...Shocked - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

...Shocked

ryman1000 Avatar
banned6y, 6m agoPosted 6 years, 6 months ago
Give it a chance before commenting. I like most of you thought ' not another conspiracy video ' but after seeing this am definite that 9/11 was an inside job. So much evidence to support it the conspiracy should be terrorists doing it
ryman1000 Avatar
banned6y, 6m agoPosted 6 years, 6 months ago
Options

All Comments

(153) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
banned#1
9 parts in total, just watch the first and maybe second, although the latter video's are the best, you need to watch the first ones to understand them

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVLu8dC2N0s
#2
let me guess, the Zeitgeist?
#3
if you look hard enough you can turn anything into a conspiracy
#4
coerce86
if you look hard enough you can turn anything into a conspiracy


Why do you say that?..... hmm are you a spy???
banned#5
coerce86
if you look hard enough you can turn anything into a conspiracy


If you look at the evidence, opposed to what you are told you can see the larger picture. How would you explain this ? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fk87OVtFe80&NR=1&feature=fvwp Where's the plane !!

20-30 points are raised against the attacks being government caused, what facts are there that it is terrorists that planned the attacks apart from what you are told by the media ? Did you watch the video ?
#6
i don't really agree or disagree wholly that it's possible (yes i did watch the video)

they tend to focus on the possibilities of what it could be to make it a government conspiracies, rather than what it could be to make it actually a terrorist attack, it's all very one sided

video i watched: fact it wasn't in zoomed out vision could easily be because it was behind a huge cloud of smoke, or indeed the other side of it, planes can lose altitude y'know.
The plane my also have had a side on impact (therefore missing the nose), explaining the fact that that it "went through" the building
The only thing I would find at all suspicious is the blackout, but perhaps even that could be explained by some EMI from the destruction of the plane/some things in the tower

Edit: and i'm too lazy to watch another video XD i'm not saying it's conclusive either way, i'm just saying not to believe either story too readily without careful analysis
#7
The list can go on...... who killed JFK.....or Princess Diana.....:?
banned#8
coerce86
i don't really agree or disagree wholly that it's possible (yes i did watch the video)

they tend to focus on the possibilities of what it could be to make it a government conspiracies, rather than what it could be to make it actually a terrorist attack, it's all very one sided

video i watched: fact it wasn't in zoomed out vision could easily be because it was behind a huge cloud of smoke, or indeed the other side of it, planes can lose altitude y'know.
The plane my also have had a side on impact (therefore missing the nose), explaining the fact that that it "went through" the building
The only thing I would find at all suspicious is the blackout, but perhaps even that could be explained by some EMI from the destruction of the plane/some things in the tower

Edit: and i'm too lazy to watch another video XD i'm not saying it's conclusive either way, i'm just saying not to believe either story too readily without careful analysis



There are nine parts and by the end I was convinced. The fact that the plane appears on screen excatly when the camera reachers the middle of the towers and then disappears at the same point , means it is very likely being computer generated. In another video you see the 'plane' come in at a straight angle, where as the computer generated version goes at an extreme dip. As well as this the news broadcasters have camera's showing cloudy and rainy days when it was a bright, clear sunny day on 9/11. BBC and CNN broadcast in excatly the same room at excatly the same time, the same woman appears 4 seperate 'amateur' tapes, there are poor actors in 'amateur' videos, obama got extremely defensive when backing 9/11 ever more making it appear a conspiracy. When a plane goes off course it gets shot down, no questions ask. They might have a bad day, but no way would america ever let 4 planes stray off course on the same day ever.
#9
I do love how the video goes on about the FBI taking the cctv vidoes withing minutes. then saying that its to cover it up.
it would be more of a conspirarcy if they didn't bother taking the cctv and just guessing what happened.
Of course they were going to get all the cctv they could as soon as possible. Oh and not realeasing it isn't unusual since its a very big 'case' meaning not all the evidence will ever be made public incase of further viewings ect.
#10
ryman1000
. When a plane goes off course it gets shot down, no questions ask. They might have a bad day, but no way would america ever let 4 planes stray off course on the same day ever.


"a passenger plane has gone of course!"
"Shoot it down!"

yh i see that happening. The forces even give chances to 'bogeys' to identify themselve beore opening fire. So what you said is not true.
#11
Forgot about all of this, one thing I've always wondered regarding the Pentagon is HOW a place, like the Pentagon, has one ****** camera looking at that side of the building.

Jeez, this wasn't 1980, it was 2001. I know a decent camera film from a CCTV in a hotel was taken by the FBI near the Pentagon, but that's all I've heard.
banned#12
ErrorOperator
"a passenger plane has gone of course!"
"Shoot it down!"

yh i see that happening. The forces even give chances to 'bogeys' to identify themselve beore opening fire. So what you said is not true.


They had enough time to realize that 4 planes going off course and not responding meant there was an issue.

Wotwot123
Forgot about all of this, one thing I've always wondered regarding the Pentagon is HOW a place, like the Pentagon, has one ****** camera looking at that side of the building.

Jeez, this wasn't 1980, it was 2001. I know a decent camera film from a CCTV in a hotel was taken by the FBI near the Pentagon, but that's all I've heard.


Excatly, they only have a video with 5 frames ? The video shows a small plane and a flash. The hole in the pentagon is perfectly round and way to small for a large passenger plan to fit. There were no signs of where the wings had gone and the outer casing of the plane seems to have just disappeared miraculously ...hmm
banned#13
ryman1000;8743109
If you look at the evidence, opposed to what you are told you can see the larger picture. How would you explain this ? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fk87OVtFe80&NR=1&feature=fvwpWhere's the plane !!

20-30 points are raised against the attacks being government caused, what facts are there that it is terrorists that planned the attacks apart from what you are told by the media ? Did you watch the video ?

What do you mean "wheres the plane"? You dont expect it to be intact do you? It crashed into the ground at 500mph before hitting the pentagon. Are the 500+ witnesses lying about saying they saw a plane hit the pentagon?

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1

to be fair, I was taken in by Zeitgeist until I researched properly and discovered half of it was made up and the other half was just a distorted view of the facts.

Have to lol hard that you think even the news agencies were in on the plot by fabricating live video items! :w00t:

Fighter jets were scrambled to intercept two of the flights and I could possibly
believe United Airlines Flight 93 was shot down.

You'll soon have DK along to back up your crackpot theories.
banned#14
ryman1000;8743316
They had enough time to realize that 4 planes going off course and not responding meant there was an issue.



Excatly, they only have a video with 5 frames ? The video shows a small plane and a flash. The hole in the pentagon is perfectly round and way to small for a large passenger plan to fit. There were no signs of where the wings had gone and the outer casing of the plane seems to have just disappeared miraculously ...hmm

Did you expect a cartoon cut out in the side of the building? As I said, the plane hit the ground shortly before hitting the pentagon at 500mph. The wings would have vaporised on impact with the ground being mainly aluminium. The rest would have disintegrated after forcing its way through 3 reinforced concrete rings.

to quote from the link above:-

[SIZE=4]Review the facts[/SIZE]

Size of 757 matches the initial size of hole in the building - somewhere between 13 and 16 feet (757 is 13 feet wide/high)
Rims found in building match those of a 757
Small turbine engine outside is an APU
Same engine has been clearly stated to not match a Global Hawk engine
Blue seats from 757 laying on ground in photos
Part of "American" fuselage logo visible in more than 1 photo
Engine parts photographed inside match a Rolls-Royce RB211
Structural components photographed in wreckage match Boeing paint primer schemes
Large deisel generator in front of building hit by a large heavy object
Large deisel engine outside is spun towards the building - could not be result of bomb blast or missile explosion
Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner
Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner hit the Pentagon
60+ bodies, matching the passenger list and flight crew roster identified and returned to families from Pentagon wreckage
#15
I'm not sure, that video did make some decent points, you have to admit that.

Secondly, if 9/11 was a inside job (which I personally think it was, but how it was achieved I have no idea) - The people who "could" of mastermind this are going to have way higher security levels than the US President, and unless that person gets seriously annoyed (and these guys must be on 6-9 digit salaries) or who knows, maybe one of them gets very ill or gets very old, then they "might" tell everything to the public.

Normally, from what I've read, things that get leaked or found out take about 40 years, so if it happened in 2001, and it was an inside job, then 2041 is the time it will come out.

In regards to who did it if it was legit, if it actually was Osama and / or his army of people - This is where I think the whole terrorism thing makes me laugh, where Osama Bin Laden came from, who trained him, how much money he has access too and who his family are involved with (i.e. USA Government figures), the whole thing is an utter complex mess, if anything is corrupt, it's the US Government.

If it became fact that the US Government paid Al Queda to carry out this attack in one way or another to gain access to certain parts of the world or perform certain things in regards to "Fight against Terrorism" it really wouldn't surprise me.

This has always made me laugh though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbusto_Energy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_CIA_assistance_to_Osama_bin_Laden

Iraq is a perfect example of how the Big Western Countries are totally corrupt, so who needs to guess about 9/11 when you have Iraq to look into?
banned#16
csiman
What do you mean "wheres the plane"? You dont expect it to be intact do you? It crashed into the ground at 500mph before hitting the pentagon. Are the 500+ witnesses lying about saying they saw a plane hit the pentagon?

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1

to be fair, I was taken in by Zeitgeist until I researched properly and discovered half of it was made up and the other half was just a distorted view of the facts.

Have to lol hard that you think even the news agencies were in on the plot by fabricating live video items! :w00t:

Fighter jets were scrambled to intercept two of the flights and I could possibly
believe United Airlines Flight 93 was shot down.

You'll soon have DK along to back up your crackpot theories.


Many witnesses said that they heard a low pitched noise and something fast and too small passing them to be a large commercial plane. The measurments of the plane passing the 'freeway' before the pentagon would mean it would have hit it. The plane would have left structured debris rather than the odd bit of metal and an engine here and there. Not only this but ATC stated that it was a military plane at the speeds it was travelling.

In regard to the media being in on 9/11, i've only looked at evidence. What evidence do you have that it was terrorists ? Why were 17 CNN/FOX/ABC news reporters there already, why did the plane not appear on camera when zoomed out ? Why did the plane appear when the camera was exactly in line with the towers and then when the camera swayed slightly to the left the nose of the plane (fully in tact) left the tower and then part of it dissapeared suddenly as it reached the middle of the camera again ? Why did CNN extend their screen banner so that it covered the largest news story in modern history ? Why did CNN/FOX/ABC all blackout 15 frames as soon as the plane impacted ? Why did many people report explosions ? Why were 17/19 witnesses reporters, but not revealed to be so ? Why does the 'footage' of the plane have different weather conditions if it is a real plane ? Why does the plane appear white in one video and black in another ? Why can secondary explosions away from the initial impact be seen ? Why does the same woman when audio is studied appear in the same 'amateur' video's 4 times ? Why have most of the sounds in official video's been proven to have artificial sounds ? Why were electronic devices down so nobody could take photo's ? Why did news broadcasters blame terrorists just 4 minutes after the first impact ? Why did high ranked officials say missile by mistake ? Why did obama feel the need to defend military invasions on iraq reffering to 9/11 stating that the conspiracys were all wrong ? Why were 3/4 planes unregistered ? ...
#17
So many decent points in that ryman1000 - No one here can say those specific points are wrong (maybe a few are), and if they do, they are just trolling, or cannot open their mind to any other theories.

Explosions from within the buildings have always been a big factor with 9/11, with building experts claiming that there had to be explosions involved, but with people claiming it's all an inside job, 1000 more will say it's not, so unless someone from inside states it was, or whatever, then conspiracy theories will always be just that.

:(

In regards to evidence suggesting it was Al Qaeda, the US Government tortured someone for years until he confessed. ^^
#18
i've gotta c this..
#19
http://i45.tinypic.com/334m4vs.jpg
banned#20
ryman1000;8743420
Many witnesses said that they heard a low pitched noise and something fast and too small passing them to be a large commercial plane. The measurments of the plane passing the 'freeway' before the pentagon would mean it would have hit it. The plane would have left structured debris rather than the odd bit of metal and an engine here and there. Not only this but ATC stated that it was a military plane at the speeds it was travelling.

In regard to the media being in on 9/11, i've only looked at evidence. What evidence do you have that it was terrorists ? Why were 17 CNN/FOX/ABC news reporters there already, why did the plane not appear on camera when zoomed out ? Why did the plane appear when the camera was exactly in line with the towers and then when the camera swayed slightly to the left the nose of the plane (fully in tact) left the tower and then part of it dissapeared suddenly as it reached the middle of the camera again ? Why did CNN extend their screen banner so that it covered the largest news story in modern history ? Why did CNN/FOX/ABC all blackout 15 frames as soon as the plane impacted ? Why did many people report explosions ? Why were 17/19 witnesses reporters, but not revealed to be so ? Why does the 'footage' of the plane have different weather conditions if it is a real plane ? Why does the plane appear white in one video and black in another ? Why can secondary explosions away from the initial impact be seen ? Why does the same woman when audio is studied appear in the same 'amateur' video's 4 times ? Why have most of the sounds in official video's been proven to have artificial sounds ? Why were electronic devices down so nobody could take photo's ? Why did news broadcasters blame terrorists just 4 minutes after the first impact ? Why did high ranked officials say missile by mistake ? Why did obama feel the need to defend military invasions on iraq reffering to 9/11 stating that the conspiracys were all wrong ? Why were 3/4 planes unregistered ? ...

You really shouldnt play into the hands of these crackpot theories from high school graduates (who happened to get very rich from zeitgeist BTW). Those questions are completely at odds with the actual evidence.

I go by reputable investigative journalism like Popular Mechanics rather than the likes of Michael Moore et al.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/1227842

Have to say I have never come across anyone saying that CNN and CBS were in on the conspiracy too lol. I've heard it all now.
banned#21
ryman1000;8743070
9 parts in total, just watch the first and maybe second, although the latter video's are the best, you need to watch the first ones to understand them

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVLu8dC2N0s

Just watched a bit but had to turn it off after 4 minutes as laughing too much. Is it meant to be a comedy? :?
#23
I recall watching it and some people recorded the second planes impact on their mobiles. It was deffo a plane, I don't believe the conspiracy theories about the Twin towers. Perhaps the camera's blacked out due to some sort of interference from the explosion, With that much fuel it could cause some sort of shockwave. It didn't blackout on every broadcasts just the two major American news channel's. I also very much doubt several news reporters could keep a secret of this nature for all these years. If the video's were hoaxed then they must of known about it.

As for The Pentagon, I must admit I find that a strange one.
#24
Government: We want to cause a tragedy so great the American people will blindly follow us into war... What do you think gentlemen...

Accomplice #1: Well, the Towers are a perfect choice.. It's been bombed before. We can just blame Osama again. We've been priming the American people by having him blow up our warships and our buildings in other countries.

Government: Yeah, good idea! How will we do that?

Accomplice #1: We can hire Osama to get some of his friends to fly planes into it!

Accomplice #2: Wait... I have a better idea, We can BOMB the buildings!

Accomplice #1: Well, that means placing enough bombs into two 110 story buildings. That's going to take a lot of man power and risk us being uncovered...

Accomplice #2: Yeah, but that way, you’re sure to knock them down. Besides, maybe the hijackers won’t make it to the target. Maybe they'll be uncovered!

Accomplice #1: But you don't need to knock them down, all you need is the horrific sight of the planes hitting the buildings. People will get the message. It's an attack on American soil. We'll also have people like the blind sheik to cover for us. We'll even put a guy on a train with evidence.

Your plan isn't perfect either, you know. Do I have to remind you of Operation Towel Pop? We already tried to embarrass Clinton by knocking it down and failed.

Accomplice #2: Yeah, our Bay of Pigs, but I say the only way they can get the message is if we knock them down.

Accomplice #1: Do not

Accomplice #2: Do too

Accomplice #1: Do not

Accomplice #2: Do too

Accomplice #1: Do not

Accomplice #2: Do too

Government: Gentlemen, gentlemen... Please... What the hell, we'll just do both! :blink: How do we do that? I mean, how do you keep explosions from showing up on TV? We're going to have to investigate this at some point. How do we cover up the scene?

Accomplice #2: But why not just knock it dow...

Government: I've made my decision. Continue...

Accomplice #2: OK.. We install charges on every floor so that after the planes hit, we blow each floor under the crash floor one by one, very fast to simulate pancaking. We'll let the building burn a while just for effect. This will also give time for the trusses to sag making it LOOK like a fire caused the building to fall.

Accomplice #1: Nice touch...

Accomplice #2: Why, thank you. :) ...We'll set a charge off in the middle of the building AFTER the top is on its way down so everyone thinks the puffs of debris coming from the windows are from the tremendous hypodermic needle like pressure blowing debris from the weakest point in the building.

Government: What about the sound of explosions? Isn't that a dead giveaway?

Accomplice #2: No problem, We'll just let them think it's normal electrical explosions like transformers blowing up or the initial concrete and steel and floors hitting the floors below.

Accomplice #1: Yeah, it could also be the steel columns snapping like twigs from the tremendous weight of the floors above... Don't worry, we have disinformation specialists in key internet forums.

Government: WOW, You guys think of everything.. What about Building 7? Can we take that out at the same time?

Accomplice #1: We won’t be able to fly planes into it, that's for sure...

Accomplice #2: Leave it to me. If we set off the explosions just right, we can have one of the towers hit Building 7, missing the two next to it. After that, we can set fires on the bottom floors and let it burn for a while, you know, to make it look possible for a normal collapse. I'll call my agent in the fire department to get everyone out before we blow it. I'll figure a way to make the floors look buckled for effect as well.

Government: Amazing ... I also want to take out the Pentagon. Any suggestions?

Accomplice #1: What we'll do is hijack a plane just for effect, then fire a missile at the Pentagon. A bunker buster.

Government: But what about the people on the plane?

Accomplice #1: We'll land the plane in area 51, then shoot them all.

Government: Why not use the plane instead of the missile? That way, you take care of all the evidence at the same time... People on the highway can also see the planes hit. If you use a missile, there's going to be a lot of witnesses who saw a missile and not a plane.

Accomplice #1: Err... ah, don't worry about these small details. I have an undercover op in the DC police department who will take the names down and shot them all.

Government: How are you going to get all the people involved in this? Bush isn't exactly loved you know..

Accomplice #1: Don't worry, psych-ops will take care of the brainwashing of the American people. As for the media, we control the left and the right!

Government: GREAT! Nice work all! Let’s make the target date Sept 11, 2001.

http://www.debunking911.com/
banned#25

Excellent :-D

you'll always get people unprepared to believe the actual facts / evidence and rely on cheap internet videos made my nerds in their garage though ;)
#26
If you think that video is good evidence that 9/11 was a conspiracy. Check this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0
banned#27
Jammy1812;8744254
If you think that video is good evidence that 9/11 was a conspiracy. Check this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0

Now I'm in two minds :w00t:
banned#28
csiman
Just watched a bit but had to turn it off after 4 minutes as laughing too much. Is it meant to be a comedy? :?


You obviouslly have a closed mind and there is little point in you watching any of the videos.
Why is the plane black in this picture, when it was a supposed white plane ? You have little/no
evidence to prove you are right apart from that zeitgest made some people a lot of money :?

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cm/popularmechanics/images/zo/0305911-lead-lg.jpg
#29
ryman1000

Why is the plane black in this picture, when it was a supposed white plane ?


Why is the sky grey when it is supposed to be blue!!!!!

ZOMG conspiracy!!! You were right all along!!! :thumbsup:
banned#30
JayBird
Why is the sky grey when it is supposed to be blue!!!!!

ZOMG conspiracy!!! You were right all along!!! :thumbsup:


In a black and white photo's lighter colours will go grey/white where as dark colours will go black/dark gray. The sky is a light blue so goes light gray. The plane is supposed to be white, and would not go black.
#31
You dont seem to be accounting for shadows
banned#32
csiman
Did you expect a cartoon cut out in the side of the building? As I said, the plane hit the ground shortly before hitting the pentagon at 500mph. The wings would have vaporised on impact with the ground being mainly aluminium. The rest would have disintegrated after forcing its way through 3 reinforced concrete rings.

to quote from the link above:-

[SIZE=4]Review the facts[/SIZE]

Size of 757 matches the initial size of hole in the building - somewhere between 13 and 16 feet (757 is 13 feet wide/high)
Rims found in building match those of a 757
Small turbine engine outside is an APU
Same engine has been clearly stated to not match a Global Hawk engine
Blue seats from 757 laying on ground in photos
Part of "American" fuselage logo visible in more than 1 photo
Engine parts photographed inside match a Rolls-Royce RB211
Structural components photographed in wreckage match Boeing paint primer schemes
Large deisel generator in front of building hit by a large heavy object
Large deisel engine outside is spun towards the building - could not be result of bomb blast or missile explosion
Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner
Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner hit the Pentagon
60+ bodies, matching the passenger list and flight crew roster identified and returned to families from Pentagon wreckage


Many witnesses have also said that they heard a missile and it went extremely fast past them, so it's their word against the others. In 9/11 many so called witnesses were working for the news company's but weren't revealed to be until people looked into it more. Most of them were clearly acting (very badly). A perfect video of the plane passing a 'freeway' (which wasn't physically possible anyway for a 747) has never been released, and would stop all the conspiracy theories. There is no reason they shouldn't show it. And a logo on a fuselage means nothing, it could easily have been planeted on whatever did hit the pentagon. Some pieces have been said to be too small. If a plane hit the pentagon it doesn't combust into a million pieces, it would still have some structure to it, maybe not as much as the photo but something similar

http://firegeezer.com/files/2009/02/amst-plane-crash-d-afp.jpg
banned#33
JayBird
You dont seem to be accounting for shadows


The position of the sun based on the building below being lit, and one of the towers facing the sun means it would not be shaded
#34
You also dont seem to be accounting for the ACTUAL color scheme of UA planes

http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/podimages/UA767colors.jpg

Next conspiracy please
banned#35
JayBird
You also dont seem to be accounting for the ACTUAL color scheme of UA planes

http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/podimages/UA767colors.jpg

Next conspiracy please


Why does the screen black out when the plane's nose is seen to come out of the tower fully in tact and suddenly dissapear excatly in the middle of the screen and why does the plane appear when the towers are excatly 50/50 in the middle of the screen, but the plane cannot be seen before the camera zooms in meaning plane would need to be travelling 620mph+ ?
#36
ryman1000
Why does the screen black out when the plane's nose is seen to come out of the tower fully in tact and suddenly dissapear excatly in the middle of the screen and why does the plane appear when the towers are excatly 50/50 in the middle of the screen, but the plane cannot be seen before the camera zooms in meaning plane would need to be travelling 620mph+ ?


i don't know what your point is there...are you trying to say a plane DIDN'T hit the WTC?

Also, you seem to have overlooked your false claims from your original conspiracy, and now your moving the goalposts
banned#37
JayBird
i don't know what your point is there...are you trying to say a plane DIDN'T hit the WTC?

Also, you seem to have overlooked your false claims from your original conspiracy, and now your moving the goalposts


The point is they realised their computer generated image had gone wrong and somebody blacked it out, the 0.28 second delay being human error, enough for us to notice. Skip to 3:40 . You can see it overlapping the image layer limit. In regard to the colour scheme of the plane, other angled shots show the plane to be almost entirely one colour, as well as being very dark and having no reflections or colour changes that windows would produce.

High up news readers on half a million USD sallary's said the 'tower is starting to collapse' before any signs of it collapsing had formed.
#38
Okay, so you say that video is computer generated - far fetched in it itself. So, you are also saying that all the other videos of the plane hitting the WTC are also computer generated + all the photos of said plane hitting the WTC are also doctored - even more far fetched

Color scheme

here is a UA plane

http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/podimages/stripe362107.jpg

here is an image of the plane seconds before impact

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_beLd7MjrO5o/Sqn9JIFt5gI/AAAAAAAAYds/KW8nN-4XxQ0/WTCplane_thumb[30].jpg

Notice the grey stripe down the belly of the plane on the first photo. See it again on the second photo

see it again on this picture

http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/podimages/highlightsstripe.jpg

see it again on this picture

http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/podimages/highlightsTaylorstripe.jpg


see it on this picture?

http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/podimages/image016.gif
#39
see it on this picture?

http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/podimages/missilehighlight.jpg

what about here?

http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/podimages/2ndTowersmall.jpg

Oh yeah, they are all computer generated. Silly me
banned#40
[IMG]http://i48.tinypic.com/2rdl1ft.jpg[/IMG]

What with the big black thing in the middle as if extra equipment has been added, there should be a line going through the centre. I didn't say they were all computer generated anyway. 3 out of the 4 planes were not registered, the same plane can be seen coming in at an entirely different angle on two seperate views meaning one of them muse be a fake. When the plane impacted there was a fireball from the lift about 70 floors below, which points to explosives being planted there.

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!