Ex-CIA Pilot - No Planes Hit The Twin Towers


Status
Not open for further replies.
They may (or may not) have seen a seat with floor attached.
Who is to say it was not placed for them to see?
I cannot imagine a plane hitting the pentagon head on, and a good sized chunk of the cockpit remaining intact, specially something as fragile as a seat - when it was supposed to have created a 16 foot hole in the wall.
The cock pit took the brunt of the impact, if it survived then far more of the plane would have survived intact.

The seat was planted? Seriously? You think that?
 
its pointless man, the official version of events story has been enough for them to not to see the elephant in the room.
To be honest mate, I do not know what to believe when it comes to 9/11. There is so much conflicting information it is unbelievable, one mans expert is another mans nutter and vice versa.
 
a statement by joel velasquez, GITGO gas station employee, to national geographic, the following day

Well I reckon he is a conspiracy nut and is lying. Actually if he is not helping push the official line I'm surprised the tv showed it or that he didn't mysteriously die! See how easy it is!? ;)
 
:lol:

I reckon the way the terrorists did, with a plane!

Haway marra, I keep being told the bit of the pentagon that got hit was weakened as part of the inside job.

just the hardly no wreckage, only a 16ft hole and the cctv consfication, kind of doesn't support that though does it

a vaporised airliner, you'll be telling me you believe the magic bullit theory in the JFK assignation next!
 
Chief Master Sergeant John Monaccio, the senior Air Force enlisted police officer for the Air Force: "I was in the Pentagon on Sep 11th, in room 1B461, when we were attacked. I personally participated in rescue and recovery operations [...] The plane's inertia carried aircraft remains all the way through the building coming to rest on the outside walls of our offices. We discovered cockpit wreckage at our feet while attempting to rescue people from a Navy operations area."

http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/pentagon/pentagon-email_20020316.html

Loads of weird things happen in plane crashes, unlikely things survive wreckage all the time.

His link to the evidence does not appear to work, and according to the way back machine, it looks like it never has workd (not checked every single archive, but checked many at random and non contain what he claims)
 
Why on earth would wreckage be placed to be found if it directly disproved what they were trying to prove?

But clearly, to many something like that is satisfactory, I was the only one so far that seems to have questioned the likely hood of a fragile seat surviving (despite being the first thing to hit the building) especially when hardened black boxes were in a right state...
 
A cruise missile?

Jesus wept. The government must be worried sick with all these columbos on the case.

lol. sorry have america not got any of them like? or some other kind of explosion - what is undeniable is a 16ft hole in a wall is more consistant with a missile damage than a jumbo jet hitting it - how can, how can you, anyone not possibly question this?
 
just the hardly no wreckage, only a 16ft hole and the cctv consfication, kind of doesn't support that though does it

a vaporised airliner, you'll be telling me you believe the magic bullit theory in the JFK assignation next!

So on one hand you're saying they needed a missile to cause damage to such a solid building, then on the other question why there isn't a bigger hole? Haway man.
 
its the dod - and why shouldn't they, governments are supposed to be transparent and servant to the people

don't you think it would shut everyone up? footage was confiscated from the gas stain and hotel which would clear the whole thing up

instead they release a 5 frame clip from a side angle which actually clearly doesn't show an airliner whatsoever, not unless it invisible
Yes the people not to placate a small number of conspiracy theorists.

This was 13y ago of course so digital hd simply didn't exist
 
The seat was planted? Seriously? You think that?

I vaguely remember controversy over the engine or parts of it, rememebr watching a video where some rolls royce employee (or similar) said that they engine was not a rolls one as claimed... a quick google brought this up.

Its all a bit convienent like the fella who found cockpit wreckage also claiming to have found religious artifacts belonging to the hijackers in the debri...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top