Flight 175 pod

[Anders Lindman]

Check out this short clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8CUnWkGr0w

Now, that pod under the plane in the middle and on the right side of
the fuselage of the plane is not your usual commercial airliner type
of equipment, now is it? Are we supposed to believe that Osama Bin
Laden's gang not only managed to hijack the plane, but also before
takeoff successfully mounted that pod under the plane?

[helloperator]

This line of thinking has been laughed at for a while now...pods and all that...the official story fans love to ridicule it....but why?

I've been in Reno for 6 weeks, I missed what the problem was with this pod thing.

Was it cgi'd on by some nut?
Does it exist on raw footage?
Is it a trick of light?
Is it a shadow?
Is it pixelation?

Am I right or wrong in thinking that for some reason this pod theory is no longer on the truth table?

[Anders Lindman]

Was it cgi'd on by some nut?


That could be the case. That someone has photoshopped it in. But it can be seen in all videos, at least in all videos I have seen so far, and not only in this edited CNN clip. So if it has been photoshopped in afterwards, those who did that must have done a pretty thorough job.

[helloperator]

And is it still on the table for opposers of the official story?

Seems to me I recall truth people slamming truth people for mentioning a pod.

But, hell, it looks like a pod doesn't it? a compartment? Something odd.

So what's the deal with the current views on this?

[Anders Lindman]

So what's the deal with the current views on this?

It would be interesting to see what the debunking sites say about the pod. I will do a search...

[helloperator]

Ok Anders...I seem to recall this pod issue from years ago...but then the truth movement, for want of a better name, dropped it for whatever reason...or ridiculed truth people who championed it.....but I don't know why.

I'm so shit at looking at debunking sites, but I might give it a go too

[Anders Lindman]

Here is one debunking:

Claim: Photographs and video footage shot just before United Airlines Flight 175 hit the South Tower of the World Trade Center (WTC) show an object underneath the fuselage at the base of the right wing. The film "911 In Plane Site" and the Web site LetsRoll911.org claim that no such object is found on a stock Boeing 767. They speculate that this "military pod" is a missile, a bomb or a piece of equipment on an air-refueling tanker. LetsRoll911.org points to this as evidence that the attacks were an "inside job" sanctioned by "President George Bush, who planned and engineered 9/11."

FACT: One of the clearest, most widely seen pictures of the doomed jet's undercarriage was taken by photographer Rob Howard and published in New York magazine and elsewhere (opening page). PM sent a digital scan of the original photo to Ronald Greeley, director of the Space Photography Laboratory at Arizona State University. Greeley is an expert at analyzing images to determine the shape and features of geological formations based on shadow and light effects. After studying the high-resolution image and comparing it to photos of a Boeing 767-200ER's undercarriage, Greeley dismissed the notion that the Howard photo reveals a "pod." In fact, the photo reveals only the Boeing's right fairing, a pronounced bulge that contains the landing gear. He concludes that sunlight glinting off the fairing gave it an exaggerated look. "Such a glint causes a blossoming (enlargement) on film," he writes in an e-mail to PM, "which tends to be amplified in digital versions of images — the pixels are saturated and tend to 'spill over' to adjacent pixels." When asked about pods attached to civilian aircraft, Fred E. Culick, professor of aeronautics at the California Institute of Technology, gave a blunter response: "That's bull. They're really stretching."

From: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=2

They say that the bulge contains the landing gear. That could be true.

http://www.compilots.com/downloads/data/media/31/KC-767.jpg

[helloperator]

What about the flash just before impact?

[Anders Lindman]

What about the flash just before impact?

I have seen videos where the flash happens just as the nose of the plane hits the building. With the kind of speed the plane had at impact the energy released could have produced the flash, that's my guess, so I wouldn't say that it must have been a missile.

[helloperator]

Could be.

There's an explanation for everything I suppose.

[cyince]

Lets not forget if there was in fact a pod on the airplane, why didn't the crew who did the preflight inspection notice it? Why didn't the baggage handlers notice it? Who install the pod? Where did they install the pod? When was this specific airplane pulled out of service to attach said pod?

Just too many logistical problems with the pod.

[helloperator]

How do you know that plane left from an airport with baggage handlers and airport crew?

[cyince]

FAA records.
I mean people did get on that plane, there baggage was loaded.
See this is where logistical problems start to cloud everything.
Each plane has a unique transponder, and air traffic control recognizes that. So unless there were two identical planes, with the same transponder then a plane switch some where... a second plane with a pod...passengers executed.. etc etc.

[veritas2007]

If I remember correctly, one of the Loose Change editions goes into some detail regarding one of the planes landing at another airport on the day. Worth looking into if you want to research the possibility of transponder switching or cloning.

I've been researching the video footage quite intensively recently, and I coming to the conclusion that all of the footage is faked. I'm not talking about watching a couple of vids on YouTube; trawling over all of the footage and watching compilations and critiques by other people. Well worth investigating if you are into 9/11 investigations.

On that premise, I don't hold much stock on the pod footage and stills.

[masonfree party]

no point in discussing this...video fakery..end of story...if you want to fantasise about it go to Jayhans website at www.letsroll911.org where he bans anyone who believes that no planes hit the twin towers

[killtown]

I debunked the Pod theory a while ago. IMO, the "pod" was just the result of sloppy video animation:

http://killtown.blogspot.com/2007/03/tv-fakery-explains-pod-phenomenon.html

[helloperator]

lol

What a mess this whole thing is

[shredmasteruk]

That 'pod' is actually the location of the undercarriage doors on a Boeing 767, in that location there is a pronounced bulge on either side.

The video below shows a 767 with its undercarriage down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MePL2yIujSA

Contrary to Killtowns opinion though, two planes did hit the towers, my friend's uncle saw flight 175 with his own eyes.

[helloperator]

Tell us more about your friend's uncle

[masonfree party]

jesus...don't people go on..fuckin believe ote they see on tv

[shredmasteruk]

Tell us more about your friend's uncle

Why ?

[helloperator]

lol...why not?