Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Not another 911 thread

1235789

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    nullzero wrote: »
    Am I alone in thinking this thread has run its course?
    Definitely not. But I'm leaving it open for the moment. I want everyone to read what they type before posting it. If it's insulting, condescending or generally not adding anything then don't bother with it. I don't want to have to start handing out bans to everyone, but I will if it keeps up.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭TalkieWalkie


    alastair wrote: »
    Beats laughing at a bunch of people being flown into a building. But maybe that's just me.

    now im confused. was it people being flown into a building or just you ?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    I showed 2 clips. 1 has a plane, the other doesnt.

    your man said those clips are not on archive.org

    I found them both on archive.org

    No you didn't. They are better quality and show the plane. Your cruddy youtube videos are clearly not the same as those on archive.org - and are indeed from unknown sources.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭TalkieWalkie


    alastair wrote: »
    No you didn't. They are better quality and show the plane. Your cruddy youtube videos are clearly not the same as those on archive.org - and are indeed from unknown sources.

    1 shows a plane, the other does not.
    Those cruddy youtube video's are not mine, aside from the quality, they are exactly the same as the ones on archive.org.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    1 shows a plane, the other does not.
    Those cruddy youtube video's are not mine, aside from the quality, they are exactly the same as the ones on archive.org.

    'Aside from the quality' you might be actually be able to see the plane that's evident to the rest of us. It's the little things that matter.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    nullzero wrote: »
    Am I alone in thinking this thread has run its course?

    If you mean that the original post has been shown to be baseless rubbish - sure. But that's been the case from the get-go.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭TalkieWalkie


    alastair wrote: »
    'Aside from the quality' you might be actually be able to see the plane that's evident to the rest of us. It's the little things that matter.

    Do you really mean that or is it just the first thing that came to mind ? "It's the little things that matter", it's not very fair on big things, it's prejudice.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    I've a new graphic representation of the 9/11 secret technology ball - cleverly overlaid against itself to show it's form before impact and after - note the identical structure:

    specsavers_logo.jpg


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,070 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    alastair wrote: »
    If you mean that the original post has been shown to be baseless rubbish - sure. But that's been the case from the get-go.

    Why do you even bother with this forum? I'm genuinely interested to know. I mean most people who don't have an interest in the subject matter would give this place a wide berth, and know what the term 'conspiracy theory' means when it's used as a description of what a forum is about. ie.. likely to contain a lot of BS to put it simply.. most people wouldn't bother

    You expend just as much energy here as the theorists, who very few people are likely to take seriously anyway for the most part. Is it solely to change the minds of theorists or what?

    Are there any theories which you think could contain an ounce of truth or is it the term itself which you find objectionable?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭TalkieWalkie


    CNN are big supporters of the "no plane" theory



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,495 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    So again "Not another 911 thread" ends like they all do.

    Conspiracy claims fall apart under basic scrutiny.
    Theorist either a)ignores all points against the first claim then moves on to more red herrings and non sequiters when they are backed into a corner, b) throw a strop or c) both.

    This happens for any or all claims about 9/11 without fail.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Why do you even bother with this forum? I'm genuinely interested to know. I mean most people who don't have an interest in the subject matter would give this place a wide berth, and know what the term 'conspiracy theory' means when it's used as a description of what a forum is about. ie.. likely to contain a lot of BS to put it simply.. most people wouldn't bother

    Curiosity - same reason I drop into reactionary right wing blogs from time to time. Always good to know what the other crowd are on about.
    You expend just as much energy here as the theorists, who very few people are likely to take seriously anyway for the most part. Is it solely to change the minds of theorists or what?

    Are there any theories which you think could contain an ounce of truth or is it the term itself which you find objectionable?

    I've no problem with accepting conspiracies exist - you would be ignoring history otherwise, but 'grand' conspiracies are never going to work out given the human condition - so all the typical 9/11, moon landing, alien lizard shapeshifter, NWO guff should be obvious to anyone with a critical faculty. It also serves to provide a handy cover for underhand misdeeds that would otherwise be the focus of concern. 9/11 is a case in point - the actual shortfall in the US response is buried under a tonne of patent nonsense, so attention is handily misdirected - maybe there's your conspiracy (aside from the boring al qaeda one)?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,070 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    alastair wrote: »
    Curiosity - same reason I drop into reactionary right wing blogs from time to time. Always good to know what the other crowd are on about.



    I've no problem with accepting conspiracies exist - you would be ignoring history otherwise, but 'grand' conspiracies are never going to work out given the human condition - so all the typical 9/11, moon landing, alien lizard shapeshifter, NWO guff should be obvious to anyone with a critical faculty. It also serves to provide a handy cover for underhand misdeeds that would otherwise be the focus of concern. 9/11 is a case in point - the actual shortfall in the US response is buried under a tonne of patent nonsense, so attention is handily misdirected - maybe there's your conspiracy (aside from the boring al qaeda one)?

    Fair enough.. I certainly agree with your last point. But it is a forum for those who generally have an interest in the things you mentioned, regardless of how outlandish they seem to people with a critical faculty.

    If it was only skeptical people arguing here then you could merge it with any number of other forums, and I'm not saying that skeptics are a scourge to a forum like this.. there should be balance on both sides. If it was just theory upon theory without any refutation it'd become unbearable to read too.

    It just irks me that so many threads end in the same way.. everyone seems to have a label for everyone else, and the more vocal from each side compounds that.. it's fairly off-putting for those with more moderate views I'd imagine


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    It just irks me that so many threads end in the same way.. everyone seems to have a label for everyone else, and the more vocal from each side compounds that.. it's fairly off-putting for those with more moderate views I'd imagine

    I'd dispute that I'm a 'skeptic' tbh. I'm a man of moderate views - I just don't care to see misinformation and nonsense peddled as evidence. people can think what they like, but they should be prepared to produce actual evidence if they try to pass it off as anything other than faith-based.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    CNN are big supporters of the "no plane" theory


    http://www.911myths.com/McIntyre.mp3

    the video should be easy to find


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    It just irks me that so many threads end in the same way.. everyone seems to have a label for everyone else, and the more vocal from each side compounds that.. it's fairly off-putting for those with more moderate views I'd imagine

    It irks me too, it really does. But I am personally willing to believe quite a lot if someone can explain why i should. However what TalkieWalkie did above is a classic example of what many truthers will do when put on the spot about their beliefs.... change the subject. Seriously 2 big planes flew over a city of 8 million people to suggest that there were no planes is beyond silly. I saw it live myself at the time.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭TalkieWalkie


    meglome wrote: »
    It irks me too, it really does. But I am personally willing to believe quite a lot if someone can explain why i should. However what TalkieWalkie did above is a classic example of what many truthers will do when put on the spot about their beliefs.... change the subject. Seriously 2 big planes flew over a city of 8 million people to suggest that there were no planes is beyond silly. I saw it live myself at the time.

    Actually I didn't change the subject. I offered a theory and was asked to supply evidence of it which I did.

    It's pointless debating with some of you skeppies.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,495 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Actually I didn't change the subject. I offered a theory and was asked to supply evidence of it which I did.
    Well considering your evidence clearly shows a plane crashing into the buildings, it's no wonder you have to change the subject.
    It's pointless debating with some of you skeppies.
    I wouldn't exactly call what you are doing "Debate".


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Actually I didn't change the subject. I offered a theory and was asked to supply evidence of it which I did.

    We were specifically talking about the twin towers and you changed the subject to the pentagon. You contend that there was no planes because of some highly compressed video. As i said above given the planes flew over a city of 8 million people, millions of people saw it live on TV and there is better quality video from multiple places which show the planes it should appear obvious to anyone that there were planes.
    It's pointless debating with some of you skeppies.

    It's only pointless talking to me if what you're saying doesn't make any sense. Seriously how in the name of all things holy could you think two big jets could be faked hitting two huge building in the middle of a huge city? It's one thing Penn and Teller 'vanishing' an elephant and quite another in this case when it would be impossible for the best special effects people in the world to pull off.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    Just to weigh in here for a second meglome

    it dosent matter if New york has Eight or Eighty million people, how many of them actually SAW the planes??

    I have a friend who was in NY at the time of the attacks, he didnt see planes, he saw the smoke and the fire and was in the middle of the confused panic on the Streets, He like most other people only found out from the Television what had happened, Millions of people BELIEVE that they saw Live footage of Planes hitting the buildings, but the nub of the argument is that it IS entirely possible to fake something like that, theres an emotive memory planted with teh Images of the planes hitting Being repeated adnauseum for the month following the attack in the public conciousness where even to this day people are steadfastly stating 'I know what I saw'. The question is do you really??


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,414 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    I doubt a lot of people saw or took much notice of the first plane. But after the first plane hit, obviously 8million people didn't see it, but thousands of people most definitely would have seen the second plane. Even people working in other buildings would have either been looking out the windows or would have evacuated to the streets for fear that another plane might hit their building.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    Just to weigh in here for a second meglome

    it dosent matter if New york has Eight or Eighty million people, how many of them actually SAW the planes??

    I have a friend who was in NY at the time of the attacks, he didnt see planes, he saw the smoke and the fire and was in the middle of the confused panic on the Streets, He like most other people only found out from the Television what had happened, Millions of people BELIEVE that they saw Live footage of Planes hitting the buildings, but the nub of the argument is that it IS entirely possible to fake something like that, theres an emotive memory planted with teh Images of the planes hitting Being repeated adnauseum for the month following the attack in the public conciousness where even to this day people are steadfastly stating 'I know what I saw'. The question is do you really??
    Well, if it means anything, I have a mate who was there and saw the second plane hit. He also believes the US government are behind it.

    I just don't see why it would seem easier to fake it than to use actual planes. It is of course possible to fake it, but there's too much of a chance of it being uncovered. It's just good sense to fly a real plane into the building.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    humanji wrote: »
    It is of course possible to fake it, but there's too much of a chance of it being uncovered.

    It's not possible to fake it. Even if you were able to drop a pre-rendered cgi sequence into all the network broadcasts, and distribute a few hundred false photos and camcorder footage, and disappear a plane carrying a full compliment of passengers without the knowledge of air traffic controllers (or with their involvement), you've still got to take into account the hundreds who will see the plane/plane substitute approach and impact, and the hundreds who will see the plane debris and / planting of false plane debris. And you need to do all this four times in the one morning.

    So no, it's not possible.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Just to weigh in here for a second meglome

    it dosent matter if New york has Eight or Eighty million people, how many of them actually SAW the planes??

    I have a friend who was in NY at the time of the attacks, he didnt see planes, he saw the smoke and the fire and was in the middle of the confused panic on the Streets, He like most other people only found out from the Television what had happened, Millions of people BELIEVE that they saw Live footage of Planes hitting the buildings, but the nub of the argument is that it IS entirely possible to fake something like that, theres an emotive memory planted with teh Images of the planes hitting Being repeated adnauseum for the month following the attack in the public conciousness where even to this day people are steadfastly stating 'I know what I saw'. The question is do you really??

    Look even if we ignore the thousands of people who saw the planes... there were plane parts (registered to those planes), there were body parts (matched with DNA), there were Id's and personal effects (matched to the passengers on those planes). So we have some highly compressed video with no plane on it... or we take the ton of other evidence for a plane including the same video at higher res which shows the plane.

    So we have to assume some incredible new hologram technology, we can also assume thousands of people needed to be in on it to even fake the footage, we have to figure some way for them to get the bodies and plane parts into the buildings, etc etc... in short it's ridiculous and impossible. AND most importantly would be way easier just to use real planes.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    I doubt a lot of people saw or took much notice of the first plane. But after the first plane hit, obviously 8million people didn't see it, but thousands of people most definitely would have seen the second plane. Even people working in other buildings would have either been looking out the windows or would have evacuated to the streets for fear that another plane might hit their building.

    Actually if you look at the Naudet brothers footage of the first plane crash, the entire street look up at the huge plane flying low over head and crashing into the building.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,414 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Yes but I meant the ratio of people who would have seen the first plane crash and the second is incredibly different.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭TalkieWalkie


    humanji wrote: »
    Well, if it means anything, I have a mate who was there and saw the second plane hit. He also believes the US government are behind it.

    I just don't see why it would seem easier to fake it than to use actual planes. It is of course possible to fake it, but there's too much of a chance of it being uncovered. It's just good sense to fly a real plane into the building.

    Maybe using real planes would leave a lot of or more evidence behind. Also there is a high chance of planes not hitting their target with human pilots. It seems the main goal of the day was to demolish those buildings. If a plane missed one of the towers, would it still have come down ? as happened with building 7..


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭TalkieWalkie


    meglome wrote: »
    Look even if we ignore the thousands of people who saw the planes... there were plane parts (registered to those planes), there were body parts (matched with DNA), there were Id's and personal effects (matched to the passengers on those planes). So we have some highly compressed video with no plane on it... or we take the ton of other evidence for a plane including the same video at higher res which shows the plane.

    So we have to assume some incredible new hologram technology, we can also assume thousands of people needed to be in on it to even fake the footage, we have to figure some way for them to get the bodies and plane parts into the buildings, etc etc... in short it's ridiculous and impossible. AND most importantly would be way easier just to use real planes.

    Thousands of people didnt see jet liners, they saw a small propeller plane. The tv reporters didn't even see a jet even though they were on the screens in front of them. At least one of them seen a small propeller plane too. It was only some folks on the phones to the TV stations saying they saw a large jet.
    There were 2 peices of a plane found at the towers, a wheel and part of a fuselage, these parts have never been registered to any thing, you just made that part up.
    So, they were your reasons to call the theory "ridiculous and impossible", so now it must be neither.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    Church and Vesey. We were coming across and we walked down. We had to go down to the command center. We carried all our tools, the bottles, everything, and as we're walking down, part of the plane engine was sitting right in the street, still burning. I said, look, this is the plane. FDNY firefighter Paul Hyland


    Once we started taking off, I guess 30 feet in front of us, there was a lady on the ground by the curb and she was just waving her arms. That's all she could wave. Her legs were crushed. Apparently she got hit by part of the landing gear, one of the tires of the airplane. There was a large tire next to her. FDNY EMT Orlando Martinez


    ...we started making our way to NYU Downtown Hospital, Beekman, to drop off our first set of patients when we got flagged down for another lady who got hit by the landing gear of the first plane. FDNY EMT Frank Puma


    We just passed a compact car where the engine was running and the door was open, which looked to me like the driver had escaped, but from the back seat to the trunk was crushed by a jet engine. We started going up West Street. I believe that's when Smitty ran over the part of the plane, but he did that to avoid the bodies because there were obviously bodies in the street. FDNY firefighter Michael Hazel


    There was a car that we drove by that the driver's door and the passenger door were open, and there was a plane motor on the back half of the car. Two inches more, and both these guys would have been dead too. That was their ticket. It was amazing. The car was actually cut right in half with this motor, right there back of the front seat. I sat there in amazement. FDNY firefighter Richard Saulle


    "A section of the landing gear proved to me that this was a commercial airliner." PAPD Det. Sgt. Raymond Dilena Source


    A tremendous fireball, flaming debris, pieces of the airplane, fuselage, landing gear, pieces of the building. ...We started running down one of the little side streets, Courtlandt or Dey. There were people dead in the street that obviously you couldn't help them. There was flaming debris coming down all over. It was just a matter of who got hit with the debris. FDNY Captain Michael Donovan


    Right behind us on the southeast corner of West and Rector was a landing gear assembly from an aircraft lying against the curb and some scaffolding. PAPD Det. Edward Rapp Source


    As we approached West Broadway, a NYPD lieutenant told us we could not proceed due to aircraft parts blocking the road. PAPD Det. Robert Fuchs Source


    People coming out of the buildings half burned, the fuel must have spewed down and hit some people. A lot of burns literally down through the skin to the bone. I had two patients on my ambulance, vehicle 111. FBI Agents were telling us to move our vehicle from the corner of Vessey and West, cause there was debris from the airplane which they needed for evidence. I guess it was NTSB, they wanted the area secured. There was nowhere for us to move the vehicle, cause there was debris everywhere. FDNY EMT Alwish Monchery


    After that, an FBI agent came down the block. He identified some landing gear that was in front of our rig, asked me to make sure no pedestrians came down the block to interfere with any type of metals and debris that were there, because they were trying to identify to put the pieces back together for the plane. FDNY firefighter Sidney Parris


    Vesey and Church, Vesey and Church right there. We stepped off the rig, and there were plane engine parts and people yelling and screaming. FDNY firefighter Bertram Springstead


    Walking around, we came out to Rector Street. We saw one of the landing gears from the airplane. FDNY EMT Benjamin Badillo


    Various pieces of the plane were falling on the street. As we went down the street you could see parts of aircraft with stencil numbers on it and things like that. There was a wheel, or like a wheel housing or something else there in the street. FDNY Deputy Commissioner Thomas Fitzpatrick


    I continued down Liberty, just west of 10 and 10. As I got down a little farther, there was what looked to be a piece of the cabin of the airplane, I guess. It looked like a piece of it about maybe six foot long. It looked like the windows. FDNY Battalion Chief Brian Dixon


    I parked the rig on Church right at Fulton, directly in front of the World Trade north plaza. My officer told us we're going to go into the north tower lobby. We proceeded down to Vesey. Walking down Vesey, we noticed large pieces of what looked like possibly the fuselage from the

    plane. There was a caravan of motorcycle police coming up. We stopped them and we cleared the path of big O rings and pieces of fuselage of the plane. We threw it to the side, and we told the guys to go on. Fire Patrolman Paul Curran


    ...it was Dey or Cortlandt Street. We walked down that block. It was littered with airplane parts.... FDNY Chief Ray Goldbach


    Captain Nahmod and I were running down Vesey Street stepping over airplane pieces, several bodies and whatnot. There was what looked like the front wheel assembly of an airplane. Unknown the size of the plane that had hit, it just looked like it was one pair of wheels on an assembly, pieces of metal with rivets in them, a few body parts scattered around. FDNY EMT Richard Zarillo


    Michael Sheehan, a broker working on the 55th floor of 2 World Trade Center, moved to the stairwell when he realized a plane had crashed into 1 World Trade Center. By the time he reached the 25th floor, he could smell the fumes of fuel that had begun to filter through the ventilation systems of the two buildings.


    Like I remember walking by with the chief, and I remember seeing the airplane engine. FDNY EMT Robert Kimball


    We came up, tried to find our way into the courtyard area and we hugged the side of the buildings and it was an overhang that we stayed under. We noticed metal that looked like it came from the plane, in retrospect. FDNY Assistant Commissioner Thomas McDonald


    So we ran back to the car and laying right in back of my car was a large object which I thought was probably part of one of the aircraft turbines. FDNY Chief of Safety Albert Turi.


    We did see part of -- I didn't see it, but Jeff Johnson told me later on he did see part of the landing gear actually fell right through the roof and it was in one of the Jacuzzis in another room. FDNY firefighter John Breen, in the Marriott Vista hotel (WTC 3)


    By the time I started to pass by in front of (firehouse) 10 and 10. As I got down a little farther, there was what looked to be a piece of the cabin of the airplane, I guess. It looked like a piece of it about maybe six foot long. It looked like the windows. FDNY firefighter Brian Dixon


    The other thing that was actually evident, though, is what appeared to be some plane parts, like some circular pieces of a plane, the walk down Vesey Street. FDNY EMS Dr. Michael Guttenberg


    We were driving out of the tunnel up West Street and we're seeing body parts in the street, torsos, chunks of flesh, parts of the airplane landing gear, car fires everywhere. It was like a war zone. FDNY firefighter Steve Piccerill


    I passed over some pieces of what appeared to be aircraft wreckage, fuselage, whatever, some body parts and bodies in various states, either people from the building or the airplanes. You couldn't tell. They weren't intact. FDNY EMS Division Chief John Peruggia


    Then actually when I found my car, I found my car like later, later on in the day, but I left it there, because it was not able to be moved because it was covered. There was an airplane tire about 10 feet away from it. FDNY EMS Captain Frank D'Amato, at the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel & West Street


    The landing gear of the aircraft was in that parking lot there. It was right near us. FDNY firefighter Dean Coutsouros


    There were a number of airplane parts throughout the street, littering the streets. FDNY firefighter Robert Norris

    I remember at one point seeing what looked like piece of an airplane. That piece looked like it crushed half that car. FDNY firefighter Kevin McCabe

    ...our initial response was seeing body parts and airplane parts all over the west side. FDNY EMT Stephen Hess


    You heard the explosion and everything, but I saw the big fire ball. The stuff was coming down across the street. It looked like a meteor came flying across the street. They said it was the engine. FDNY firefighter Peter Fallucca


    As we were riding in, we must have ran over some debris from the plane. We saw debris all over the floor. We saw a wheel. There was cars that were flattened. It was obvious that heavy things had fallen on them. FDNY firefighter Joseph Sullivan


    That was before we got to the south pedestrian bridge, before Liberty Street . You could see airplane parts just littered across the street, across the highway. FDNY firefighter Craig Monahan


    You could see airplane parts on the ground and although I didn't realize it at the time, I later realized there were body parts, both on the concourse and on the street. (some of these might have been jumpers) I now made a left on Vesey and walked down the street on the 7 World Trade Center side, where I could see more airplane debris. FDNY Assistant Commissioner James Drury


    There was jumpers everywhere, there was bodies everywhere, pieces of plane everywhere. FDNY firefighter Kevin Murray


    We walked down Vesey Street, and it was like total silence, nothing. It was eerie. There were police cars all parked on angles, metal going through their hoods. There was a tire of a plane on top of one. FDNY firefighter Arthur Riccio


    It's interesting because, as we were there, there was a police car, I guess, on Vesey, on the corner there, and some debris comes down from whatever this explosion was, at the time we really didn't know, and it just crushes it, I mean, crushes the top front of the police car, which really scared me at that point.

    Q.Could you tell if it was airplane parts?

    A. It looked like an airplane part afterward, yes, it did. It looked like part of an engine. It was pretty big. It was probably the size of the hood because it kind of hit it, bounced, and then rolled off. FDNY paramedic Manuel Delgado


    Well, we had problems securing some tie- back cables to the setback roof and I had to go to the upper roof to see if we could run the cables up there. I had my camera and headed for the upper roof and I couldn't believe what I saw. There was a large piece of a landing gear and pieces of airplane parts all over the roof. I took many pictures and quickly left he roof. Louis, aka "Scaffoldrider" Took photos of aircraft parts on Federal Building Source


    In my zeal to get close, I had not noticed the falling bodies. Then I nearly stepped into a puddle of blood that was congealing beside what looked like the titanium gear of a pulverized airliner. Andrew Jacobs


    One security officer reported that while the engine of the first plane had landed in the [Marriot] swimming pool, everyone in the health club was fine, and all were being brought to the lobby. Another officer radioed that the room-by-room evacuation was proceeding and that all guests were being brought down to the first floor. Source

    Loads of pictures and the source for the above quotes


    Pictures like

    PlanePart-serial-large.jpg

    http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/aircraftpartsnyc911


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 246 ✭✭Joshua Jones


    King Mob wrote: »
    Because I'm not arsed to waste the time and bandwidth with more examples of people failing to identify video compression and drawing ridiculous conclusions from it.

    Why not just explain it in a few words?

    If we just kept linking you a video over and over again we wouldn't hear the end of it.

    How can you comment on a thread where you don't take in relevant information?. Something that can't bend will break.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭TalkieWalkie


    Di0genes wrote: »
    Loads of pictures and the source for the above quotes

    Hmm, they don't seem to work.
    The first photograph shows a portion of Flight 11's landing gear, according to Chapter 2 of FEMA's World Trade Center Building Performance Study. The report locates the debris -- the only part of the plane it identified -- at the corner of West and Rector Streets, about four blocks south of the North Tower. The second photograph, apparently of the same landing gear fragment, shows more of the surroundings.

    Doesnt look like the same piece to me, it's very different. Also seems to have moved location, one is on the corner of a street and the other not. But the scaffold in the background seems to have stayed and has been cleaned up a bit. In fact, the whold area has been cleaned up a bit.

    Why did the tyre burn during the explosion ?

    Is this part of your proof ?

    jettire2blocksaway.jpg

    airplane_tire.jpg

    http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/evidence/photos/landinggear.html


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair



    Doesnt look like the same piece to me, it's very different. Also seems to have moved location, one is on the corner of a street and the other not. But the scaffold in the background seems to have stayed and has been cleaned up a bit. In fact, the whold area has been cleaned up a bit.

    Your research letting you down again?
    The NIST report said of this photo:
    A second wheel from a landing gear, shown in Figure 6-18, was found much further south at the corner of Rector Street and West Street. This is a distance of roughly 1,385 ft from the base of the south face of WTC 1. The presence of a braking system indicates that this wheel also came from one of the two main landing gears.

    The two wheels in Figure 6-16 and Figure 6-18 are the only large pieces of aircraft debris from WTC1 that have been identified in the visual record. Numerous smaller pieces of aircraft debris are evident in close-ups of the street debris following the aircraft impact.
    The aircraft wheel found embedded in the panel section at the corner of Cedar and West Street likely passed through the center of the building in order to hit the south face near the center. Based on where it landed, it is considered likely that the wheel that landed on the corner of Rector and West Streets also passed through the core, but this conclusion is not as well supported as for the other wheel"


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,495 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    How can you comment on a thread where you don't take in relevant information?.
    Because experience tells me there probably isn't anything new in the video.
    I asked TW to explain exactly what point the video makes.

    Considering his last few videos did not support anything he claimed and in fact refuted his nonsensical claims.

    I see no point in wasting any more time watching a video which is either more old debunked nonsense or has nothing to do with the topic.

    So if it annoys you so much why not point out exactly what the video is meant to prove?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    Hmm, they don't seem to work.

    The links can be found,

    http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lie...aftpartsnyc911

    here.

    Is this part of your proof ?

    Lets see your argument is that. No plane hit the WTC at all. No one saw a plane hit the first time, and then no plane hit it the second time. None of the 8 million people living in Manhattan noticed this, despite this happening in broad daylight. You're also saying that some of the footage of this was faked, and some wasn't and that the footage that was faked was inserted real time, despite the fact that the technology doesn't exist. Then some how airplane wreckage was strewn around the WTC complex, including trashing cars, and no one noticed this.

    An this was all done on the pretext of invading Iraq and Afghanistan, and in order to facilitates this they dropped the passport of a Saudi man into the debris.

    And you, seriously, have the temerity to try and be scathing about other peoples "proof"?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Di0genes wrote: »
    Lets see your argument is that. No plane hit the WTC at all. No one saw a plane hit the first time, and then no plane hit it the second time. None of the 8 million people living in Manhattan noticed this, despite this happening in broad daylight. You're also saying that some of the footage of this was faked, and some wasn't and that the footage that was faked was inserted real time, despite the fact that the technology doesn't exist. Then some how airplane wreckage was strewn around the WTC complex, including trashing cars, and no one noticed this.

    An this was all done on the pretext of invading Iraq and Afghanistan, and in order to facilitates this they dropped the passport of a Saudi man into the debris.

    And you, seriously, have the temerity to try and be scathing about other peoples "proof"?

    Well put.

    I'd be the first to say there are many things about 911 that can be discussed back and forth but seriously to believe the no planes theory you need to also have no problem believing in the tooth fairy and santa claus.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭TalkieWalkie


    Di0genes wrote: »
    The links can be found,

    http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lie...aftpartsnyc911

    here.




    Lets see your argument is that. No plane hit the WTC at all. No one saw a plane hit the first time, and then no plane hit it the second time. None of the 8 million people living in Manhattan noticed this, despite this happening in broad daylight. You're also saying that some of the footage of this was faked, and some wasn't and that the footage that was faked was inserted real time, despite the fact that the technology doesn't exist. Then some how airplane wreckage was strewn around the WTC complex, including trashing cars, and no one noticed this.

    An this was all done on the pretext of invading Iraq and Afghanistan, and in order to facilitates this they dropped the passport of a Saudi man into the debris.

    And you, seriously, have the temerity to try and be scathing about other peoples "proof"?

    Yes that's what am saying. The technology does exist to edit real time tv, it has existed since 1998, often used during football games. Even if it didn't exist.... the theory is that there is an approx 17 second delay on the news stations from the hit and their reactions. But of course you wouldn't know this as you don't look at the evidence put forward.

    Regarding finding plane parts at all sites.. It is fairly obvious if you want to make it look like a plane crashed at a particular area, YOU PLANT SOME PARTS !!! kinda like a cop setting someone up on a drug charge, they must plant the drugs first lmfao - it's not rocket science


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭TalkieWalkie


    meglome wrote: »
    Well put.

    I'd be the first to say there are many thing about 911 that can be discussed back and forth but seriously to believe the no planes theory you need to also have no problem believing in the tooth fairy and santa claus.

    I never said I believed, but since you brought up the tooth fairy and santa claus, that kinda stuff comes off the same shelf as the official version.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭TalkieWalkie


    alastair wrote: »
    Your research letting you down again?

    Link or it didn't happen.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    Yes that's what am saying. The technology does exist to edit real time tv, it has existed since 1998, often used during football games.

    That's not editing it's vision mixing and simple graphics overlay over simple static shots.

    There's a world of difference.
    Even if it didn't exist.... the theory is that there is an approx 17 second delay on the news stations from the hit and their reactions. But of course you wouldn't know this as you don't look at the evidence put forward.

    The theory isn't sustained by any facts, and even if it was true, 17 seconds isn't enough time to composite a plane into shot.
    Regarding finding plane parts at all sites.. It is fairly obvious if you want to make it look like a plane crashed at a particular area, YOU PLANT SOME PARTS !!! kinda like a cop setting someone up on a drug charge, they must plant the drugs first lmfao - it's not rocket science


    And exactly how and when were the plane parts planted? Do you think people would have noticed someone bringing a car with a chunk of landing gear stuck into it's engine while this was all happening.

    So, again, your argument is that there were no planes, no one of the the 8 million people in new york looked up while either of the planes crashed, or if they did, they saw a small plane, and just forgot about it, or didn't worry about it. Then a team of what ninjas? Planted dozens of pieces of airplane wreckage around the WTC complex, and to top it off they planeted evidence that Saudis not Iraqis carried.

    Congratulations. You've implicated tens of thousands of people in the most complex and brilliant fraud ever, and implied they're also morons.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Yes that's what am saying. The technology does exist to edit real time tv, it has existed since 1998, often used during football games. Even if it didn't exist.... the theory is that there is an approx 17 second delay on the news stations from the hit and their reactions. But of course you wouldn't know this as you don't look at the evidence put forward.

    We are looking but so far your 'evidence' is proving you to be mistaken not the other way around. I don't think anyone is disputing that some 'live' TV has a delay in it. They do it to fix any technical problems or edit out any stuff that could get them into legal trouble.There is also the possible time delay for the broadcast back and forth to the satellite. The problem here is there were numerous TV sources, numerous people videoing from several different locations. There were hundreds of thousands of people in the area at the time, it was bread daylight. There are many documented witnesses. You have to ignore an awful lot to assume no planes.
    Regarding finding plane parts at all sites.. It is fairly obvious if you want to make it look like a plane crashed at a particular area, YOU PLANT SOME PARTS !!! kinda like a cop setting someone up on a drug charge, they must plant the drugs first lmfao - it's not rocket science

    Trucks would be needed to bring in these plane parts, which would have to driven all the way through NY and no one manages to see them. Even with all the people in the area no one notices that something is amiss. Then the documents which show they are from the missing planes would need to be faked and no one notices. Some the parts would also have to be dropped from a great height to damage stuff in the area of of WTC and no one sees this.The passengers would need to be killed and their body parts taken to the site along with their personal effects and no one sees this. And this ignores all the people who'd need to have in on it to carry this out. I cannot even fathom you're comparing a cop planting a bag of drugs on someone that will fit into a hand and a piece of a plane half the size of a car. You know i don't want to laugh at you even though you're doing it but what makes sense to you and what makes sense me is obviously very different.

    I dunno it's almost like it would be far easier to use a plane.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭TalkieWalkie


    Di0genes wrote: »
    That's not editing it's vision mixing and simple graphics overlay over simple static shots.

    There's a world of difference.

    Di0genes wrote: »
    The theory isn't sustained by any facts, and even if it was true, 17 seconds isn't enough time to composite a plane into shot.

    Maybe it's not enough time for you to do it. Fact is in the "live" footage on archive.org. On 2 separate stations you can hear a distinct beep then a 17 second delay, then reaction from the anchors "who didn't see the plane they broadcast".
    Again, you would know this if you saw the evidence i put forward. I gotta say everything 2 or 3 times.
    Di0genes wrote: »
    And exactly how and when were the plane parts planted? Do you think people would have noticed someone bringing a car with a chunk of landing gear stuck into it's engine while this was all happening.

    Not necessarily. Of course you suggest the most ridiculous scenario :rolleyes: . They could feck it out of a helicopter, there were many in the skies that day. [/QUOTE]

    Di0genes wrote: »
    So, again, your argument is that there were no planes, no one of the the 8 million people in new york looked up while either of the planes crashed, or if they did, they saw a small plane, and just forgot about it, or didn't worry about it. Then a team of what ninjas? Planted dozens of pieces of airplane wreckage around the WTC complex, and to top it off they planeted evidence that Saudis not Iraqis carried.

    Congratulations. You've implicated tens of thousands of people in the most complex and brilliant fraud ever, and implied they're also morons.

    ALL THOSE PEOPLE WERE LOOKING UP SCREAMING BECAUSE THEY SAW A HUGE EXPLOSION. YOU CANT HEAR THEM SAYING "JET" "JET" "JET" EXCEPT FOR A COUPLE OF SET UP CAM JOBS


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Regarding finding plane parts at all sites.. It is fairly obvious if you want to make it look like a plane crashed at a particular area, YOU PLANT SOME PARTS !!! kinda like a cop setting someone up on a drug charge, they must plant the drugs first lmfao - it's not rocket science

    Yeah - you plant bits of planes, items belonging to the passengers, and bits of their bodies, all transported from Boston, and distributed in downtown NYC 45 minutes later. And you con hundreds of people into believing they saw an actual plane hit the building. What's not plausible!?

    http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/met_WTC_histories_full_01.html


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    They could feck it out of a helicopter, there were many in the skies that day.

    The helicopters that made it down from Boston in 45 minutes? And no-one noticed dropping anything? Those ones?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,495 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    So ignoring the fact your arguments are profoundly ridiculous, I'm morbidly curious what you think caused the explosions.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭TalkieWalkie


    alastair wrote: »
    Yeah - you plant bits of planes YES, items belonging to the passengers YES, and bits of their bodies DID YOU FIND THEIR DODY PARTS ?, all transported from Boston IUNNO, and distributed in downtown NYC 45 minutes later YES. And you con hundreds of people into believing they saw an actual plane hit the building ABSOLUTELY. What's not plausible!? NOTHING

    Billions of people believe in stranger things.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    King Mob wrote: »
    So ignoring the fact your arguments are profoundly ridiculous, I'm morbidly curious what you think caused the explosions.

    Ah now - the secret technology ball of course!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭TalkieWalkie


    alastair wrote: »
    The helicopters that made it down from Boston in 45 minutes? And no-one noticed dropping anything? Those ones?

    Several news reporters sighted planes circling the buildings.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭TalkieWalkie


    King Mob wrote: »
    So ignoring the fact your arguments are profoundly ridiculous, I'm morbidly curious what you think caused the explosions.

    Welcome back mob :rolleyes:

    Thats a silly question. Here is a better one. If there were no planes, what caused the impact damage to the building ?

    Answer : I have no idea.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    DID YOU FIND THEIR DODY PARTS ?
    A total of 293 intact bodies were found, and recovery workers unearthed hundreds of parts each day. As time went on, the remains found were smaller and smaller - fragments of flesh, pieces of bone.

    The identification process moved quickly to microscopes and computers as forensic specialists used DNA, and several laboratories across the nation joined the undertaking.

    http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/planes/evidence/dailynews_halfvictimsidd.html
    DNA extractions were done on every one of the 19,906 remains, and 4,735 of those have been identified. As many as 200 remains have been linked to a single person.

    The 1,401 people identified include 45 of those aboard the hijacked planes - 33 from Flight 11, which struck the north tower, and 12 from Flight 175, which hit the south tower.

    Using DNA alone, 673 people were identified. Using dental records only, 187 were identified; fingerprints only, 71; photo identification, 16; miscellaneous X-rays, 45.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,495 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Thats a silly question. Here is a better one. If there were no planes, what caused the impact damage to the building ?

    Answer : I have no idea.

    Well considering the video you posted showed planes crashing maybe you should start there?

    And any photos of these planes dropping the wreckage?
    Any eyewitness reports?

    Anything other that your insistence to explain an increasingly stupid theory?


  • Advertisement
Advertisement