. Witnesses saw the aircrafts, there are pictures of the aircrafts, there was debris of aircrafts, there were human remains that were positively identified through DNA, there are 4 jets that were destroyed, the people on board those jets are clearly dead. The physical damage done to the buildings is consistant with large jets, and the debris recovered is also.
Thereis NOTHING that supports your theory.
Laysoles 2 years ago
No airliners struck the towers.
izzysykopth 2 years ago
and the official story is that the hijackers only had basic training flying Cessna's and light aircraft and small amount of training in a flight simulator???
wen did they become so good at target practice with 747s lol
spookymooney 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
By the way it is not that difficult to fly a plane that low to the ground, hell they did not even have to worry about pulling out or anyting all they had to do was go fast along the ground.
Commercial pilots do it, military pilots do it and land their aircraft on aircraft careers and even do it in turbulent seas.
Rofl Fail some more.
Laysoles 2 years ago
TBH yu stupd prick i'm a pilot.......never in my life have i seen ANY plane fly that low along the ground.....it's impossible unless your landing......get bent prick
BarcaBoii 2 years ago
I do not believe your a real pilot. A real pilot could do it. I know 6 pilots all of them say they could do it.
A few of them even brought up the point that the reason it is "impossible" is becuase most people don't have the death wish to do it. You do not need to even pull up all you do is crash.
Laysoles 2 years ago
Ever heard of ground effect? Its impossible to fly that low that fast. Air trapped between the wing and the ground generates more lift and trying to control it results in a MASSIVE pitch ocillation.
izzysykopth 2 years ago
Again all 6 said they could do it.
You dont even have to land the plane you just control it enough to crash into something.
You make it sound like these hijackers were courteous to the passangers, making for a smooth flight and a nice enjoyable comfortable flight. And I am sure they did not forget to turn on the fasten seatbelts sign either.
Again they werent trying to land the plane or make for a comfortable ride. Even with ground effect, they werent that low for that long.
Laysoles 2 years ago
Doesnt matter how long. They would lose control instantly. Only the alleged Pentagon aircraft would have to deal with this issue. Passenger comfort? LOL!! Give it up. Traitors are going to swing. The 911 evidence is about as subtle as a wheelbarrow full of cement falling off a scaffold.
izzysykopth 2 years ago
Lol you want to argue about ground effect?
No they would not lose control instantly.
You know there are many ways of dampening ground effect, and it does not mean a pilot would lose control.
And again I pointed out that they DO NOT CARE WHAT THE END RESULT OF THEIR FLIGHT WAS. They were not trying to survive that plane was going to crash regardless.
Laysoles 2 years ago
hey everyone, Laysoles is a stooge, he is here just to piss off people who rightly believe 9/11 was an inside job, sorry buddy, but your argument about the pentagon is retarded, the hole wasn't even REMOTELY LARGE ENOUGH, and what about the lawn? Ah, I don't even know why I waste my time with people like you, you'd would have been a good little nazi in a past life, huh?
Dracanon 2 years ago
For a plane that only has a 12 foot 4 inch fuselage a plane could easily fit in the original hole before the building collapse.
Maybe you should go look at the pictures damage to the pentagons surviving structure from the wings is evident. More over considering that building was built to be blast resistant with blast resistant windows it does not surprise me that the buildings structure held up as well as it did.
Please educate yourself before you run your mouth.
Laysoles 2 years ago
Your obviously not a pilot. A 757 at that speed, close to the ground would not be possible due to ground effect and natural flucuation. Even the most experienced pilots would tell you it's impossible to hold the plane perfectly smooth and level along that lateral and vertical navigation path. Now take an inexperienced pilot who was failing his flight checks in small G.A. aircraft, Get X-Plane or Flight Simulator and post your video recreating the crash. Tee Hee, Good Effing Luck!
TommScholz 2 years ago
Thing is my neighbor is a pilot for United Airlines and he says "the aircraft would experience some ground effect but ground effect is only really a big problem on small, light aircraft, but not much of a problem for a large jet.
Laysoles 2 years ago
With an aircraft that big, ground effect would keep it 50 feet in the air.
jhagins 2 years ago
I actually discussed this with my cousin who works for Boeing yesterday.
In short he said
-Ground effect does effect a 757
-Regardless a pilot could still fly it at that low altitude
-A 757 is capable of flying that fast at low altitude.
He is works with the company that actually makes those aircraft as an aerospace engineer. I think he knows a little more about it than you do.
Laysoles 2 years ago
I got that information from 20-30 year veteren pilots. As pilots who have flown those aircraft for 20-30 years, I think they would know ground effect and how it effects aircraft.
jhagins 2 years ago
Well you see the funny thing is I spoke with a retired pilot who lives down the street from me and used to fly for United and he said basically
-He would not personally fly that fast that low it could be down.
-Ground effect on a large aircraft is not as nearly much of a problem as it is on a small aircraft
-it would cause a lot of stress and aging on the aircraft but once again it could still be done.
Laysoles 2 years ago
So with the plane that low, with ground effect in play, wouldn't the grass be a mess? The lawn looks fine in the photos to me.
jhagins 2 years ago
Lol typical truther fashion. Change the subject.
Why would the grass be messy?
Laysoles 2 years ago
I changed the subject because it is obvious that I'm not going to convince you otherwise. The ground would be a mess because if a plane that big, flew that low, it would rip up the lawn with the force it was creating.
jhagins 2 years ago
No you changed the subject because your argument can't stand. Your grass argument is garbage. It is one of those things that you just throw out there to distract from the original topic
Why don't you prove to me how it was not a plane.
Where are the pictures of missile debris? There is not a single one. Where are the witnesses who saw a missile? What kind of missile strikes lights that are spread apart?
A plane meets all these. A missile meets none.
Laysoles 2 years ago
No I changed the subject for the reason I said. And the grass argument is weak but it would be torn up if a plane going that fast,that low were to hit the pentagon. Im not saying a missle hit it, but it was not a plane. But whatever, believe what you want. I won't waste my time on you.
jhagins 2 years ago
Here is my reply.
According to your logic of the grass than there should still be torn up grass and signs in the grass. A missile travels faster and has more exhaust heat.
Hmm. So that would seem to suggest no missile either. And in all honesty since when does an aircraft performing a strike, fire their missile at such a shallow angle that it punched a whole in the wall? Missiles come from above not from sideways, and for good reason too.
Also no witnesses say they saw a missile.
Laysoles 2 years ago
Not if the missile was traveling down at an angle, and a AGM-86C has the same max speed as a 757s cruise speed, of 530MPH.
Yes, the round hole, i have never seen a jet crash into a building and leave a round hole 3 rings into the pentagon, it seems Flight 77 was more advanced than your average 757.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
I love how the only thing you could address was the angle of attack. I will give you that it could have been shot at a shallower angle but you couldn't explain anything else.
Please explain to me how NO ONE said they saw a missile? When was the last time a person mistook a 757 for a missile? Go to Iraq and ask some of the Iraqis whose homes were destroyed which ones where hit by a 757?
Also explain why there is no missile debris at all. There is plenty of aircraft debris.
Laysoles 2 years ago
The grass would show more distress than it does, b/c the thrust from these engines would have blow the grass down, etc, and the heat, etc, it wouldn't have caught the grass on fire, but the grass would be affected none the less, and a 757 can't fly this low at this speed, it's not possible, unless the aircraft was doing a nose dive, even then it begin to over stress and it would literally rip the plane apart.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
I am not really convinced of your claims about the grass (or if you could even see it in the pictures provided. I will look into it further though.
The 757 can't fly that fast claim however is outright wrong.
My cousin for lockheed, and 2 friends of mine that work for boeing (all 3 are aerospace engineers) all agree that the 757 can travel that fast at a low altitude.
It would be dangerous(fly into low structures trees ect). and it would also age the planes parts, but it is possible.
Laysoles 2 years ago
I don't care, a 757 can't fly 5 feet of the ground, if these people you claim say it's possible, get them on camera, & ask them to explain how it's possible.
I didn't say it couldn't fly at low altitude, but at 530 MPH it would not be possible to get it below 50 feet, & thats if you really push the nose down, which according to the FDR animation made from the FDR data, shows the plane on a different flight path, and still 400+ feet in the air, it originally said 100+ ft, but that was corrected.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
"A 757 can fly at that hight at that speed. The pilot would be experiencing ground effect and if the pilot wished to remain in control they would need to be constantly adjusting. In otherwords it would probably look like the plane was rocking back and forth badly."
"It would not be a comfortable ride and it would be dangerous but they were not concerned about either."
Airport Chris you have no argument other than my daddy said it was impossible. When clearly he is wrong.
Laysoles 2 years ago
lol, and in FDR their is no sign of rocking back and forth, a nice controlled approach into the Pentagon, by a guy who couldn't rent his own C172 without more lessons.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
It is harder to fly a plane safely and controlled than it is to fly it erratically.
Multiple witnesses state the plane was rocking back and forth. Multiple witnesses also state the plane came in at a very steep angle towards the ground going fast.
Would you mind citing your source on the FDR claim because I am pretty sure I saw to the contrary.
:)
Laysoles 2 years ago
Here is the official NTSB FDR for AA77.
watch?v=DzR-q0ijbV0
Airportchris2 2 years ago
Comment removed
Laysoles 2 years ago
I was looking for the raw data but I the animation will do I guess.
Notice the steep angle of descent. The speed which the aircraft reads.
Also look at the spastic movements of the controls, it confirms witness statements such as the plane appeared to be wobbly.
Laysoles 2 years ago
I don't have raw data, I been trying to find it, but no luck, why would need raw data, that's what the animation is based off of.
Granted, but explain the way off official flight path, I know the altitude is incorrect b/c the altimeter wasn't set, but Pilots for 9/11 truth corrected it, using a software program, in which they put in the correct pressure, and even temperature for that day, and it showed the plane was actually even higher than in that animation, almost 300+ feet higher.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
So let me get this straight, because 2 different explainations do not exactly match up that is somehow proof that it was a conspiracy? That makes on a little bit of sense.
A more plausable explaination is that it is just roughly approximated in the official story.
I do not care if the 2 animations are not exactly the same, it is not proof that it is a conspiracy.
I would like to point out that truthers are not even close to being on the same page as each other.
Laysoles 2 years ago
lol, trust me, we are more on the same page than you know.
We are increasing in size everyday, whether you want to believe it or not.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
Yeah we are more on the same page now because you gave up on your no plane argument.
If you are suggesting that I am somehow like the truthers you better stop there. I do not misrepresent quotes and mangle physics like you guys do.
Laysoles 2 years ago
I was talking about the 9/11 truthers, being on the same page.
No you are not a truther, why would I curse with that, lol.
I am however gonna laugh my ass off at you others like you when it does finally come out, haha.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
I laugh my ass off now about how stupid you are and others like you. You have completely failed at providing any legitimate point.
Start laughing now because the truth is out there already. Oh you meant when truthers are "right"? lol you will spend the rest of your days waiting for that one to happen.
Laysoles 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
ROFL omg so much is wrong about this video.
The arabs weren't good pilots?
Yeah ok despite the fact that they had been an american flight schools, had been trained, and had their licenses.
This video is terrible.
Laysoles 2 years ago
Is it not funny the sound and the videos that hit the questions and answers we have dissapear but look up the anti christ or porn it allowed werd eh
itsmesarah05 2 years ago
the front end of a bunker buster on a plane
drhatchback 2 years ago
I don't think its Uranium, i think its Thermite. Its easier to handle and much easier to make it melt steel. Just like you see Yellow Liquid Steel falling off the Twin Tower. I know people say that fire can melt steel but not in 2 hours, not that much so its still hot days later. Thermite was used in towers as well as it was packed in the airplanes.
exxtraz 2 years ago 2
I think you don't get it:
Uranium is used for bullets to penetrate armour.
ThermAte is used to cut through steel pillars.
The uranium was in the projectile.
The Thermate was INSTALLED in the building.
LiteWaiter 2 years ago 2
DU is used as ballast in aircrafts, the piece of boeing 767 at 4:14 is the titanium engine shaft. No missile that I know of uses DU.
493175001 2 years ago
This moronic, and ignorant video seriously makes my brain hurt.... WOW some people are dumb.
ERAUdarouze 2 years ago 2
how is a theory ignorant, its an idea not an opinion genius ... your ignorant for disregarding truths because its just too scary to believe
drhatchback 2 years ago 2
the flash is the transfer of kynetig energy, idk how u spell that in english coz my 1st langauge is welsh. But I know it's its the transfer of kynetig energy transfering
d7ade 3 years ago
could be thermite.
d7ade 3 years ago
Within the rubble of two of the largest skyscrapers in the world, DNA from victims and attackers, alike, was recovered. Does anyone know if any similar such DNA was found at the Pentagon?
Rennpanzer 3 years ago
If Hijackers can blow up the 2 largest building in the world (pentagon and WTC) on the same day. Or the U.S. govt (much more plausible) can stage it to make it seem like they did. Dna can be planted, people can be made up, and erased alot easier than either than the two only possible 9/11 explanations... So DNA at ground zero is irrelevant
Caligirl0100 2 years ago 3
You offered some points I have not heard before. Keep asking questions...we will get to the bottom of this one day!
CosmicAdventures 3 years ago
makes sense for pentagon and actually the black blob on twin tower footage. The footage of the plane hitting the pentagon was a black plane not a boeing 767
JCeiver612 3 years ago