Top 10 reasons why no planes hit the WTC on 9/11/01

khothla

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2008
Messages
120
Watch the TV news networks lie about planes again!Hottest new 911 Hoax documentation911 Planes had Pentanium Wings!from the Author911Hoax.com Page 2

Top 10 reasons why no planes hit the WTC on 9/11/01

Folks, on 9/11/01 the TV networks lied to the world about planes striking the World Trade Center.
HomeFake, fake, fake!

1. Planes are made of light materials like aluminum and fiberglass. Think of them as long beer cans. Even birds can give planes problems.

2
. There were many steel core columns supporting both of the Twin Towers. No plane could enter such a structure without being completely destroyed.

3. Two planes were depicted as being inside and intact the Twin Towers, a pair of buildings made with 200,000 tons of steel each.

4
. Eyewitnesses: Very few people in New York's business district actually had a decent view of the South Tower of the WTC. Only a few thousand people at most would have been able to see the South Tower explode. The author of this website has interviewed people who do not believe that they saw a plane strike the South Tower.

Meanwhile, it was a simple matter for the TV networks to keep the eyewitnesses who didn't see a plane off the air.

5
. Both Boeing 767s (i.e., Flights 11 and 175, which supposedly struck the North and South Towers respectively) have165 foot wingspans. Meanwhile, both the North and South Towers were 210 feet wide. We're supposed to believe that both planes were entirely inside the tower they hit, with no pieces showing, with only 45 feet of room to spare!

6. United Airlines Flight 175 was shown entering the South Tower like a ghost. When the tip of the plane's fuselage hits the steel exterior of the South Tower the fuselage should be breaking up. That would cause the wings to break off.

7. Newton's Third Law of Motion states that "To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.". Let's apply Newton's Third Law to Flight 175. In the 9/11/01 story, Flight 175 strikes the the South Tower at 450 m.p.h.

Now imagine that the South Tower moved at 450 m.p.h. and struck a stationary Flight 175. We would not expect that Flight 175 would be undamaged. We would not expect that it would simply disappear into the South Tower.

8. There was no audio of 'Flight 175' striking the South Tower. This is true even though there were about a dozen videos of the event said to be obtained from lucky amateurs.

9. There are innumerable contradictions with the news reports of planes striking the WTC. (The author's writing is here.) Just a cursory examination of the 911 news reports can reveal dramatic inconsistencies.

10
. There has been massive censorship of the 911 Hoax. Dozens of media sources have exercized a zero tolerance policy for any suggestion that no planes struck the WTC before it was vaporized from exotic weaponry and nuclear weapons.

Why would CBS, The New York Times, The History Channel, Indmedia.org and YouTube.com be censoring the idea so aggressively if real planes hit the Twin Towers?

 
Werbung:
For one to believe this, one must be psychologically impaired or just a good ole' hater of America.

Which is it for you?
 
It's disappointing....no...It's truly frightening that so many delusional paranoids are allowed to roam free....and VOTE! for Christ sake!!

Something a 9/11 truther will never hear" "I'm proud of you, son"
 
It is the epitome of stupidity to not be able draw the obvious conclusion that 2 commercial passengers jets hit the World Trade Center.

Let's just skim the high points...

Thousands of first hand eyewitness accounts.

Tons of the verified video footage of the event itself.

The FAA tracking and subsequent grounding of every single aircraft in the entire United States of America.


I can't really get my head around what makes anyone want to call this tragedy anything other than what it was. I would hope that those who just make up nonsense would see the error of their ways and have some compassion for those who died in this attack.



 
The silliest part of posts like this, is not that khothla believes them.

The silliest part, is that he thinks anyone besides him will believe them.
 
Watch the TV news networks lie about planes again!Hottest new 911 Hoax documentation911 Planes had Pentanium Wings!from the Author911Hoax.com Page 2

Top 10 reasons why no planes hit the WTC on 9/11/01

Folks, on 9/11/01 the TV networks lied to the world about planes striking the World Trade Center.
HomeFake, fake, fake!

1. Planes are made of light materials like aluminum and fiberglass. Think of them as long beer cans. Even birds can give planes problems.

2
. There were many steel core columns supporting both of the Twin Towers. No plane could enter such a structure without being completely destroyed.

3. Two planes were depicted as being inside and intact the Twin Towers, a pair of buildings made with 200,000 tons of steel each.

4
. Eyewitnesses: Very few people in New York's business district actually had a decent view of the South Tower of the WTC. Only a few thousand people at most would have been able to see the South Tower explode. The author of this website has interviewed people who do not believe that they saw a plane strike the South Tower.

Meanwhile, it was a simple matter for the TV networks to keep the eyewitnesses who didn't see a plane off the air.

5
. Both Boeing 767s (i.e., Flights 11 and 175, which supposedly struck the North and South Towers respectively) have165 foot wingspans. Meanwhile, both the North and South Towers were 210 feet wide. We're supposed to believe that both planes were entirely inside the tower they hit, with no pieces showing, with only 45 feet of room to spare!

6. United Airlines Flight 175 was shown entering the South Tower like a ghost. When the tip of the plane's fuselage hits the steel exterior of the South Tower the fuselage should be breaking up. That would cause the wings to break off.

7. Newton's Third Law of Motion states that "To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.". Let's apply Newton's Third Law to Flight 175. In the 9/11/01 story, Flight 175 strikes the the South Tower at 450 m.p.h.

Now imagine that the South Tower moved at 450 m.p.h. and struck a stationary Flight 175. We would not expect that Flight 175 would be undamaged. We would not expect that it would simply disappear into the South Tower.

8. There was no audio of 'Flight 175' striking the South Tower. This is true even though there were about a dozen videos of the event said to be obtained from lucky amateurs.

9. There are innumerable contradictions with the news reports of planes striking the WTC. (The author's writing is here.) Just a cursory examination of the 911 news reports can reveal dramatic inconsistencies.

10
. There has been massive censorship of the 911 Hoax. Dozens of media sources have exercized a zero tolerance policy for any suggestion that no planes struck the WTC before it was vaporized from exotic weaponry and nuclear weapons.

Why would CBS, The New York Times, The History Channel, Indmedia.org and YouTube.com be censoring the idea so aggressively if real planes hit the Twin Towers?


The ONLY thing YOUR POST PROVES is YOU ARE a democrat!! A PERFECT "NUT", You must visit a GARAGE and have them use a LUG Wrench on your HEAD!! YOUR NUT IS LOOSE!! DANGEROUSLY SO!! SAY ,"HI" To Algore and Barack!!
 
South tower plane was added to this rare wide angle clip

This is so simple it's stupid.;) The plane does not pass through the open skyline before it comes into view which proves a fake plane was added.
no-plane_h_GIFSoupcom.gif


Advance this clip to 4:00 or before and see the plane created out of thin air from behind the building just right of the open and unobstructed skyline.
Unseen 911 Footage Finally Released By FBI, DOJ - YouTube

Tuesday, Nov 11, 2008 The FBI and the Department of Justice have released ten new videos relating to the events of 9/11, three years after a freedom of information act request for the footage was submitted.
 
I took the work from September Clues and made it into something real instead of a rambling mess. Dick Oliver called the orb a remote controlled drone. He was on the ground and saw it floating just like it did in 4 live broadcasts. Dick was totally oblivious that his honest account completely destroyed the myth of a real plane impacting T2.

ny1-rewind_h_GIFSoupcom.gif

 
Mark, cryptically laughs at the end of his description, further proving that he was describing the slow moving drone, and falling short of confirming that it really wasn't a plane. It's no different than Jean Hill saying she saw the secret service shooting back, but falling short of fingering the driver. Of course it didn't belong in the area because it was a drone and not the boeing 767 it was supposed to be.

Eyewitness on 9/11 Mark Burnback was able to get a good view of the plane that hit the World Trade Center, because he said that the plane was flying very low. He explained to FOX News that the plane had no windows, a blue logo, and did not look like a commercial plane.

Fox NewsCaster: "Mark Burnback, a Fox employee, is on the phone with us. Mark witnessed this... Mark were you close enough to see any markings on the airplane?"

Mark Burnback: "Hi gentlemen. Yeah there was definitely a blue, circular logo on the front of the plane towards the front. It definitely did not look like a commercial plane. I did not see any windows on the side. It was definitely very low...

"Mark, if what you say is true, those could be cargo planes or something like that. You said you did not see any windows on the side?"

Mark Burnback: "I did not see any windows on the side. I saw the plane was flying low. I was probably a block away from the sub-way in Brooklyn and that plane came down very low, and again it was not a normal flight that I have ever seen at an airport. It was a plane with a blue logo on the front and it just looked like it did not belong in this area."

 
A fake plane was added for south tower explosion : Politics & NWO - Page 41
9/11 Airplane Photo Gallery - 9-11-2001 - 2nd World Trade Center Attack

Thanks goes to Rich for comparing fiction against reality. He should have a 1 and 4 at the top, but it's self-explanatory. Rich's post is below the picture. Robert Clark is credited with this and one other fake photo image from 911. Rich didn't line up the fake right engine with its way out of alignment left counterpart. Every discernible plane part is out of sync with a real boeing 767-222, including the joke image being a black smudge with no windows or markings.

1. Horizontal stabilizer
2. Right Wing
3. Tail Fin
4. Left Engine




I've resized the blue/grey plane to make it the same length as the colour photo underneath it... some interesting anomalies pop up right away. I lined the planes up from their ass end to their noses marked A and B. The rest is self explanatory...

I don't know how much these planes need to be twisted and turned, rolled and pushed about to get the 4 anomalies to line up as they should... But I just can't see how they can line up.. No. 2 is the standout for me..

Even if the coloured plane was rolled more to it's left, the right wing that we can see would naturally go up and move further away from the tail section.. not closer to it and right thru it.. not a chance. I also cannot see how a planes fuselage can become 25% thicker.. ok bad photo.. but it shouldn't look like that.. it makes no sense at all..

As Doogle has shown, maybe it's the angle.. I'm not seeing it yet and I'm not sure I will.
 
top 10 reasons idiots will believe any bullshit on the internet....Read this thread and look at all the stupid conspiracy claims that are defeated by common sense, logic, physics, Eye Witness accounts, or just lacking the skill to read any one of a number of things debunking them all.
 
Werbung:
Real truthers don't believe the no-plane theory. Start watching this video at the 4:20 time mark.
"provocateurs,shills and disinfo agents"

The no-plane theory was thought up by some public relations people to discredit the truth movement.
 
Back
Top