no planes theory a hoax

[kbeet]

no plane theory a hoax
it dont mater how much proof they are shown the hoax is delibrate and intentional.. why?. to fit in with another hoax about 9/11 being a inside job. pictures showing planes on the net got a red X in them. i feel sure this no planes theory is made up to fit in with the inside job theory.. and i think it is a attempt to show the world that it was a inside job as a excuse for somthing which dident even exist. . i saw the no planes theory thread and it made my stomic turn. because i am one of the witnesses in new york at the time. i saw the 2nd plane fly at and into the building exploading in a fire ball. this no planes theory together with the inside job garbage is propaganda. one user in another thread started to half believe i saw planes and another user asked the mod to close the thread. i showed proof on ats of planes and ats disabeld my ability to post. and the whole real conspiracy is these lies to set up america for what is not true. its no real big thing the world knows there was planes there are thousands of witnesses and evidence was found. but this lie is poisening peopls minds on the net with this falsnes replaceing the truth. somone has to speak up and i intend to do my best to spread this truth on the net

[oioioi]

And you're on this forum because.....?

[truegroup]

And you're on this forum because.....?

None of your business really.

For what it's worth, I have no problem believing a New Yorker saw a frickin' plane on 911 !!!!!!

[kooskoets]

If a witness before a judge claims to have seen something that is physically impossible
and for which there is not a shred of concrete evidence, his statements will be rightfully dismissed.

There you go...

[kbeet]

If a witness before a judge claims to have seen something that is physically impossible
and for which there is not a shred of concrete evidence, his statements will be rightfully dismissed.

There you go...

lol what you want me to do try and proove it to a judge
can you proove to a judge your not gay.. oops... are you?



and thanks to the other guy for sticking up for me

[kooskoets]

lol what you want me to do try and proove it to a judge

As i said : any judge would dismiss your claim.
( ...and probably would tell you to stop lying ).



can you proove to a judge your not gay.. oops... are you?

Ah...that answers the Q in the first reply.
You're only looking for a date, right ?

[winegums]

If a witness before a judge claims to have seen something that is physically impossible

Planes are physically impossible?

[kbeet]

As i said : any judge would dismiss your claim.
( ...and probably would tell you to stop lying ).




Ah...that answers the Q in the first reply.
You're only looking for a date, right ?

your suporting a looseing thrend with this no planes thing
i suggest you do more research unless your one of them that know dam well there was planes and are trying to disproove it for the reason i sead in the first post and if thats the case take a long walk and keep going

[kronoix]

And you're on this forum because.....?

Because 9/11 was not an inside job, duh, don't you watch the mainstream media, they told me that:D

Here's your scheduled mercury poi---- I mean healthy vaccine.

[winegums]

Here's your scheduled mercury poi---- I mean healthy vaccine.

Except most vaccines don't use thimerasol anymore, and even when they did there was no proven correlation to any medical detriment.

But hey, let's not let the facts get in the way of the paranoia

[dave52]

i showed proof on ats of planes

Can you bring that evidence here...? I'm interested in what you have to say.

[bryan]

your suporting a looseing thrend with this no planes thing

It's supporters of the official story who are on a losing trend. If you don't believe it, keep an eye on this site:

http://www.ae911truth.org/

You'll find the number goes up, not down.

[3stepsahead]

the media lies to you everyday, so, why didnt they on 9oneone

the official is a hoax, even if the main issue of planes or not is removed completely, the official is a hoax. you know copperfield? HOAX.....

[kahn2010]

i dont really get this 'no planes' theory, however i do believe, 100% infact, that 9/11 was an inside job.

I believe American Military planes were flown in, which technically proves the 'no planers' right cos they say no commercial airliner flew into the towers, which, in reality, no comemrcial airliner DID fly into the towers, cos they were military planes (with undercarriage missile launchers)! :D

[bryan]

I believe American Military planes were flown in, which technically proves the 'no planers' right cos they say no commercial airliner flew into the towers, which, in reality, no comemrcial airliner DID fly into the towers, cos they were military planes (with undercarriage missile launchers)! :D

I think MPT is disinfo.

[kbeet]

It's supporters of the official story who are on a losing trend. If you don't believe it, keep an eye on this site:

http://www.ae911truth.org/

You'll find the number goes up, not down.

i dont need to keep a eye on this site to know what i saw.. as i been saying i was there i saw the plaines fly into the buildings there are thousands of new yorkers who allso saw it all those eye witnesses includeing me just LOL at what ever you wanna bees rig up. there is evidence there are news media showing the plaine sticking out of a building any library you viset can suply you with news media and news paper storys and images. all you have to do is ask to see everything and i am sure you will see what i saw in real time
but play your game its fun to watch

[kbeet]

Can you bring that evidence here...? I'm interested in what you have to say.

you can viset your library and ask to see all information on 9/11
if you want hard evidnce you can maybe contact the fbi and ask them how you can see it.
type this in your search box on your computer
(9/11 showing plaines in building)
i counted 7 photos on the net that had a red X in them.
those photos were hacked. but go to the library and try them.

[dave52]

Post some images here, because I have no idea what you're on about. I've never seen an image from 9/11 showing a plane in a building.

[kronoix]

you can viset your library and ask to see all information on 9/11
if you want hard evidnce you can maybe contact the fbi and ask them how you can see it.
type this in your search box on your computer
(9/11 showing plaines in building)
i counted 7 photos on the net that had a red X in them.
those photos were hacked. but go to the library and try them.



Bullshit.

I guarantee they will not show you ALL of the information on 9/11.

For example, they wont tell you how exactly the plane that hit the pentagon had a super god-like nosecone, to smash through all rings of the pentagon.

[kbeet]

Bullshit.

I guarantee they will not show you ALL of the information on 9/11.

For example, they wont tell you how exactly the plane that hit the pentagon had a super god-like nosecone, to smash through all rings of the pentagon.

you going to start swearing on the board again like the other thread you had closed after you got done with that one.
if you don t agree and cant say anything to keep your man hood you shouldent say anything

[dave52]

Hey, Kbeet - Planes inside towers. Pics or it didn't happen...

[kbeet]

Post some images here, because I have no idea what you're on about. I've never seen an image from 9/11 showing a plane in a building.

man.. even the terrorist know there was plaines that hit the buildings
and thousands in new york me included saw them
you people want to follow what some geek started on the internet go for it
but dont say i dident see plaines. you people ill bet were never in new york
but if you go there there anger of 9/11 is still there so dont tell a new yorker there was no plaines untill you make a fast escape route

[dave52]

So, you have no pictures of planes inside the buildings...?

[kbeet]

So, you have no pictures of planes inside the buildings...?

i posted a photo of one of the plaines hiting the building exploading on impact. in this thread or another one i think its in coverups the thread somthing about plaines or its in war on terror.
then all the idiots in hear say its fake so whats the use posting pictures as proof

[dave52]

You said you'd seen pictures of the plane inside the building after the crash.

I have probably seen just about every image, video, still what have you from 9/11. I've never seen an image showing plane parts in the towers.

Have you seen such an image, and if so, post it here.

[kbeet]

You said you'd seen pictures of the plane inside the building after the crash.

I have probably seen just about every image, video, still what have you from 9/11. I've never seen an image showing plane parts in the towers.

Have you seen such an image, and if so, post it here.

go to SEARCH at top of window
search with my user name KBEET
its in one of those threads

[justin_pushka]

No Pic no link to thread. I think we can safely assume its just a case of keep repeating the same old lies people will go with the official story. Only problem is its never gonna happen dude. You may as well save your breath cos the number of people who think its an inside job are growing exponentialy every day. :)

[dave52]

No, I'm not trawling through all your posts.

You post a picture here of the plane in the tower after the crash.

You claimed you've seen the picture - you post it here.

[kbeet]

No, I'm not trawling through all your posts.

You post a picture here of the plane in the tower after the crash.

You claimed you've seen the picture - you post it here.

go get your milk shake and get the picture
and dont tell me what to do or how to do it
i did post a picture if you want it go get it
dident i see your picture in the fbi most wanted

[dave52]

go get your milk shake and get the picture
and dont tell me what to do or how to do it
i did post a picture if you want it go get it
dident i see your picture in the fbi most wanted

No further questions your honour...

[stannrodd]

No, I'm not trawling through all your posts.

You post a picture here of the plane in the tower after the crash.

You claimed you've seen the picture - you post it here.

Fair request..

:)

[kbeet]

http://kerrysdomain.net/images.jpg

the building on the right you can see the jet just as it crashes into the building and then hiden by clouds of smoke
picture taken from a building ACROSS TOWN and i was closer that that building when i saw it
they are two pictures showing befor and after

[apollo_gnomon]

So, you have no pictures of planes inside the buildings...?

Post a picture of your bong.

What a dumbass.

[policestate]

http://kerrysdomain.net/images.jpg

the building on the right you can see the jet just as it crashes into the building and then hiden by clouds of smoke
picture taken from a building ACROSS TOWN and i was closer that that building when i saw it
they are two pictures showing befor and after

lol that picture is from a "no planes" website

click here to see (http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1058981900&postcount=68)

[kbeet]

lol that picture is from a "no planes" website

click here to see (http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1058981900&postcount=68)

i dsont know what the site is about i just got that picture from it and and its just what i saw in real time.. that plain in the picture is what i saw regardless of what that website is trying to do with it

[kbeet]

http://www.25idl.army.mil/fallenhero%5CRemembering.htm

oops
looks like these cno plaines geeks got to these pictures to
they search the net and hack every possable picture showing plaines then come in this forum with there BS

[policestate]

Thats quite a crazy remark kbeet.

[kbeet]

Post a picture of your bong.

What a dumbass.

look i am just trying to proove what i saw and this is the best i can do forr now the picture of the plaine is real because i was there and i saw this. i dont care what that no plaines site is doing with it..
but im not the dumb ass or the liar all i got left to say is dont call me a liar or a dumb ass to my face

[dave52]

That picture has an outline of a plane drawn on it, you cannot see the plane in that picture.

In fact that picture is just showing you that the hole is exactly the same shape as the plane (like a cartoon cut out - that is why it's on a no-plane site).

The dumb-ass/bong insult was aimed at me, not you Kbeet. Apollo_gnomon is attempting to insult me because he has very little else to bring to the table.

So, can you admit that you haven't seen pictures of the plane inside the building...? Because that image doesn't show it.

[stannrodd]

I wanna see your bong too .. Dave !! :)

[dave52]

I wanna see your bong too .. Dave !! :)

I don't have one mate - Apart from a nice cup of coffee and a few cans of beer, I don't do any drugs. My "look" (which seems to be so upsetting for Apollo_gnomon), is all down to the fact that I like loud and heavy music...
;)

[1776]

Debunk the following

9/11 Fake: How the plane fraud was sold to the World
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

TV Fakery: How does the Media Work
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

9/11 Fake: Media Make Believe
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

9/11: A Bridge Too Far
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

I dare you


Peace&Love
God bless

[stannrodd]

I don't have one mate - Apart from a nice cup of coffee and a few cans of beer, I don't do any drugs. My "look" (which seems to be so upsetting for Apollo_gnomon), is all down to the fact that I like loud and heavy music...
;)

What's a bong anyway ? .. is it like a gong ?

Oh I see .. drugs .. I like heavy music too .. Pink Fairies .. Do It

Stann

[ultima1]

look i am just trying to proove what i saw and this is the best i can do forr now the picture of the plaine is real because i was there and i saw this. i dont care what that no plaines site is doing with it..

Well how could you be at all sites to see what happned at all the crsh sites that day?

Do you know the difference between a civilian or military plane?

[kbeet]

Well how could you be at all sites to see what happned at all the crsh sites that day?

Do you know the difference between a civilian or military plane?

why dont you people who have never been in new york or was not in new york on 9/11 and dont know what your all talking about go to the main home page of new york ny and ask your questions there at the links thell tell you all your looking for

[1776]

ere!

Debunk the following

9/11 Fake: How the plane fraud was sold to the World
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpxsuIPvLwk

TV Fakery: How does the Media Work
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFEIK6yQolI

9/11 Fake: Media Make Believe
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jelhweOLfm4

9/11: A Bridge Too Far
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEc58UlLfss

I dare you


Peace&Love
God bless

No takers, huh?


Surprising :rolleyes:

why dont you people who have never been in new york or was not in new york on 9/11 and dont know what your all talking about go to the main home page of new york ny and ask your questions there at the links thell tell you all your looking for

Why don't you learn rudimentary English skills before trying to discredit real researchers on an intelligent conspiracy forum on the internet. It's really an eye sore trying to read your dribble to start with...

Want to meet someone from NY that was there?

How's an an account from an FBI Agent (NYC field office)? Is that good enough? How about one better...


9/11 Fake: FBI NY confirms TV Fakery Problems
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.


It just got real quiet in here, didn't it? :p


The footage we saw on the Tell-Lies-Vision that day was FAKED by the media/military/government! They all helped each other (CONSPIRACY) pull the wool over the eyes of the world and cast the spell of "TERRORISM" (Fear Fear Fear) so we would support their every whim when it came to DEFENDING (Problem-Reaction-Solution) ourselves and taking out the "Bad Guys" (Scapegoat). They scared us into believing the LIE, the LIE that we live today... where we trade our FREEDOM for SECURITY. We are killing ourselves... slowly... and painfully...


If you want to know what's really wrong with our planet today, go take a good look in the mirror.


Peace&Love
God bless

[hadabusa]

Post some images here, because I have no idea what you're on about. I've never seen an image from 9/11 showing a plane in a building.

neither have i.

im very curious now.

[hadabusa]

http://kerrysdomain.net/images.jpg

the building on the right you can see the jet just as it crashes into the building and then hiden by clouds of smoke
picture taken from a building ACROSS TOWN and i was closer that that building when i saw it
they are two pictures showing befor and after

lol, thatsa drawn plane.

you cant be serious.

[freedom1st]

At this point I don't know either way. But wouldn't the plane come out the other side? And if so wouldn't it then hit another building/s and then crash down to the ground?

[ultima1]

why dont you people who have never been in new york or was not in new york on 9/11 and dont know what your all talking about go to the main home page of new york ny and ask your questions there at the links thell tell you all your looking for

Becasue you stated you were there and witnessed what happened.

So tell us what you saw and what you know about planes.

[ultima1]

At this point I don't know either way. But wouldn't the plane come out the other side?

NO a airliners airframe is made from fragile aluminum and as concluded in the Purdue university study a airliners airframe would have been shredded by the steel lattace as soon as it entered the building.

[hadabusa]

At this point I don't know either way. But wouldn't the plane come out the other side? And if so wouldn't it then hit another building/s and then crash down to the ground?

in 1940s, a plane crashed into ESB and fell off the building instead of getting struck/fly trough.

even msm never showed tail hanging out, kbeet has access2rather brutal drugs it seems:D

[policestate]

lol, thatsa drawn plane.

you cant be serious.

lol... click

http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/3897/drawn.jpg
http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/3897/drawn.jpg

[kooskoets]

lol... click

http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/3897/drawn.jpg
http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/3897/drawn.jpg

It's flying backwards.
Damn tewwowists....

[stannrodd]

It's flying backwards.
Damn tewwowists....

That's what cartoon planes do isn't it Einstein .. ?

:eek:


>
>
>

:confused:

[luciferhorus]

no plane theory a hoax...
... but this lie is poisening peopls minds on the net with this falsnes replaceing the truth.

Yes, exactly. However I refer only to the World Trade Centre No Planers. Most of the 911 truth crowd who are scientists and engineers dispute that a 757 hit the Pentagon and that a 757 crashed in Shanksville; there is simply no evidence of a large aircraft at either site.

I suspect the major proponents of the "WTC No Plane" theory are actually the US military themselves; after all they do have an army of counterintelligence employees in both the mass media and they have admitted that they do operate on the Internet.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/84/National_Security_Agency_headquarters%2C_Fort_Mead e%2C_Maryland.jpg/300px-National_Security_Agency_headquarters%2C_Fort_Mead e%2C_Maryland.jpg
Above: NSA (counterintelligence) HQ in Maryland.

The scale of the operations at the NSA (Maryland) is hard to determine from unclassified data; some 18,000 parking spaces are visible in photos of the site.
National Security Agency - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Lux

[onourway]

So, you have no pictures of planes inside the buildings...?
Dave.....he's talking about "plaines"...and we're talking about "planes"! No wonder there's a big misunderstanding! Now I don't know what exactly "plaines" are but they may be in there somewhere.

[1776]

I think it's funny that you all just keep going on about yourselves in the thread like I never posted this reply,

>> http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1058998499&postcount=46 <<

I think it's pretty solid ground for the No plane theory, don't ya think?

I build my theories upon solid foundations, because anything built on something less than 100% truth will crumble, eventually - always. The bigger they get, the harder they fall.

Here's some more great videos lending support to the No plane theory,


9/11: Rubble Piles & Dust
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

9/11 Fake: Media Make Believe
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

9/11 Fake: John Lear on Remote Controlled Planes vs No Planes
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

9/11 Fake: John Lear on Strategic Perception Management Manual & Holograms
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

9/11 Fake: John Lear on Vanish Planes & Holograms
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

Colonel Tom Bearden on Military Energy Weapons (1985)
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

Boyd Bushman on Anti-Gravity & the Laws of Physics pt.1/3
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

Boyd Bushman on Anti-Gravity & the Laws of Physics pt.2/3
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

Boyd Bushman on Anti-Gravity & the Laws of Physics pt.3/3
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

9/11 was faked using TV fakery. Using 'No planes' was a strategy employed by the elites, the Mystery Schools of Babylon, who took down the towers using unconventional means of demolitions. They fooled you into thinking you saw planes hitting the buildings dead center because they had help from the media who faked the video footage from 9/11!

Once more, this is possible... this has been possible for DECADES!

'Wag the Dog' & TV Fakery
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

Peace&Love
God bless

[ultima1]

Above: NSA (counterintelligence) HQ in Maryland.

The scale of the operations at the NSA (Maryland) is hard to determine from unclassified data; some 18,000 parking spaces are visible in photos of the site.

I suggest you look up thier public website if you are looking for information. Also they were one of the several intell agencies that warned of hijackings around 9/11.

www.nsa.gov

[hadabusa]

I suggest you look up thier public website if you are looking for information. Also they were one of the several intell agencies that warned of hijackings around 9/11.

www.nsa.gov

hear hear

:)

nice one,thx.


to no plane believers....tv fakery mustnt mean there were no planes.


i think the key is leaving wtc planes /noplanes idling, but focussing on pentagon.

bc THAT was no plane.

im still undecided about wtc.

[ultima1]

to no plane believers....tv fakery mustnt mean there were no planes.

Exactly, the problem that must be worked on by both sides is the fact of the majority of evidence and official reports still not released.

[hadabusa]

Exactly, the problem that must be worked on by both sides is the fact of the majority of evidence and official reports still not released.

how long can it be kept classified?

is there a council2ensure stuff dont "get lost"?


youre right, neither side should claim knowing the truth untill everythings released.




tv fakery can have many reasons, cant be used as proof exclusivelly.

[ultima1]

how long can it be kept classified?


Yes problem is also now that its been so long how do we know the evidence has not been tampered with.

[hadabusa]

Yes problem is also now that its been so long how do we know the evidence has not been tampered with.

digital stuff is borderline impossible to tamper wo leaving evidence thereoff.

but statements, my goodness, stomach turns:(


biggest atrocity&taxscam are cctv.


isnt cctv supposed to be for citizens security(slight sarcasm)?

if ppl had non cctv surveillance devices, wed know alot more.

maybe1day 1:1 remake of wtc scenario will be affordable,and done by independent party.

thatd be conclusive.

[stannrodd]

If I had the money .. I'd buy a no plane and build a WTC facade in which to not fly it into .. and see if it leaves a cartoon hole in the shape of a 767 or a DC10 ..:)

Stann

[hadabusa]

If I had the money .. I'd buy a no plane and build a WTC facade in which to not fly it into .. and see if it leaves a cartoon hole in the shape of a 767 or a DC10 ..:)

Stann

stann, you arent very constructive.

i can understand npt seeming insane to you, and you enjoying taking the piss out of it.

but your attitude is jref-ish, they claim to know everything, when infact very important evidence wasnt released .

thats naive.

oh.

F4 Phantom Vs. Wall - YouTube

[ultima1]

If I had the money .. I'd buy a no plane and build a WTC facade in which to not fly it into .. and see if it leaves a cartoon hole in the shape of a 767 or a DC10 ..:)

Stann

You mean the ones that we have no real evidence or official reports released about?

[stannrodd]

stann, you arent very constructive.

Correct .. !

[hadabusa]

Correct .. !

from your own pentagon thread...

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=578124&postcount=7


video removed due to blabla.

[tabea_blumenschein]

stann, you arent very constructive.

i can understand npt seeming insane to you, and you enjoying taking the piss out of it.

but your attitude is jref-ish, they claim to know everything, when infact very important evidence wasnt released .

thats naive.

oh.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--_RGM4Abv8


[no-planer]But the body of the plane didn't even SLOW DOWN as the front end impacted against the wall! Newton's laws say that can't happen, since planes are supposed to be very flimsy yet behave like perfectly rigid objects when they collide with something! A flying tin can against a huge, thick wall of SOLID cement? Are you fucking KIDDING me??? The weakest object always deforms FIRST!!! The flimsy aluminum plane should have just crunched itself up against the ROCK-SOLID concrete and broken into pieces and fallen to the ground!!! The wall should still be there undamaged!!!!

Did I mention that there was NO VISIBLE DECELERATION of the body of that plane!!! Eleven-ty!!!11!11111!!!!11

We see through your fake videos, you SHILL![/no-planer]

(Nothing personal, hadabusa, I had someone else in mind whilst I was typing. :))

[dave52]

That is a huge block of concrete, design specifically to absorb that type of impact. The plane hit straight on. Apples and oranges.

[hadabusa]

That is a huge block of concrete, design specifically to absorb that type of impact. The plane hit straight on. Apples and oranges.

i posted it bc similiar speed&wing issue.


made neither pt/npt claim.

[dave52]

Fair enough... There are doubts that the large passenger planes could've managed the speed reported...

[luciferhorus]

That is a huge block of concrete, design specifically to absorb that type of impact. The plane hit straight on. Apples and oranges.

Yes, it looks to me like the concrete wall is several metres thick, and it may well be steel reinforced concrete. Steel reinforcing is standard in the construction industry, since concrete block construction can only hold the weight of small, lightweight dwellings, not large skyscrapers.


http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian/WTC/col-dimensions.gif

The diagram above is of the outer steel tubular colums which covered the outside of the WTC in between the windows. As you can see it is only 2.5 inches think at it's densest point; not quite the same as ramming into a reinforced concrete wall which is several metres thick.

I have some very thin steel cable at home which is used for hanging heavy picture frames on walls. It is only a couple of millimetres thick. It cannot be broken by hand, but it will only hold so much weight before snapping. I could probably tension the steel cable and hit it with a block of wood or aluminium and I am quite certain it would break. In fact if I dropped a heavy enough large pile of newspapers on it, it would break.

Allegedly the kenetic energy released by a Boeing 767 in a flight collision with an object would be 3.706 billion ft lbs force (5,024,650 Kilojoules). I am not qualified sufficiently in physics or in engineering to be able to understand exactly what 3.706 billion ft lbs force (5,024,650 Kilojoules) can do to a hollow steel column, but I could certainly break a small steel cable with a lump of aluminium, and that would be nowhere near 3.706 billion ft lbs force, but it may be a useful comparison to 100 ton aircraft slamming into a 2.5 inch (the thickness of the steel plate) tubular steel column.

There are numerous calculations of the collision on http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian/WTC/wtc-demolition.htm.

The WTC Boeing crashed through a singluar 2.5 inch tubular outer column, however that was like tissue paper in comparison to the inner core columns which are described as "47 steel box columns tied together at each floor by steel plates." It is of course universally held by all engineers and architects of the 911 truth movement that it would be impossible for a Boeing to do anything other than minor damage to a grid of 47 attached steel columns in the core of the WTC.

The effect of a Boeing hitting a web of 47 steel core columns at the WTC attached together by metal plates would be much like the effect of the jet on the previous page hitting a reinforced concrete wall several metres thick.

It would be quite another matter to fly a 100 ton Boeing into a 2.5 inch inch thick tubular steel column; one would not expect the same resistance as a connected grid of 47 steel columns or a reinforced concrete block several feet thick.

If any of the WTC No-paners have a spare Boeing 767, or a 100 ton aircraft, I would suggest that they fly it at a tubular steel column 2.5 minches thick, at 400 mph and see what happens, otherwise we have to wonder why the architects, physicists and engineers of the 911 truth movement don't have a problem with the maths of this and why they seem to almost universally consider the "WTC No Planers" to be out to destroy the credibility of the evidence which "can" be proven of the impossibility of a Boeing aircraft sufficiently destroying a connected grid of 47 steel box columns or of dissapearing into a tiny hole at the Pentagon.

Lux

http://electronicintifada.net/artman2/uploads/1/ramp.jpg

The above is the damage done to an (steel reinforced concrete) apartment building in Amsterdam
in the 1992 El Al (Israeli) Bijlmer crash from the 747 Boeing aircraft below. I cannot find the airspeed of the Israeli Boeing, but it was certainly "not" flying at anywhere near to 400 mph; the craft suffered engine failure, it had lost two of its four engines, and the crash ocurred partly because it was flying too slow as it came into land and lost altutide.

http://electronicintifada.net/artman2/uploads/1/elalcargo483.jpg

[joeydonuts]

The above is the damage done to an (steel reinforced concrete) apartment building in Amsterdam
in the 1992 El Al (Israeli) Bijlmer crash from the 747 Boeing aircraft below. I cannot find the airspeed of the Israeli Boeing, but it was certainly "not" flying at anywhere near to 400 mph; the craft suffered engine failure, it had lost two of its four engines, and the crash ocurred partly because it was flying too slow as it came into land and lost altutide.

I don't see the nose of the aircraft.

Aluminum is not as strong as steel-reinforced concrete.

That photograph is a fake to cover up the real cause of the crash, which was (insert pet theory here)

That about right?

[luciferhorus]

I don't see the nose of the aircraft.

Aluminum is not as strong as steel-reinforced concrete.

That photograph is a fake to cover up the real cause of the crash, which was (insert pet theory here)

That about right?

LOL. :) Assuming that you are being satirical, then yes, you seem to be correct.

Let me expand this.

The crash of a Boeing aircraft into an Amsterdam apartment building was faked.

What really happened was that the aircraft bounced off the steel reinforced concrete apartment building.

Numerous live TV cameras filmed the apartment building (which suffered very little damage) and employed a musician to edit the tapes in order to convince the world that an accident had occurred and that the kenetic energy of the plane had demolished part of the building.

The Amsterdam crash was a practice run for 911.

the Dutch government and the Israeli government thought, "let us fake a plane crash demolishing a building" so that in the future we could slag off "WTC No Planers" and say, "look we faked this before, so you are obviously wrong."

All photographs of the Amsterdam crash have obviously been manipulated in Photoshop and Adobe Premier.

There is no way that there would be sufficient kenetic energy from a slow flying 100 ton (approx.) aircraft coming in to land to demolish part of a steel reinforced concrete apartment building.

What really happened was that the apartment building deflected the 100+ ton Israeli cargo jet and digitally edited photos and videos were circulated on the Internet in preparation for 911.

It was a practice run in digital video and photo editing for the WTC 911 event.

Here is what really happened on 911:

http://i41.tinypic.com/35k90df.jpg



Lux

[bryan]

The crash of a Boeing aircraft into an Amsterdam apartment building was faked.

What really happened was that the aircraft bounced off the steel reinforced concrete apartment building.

Numerous live TV cameras filmed the apartment building (which suffered very little damage) and employed a musician to edit the tapes in order to convince the world that an accident had occurred and that the kenetic energy of the plane had demolished part of the building.

The Amsterdam crash was a practice run for 911.

the Dutch government and the Israeli government thought, "let us fake a plane crash demolishing a building" so that in the future we could slag off "WTC No Planers" and say, "look we faked this before, so you are obviously wrong."

All photographs of the Amsterdam crash have obviously been manipulated in Photoshop and Adobe Premier.

There is no way that there would be sufficient kenetic energy from a slow flying 100 ton (approx.) aircraft coming in to land to demolish part of a steel reinforced concrete apartment building.

What really happened was that the apartment building deflected the 100+ ton Israeli cargo jet and digitally edited photos and videos were circulated on the Internet in preparation for 911.

It was a practice run in digital video and photo editing for the WTC 911 event.

Can you show that neither the flight recorder nor the engines were recovered and that fake videos of the crash were broadcast on TV?

[bryan]

http://electronicintifada.net/artman2/uploads/1/ramp.jpg

The above is the damage done to an (steel reinforced concrete) apartment building in Amsterdam
in the 1992 El Al (Israeli) Bijlmer crash from the 747 Boeing aircraft below. I cannot find the airspeed of the Israeli Boeing, but it was certainly "not" flying at anywhere near to 400 mph; the craft suffered engine failure, it had lost two of its four engines, and the crash ocurred partly because it was flying too slow as it came into land and lost altutide.

http://electronicintifada.net/artman2/uploads/1/elalcargo483.jpg

You forgot to mention a couple of details from the article where you found these pictures.

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article3165.shtml


On Sunday, October 4, 1992, an El Al Boeing airplane carrying unspecified military cargo crashed into an apartment building in the Bijlmer neighbourhood of Amsterdam. Forty-three people directly lost their lives. More people have died since then, and many are still suffering from unidentified diseases.


What is known is that the destroyed Boeing aircraft carried 75 tons of kerosene and 10 tons of chemicals. From the plane itself, at least 152 kg of depleted uranium counterweights are missing. Most probably, they burnt into particles. Because of the very sensitive cargo aboard the doomed aircraft, official investigations into the causes and repercussions of the 1992 crash have been shrouded in secrecy, denial and misinformation.

[ultima1]

You forgot to mention a couple of details from the article where you found these pictures.

Funny how that the EPA reported that Depleted Uranium from the planes was the cause for radaition as the crash sites at WTC and Pentagon.

Problem is the 757 and 767 do not carry DU.

They stopped using DU after crashed involving the older 747s had radiation fires because of the DU they carried.

[joeydonuts]

Here is what really happened on 911:

http://i41.tinypic.com/35k90df.jpg

Well, that answers everything.

[hadabusa]

Funny how that the EPA reported that Depleted Uranium from the planes was the cause for radaition as the crash sites at WTC and Pentagon.

Problem is the 757 and 767 do not carry DU.

They stopped using DU after crashed involving the older 747s had radiation fires because of the DU they carried.

radiation?

how much?

[ultima1]

radiation?

how much?

http://www.xs4all.nl/~stgvisie/VISIE/radioactive-NewYork.html

From: "Leuren Moret" <leurenmoret@yahoo.com:


On Sept. 11, I called a medical doctor who lives 7 miles from the Pentagon and warned her that DU could have burned in the hijacked jets that crashed (up to 3000 pounds were used in 747's). She turned on her gamma meter - radiation levels were 8 times higher than normal inside her house. She informed the Nuclear Information ResourceService in Washington DC[Phone: 202-328-0002], and the EPA, FBI, HazMat and other emergency response gencies went to the Pentagon to investigate. A pile of rubble from the crash was radioactive, but the EPA rep said "oh... it's probably depleted uranium... it's not a health hazard unless you breathe it". Firefighters, Pentagon personel, and communities nearby DID BREATHE IT. There was no followup investigation, and what about the World Trade Center in NY? Radiation almost never gets into the media. It is a taboo subject.


From: "Dr. H. D. Sharma"
<hdsharma@golden.net>[Physicist]

It does not matter whether the planes that hit the World-Trade Towers and the Pentagon have DU or not as long as DU does not catch fire. If DU catches fire -- most likely it will just like in the case of the El-Al plane that caught fire outside Amsterdam (Netherland), it will form aerosols of uranium dioxide. Inhalation of the aerosols can be harmful to human health depending on the quantity inhaled.

The presence of aerosols can be checked with the help of a simple radiation survey meter. Such meters are readily available and the site near the Towers should be checked for gamma-ray emitters as soon as possible. If you do not see any radiation from adioisotopes of thorium-234 and protoactinium-234, you are fairly certain that no DU has become airborne and it is unlikely to be harmful to human health.
Hari Sharma.

[onourway]

Well here's OP k"plaines"beet's advice to Icke:
frrom what i learnd from this forum and the net you used to believe in jesus
and now you dont.. and you have to do somthing.. like seeing and talking to the bishop in your area. once he learns thats why you want to see him, im sure he will want to see you. its possable that his arguments will win over yours.
.....make of it what you will