9/11: 9 years have passed... STILL NO TRUTH !

[On Guard for Thee]

Wings on an airplane hitting anything will leave some trace of it hitting whatever. Every time I see the results of an airplane crash, the tail end always seems to survive and is left sitting on the ground pretty much in one piece. A closer look may help you.

Did you happen to see any tail/wing sections laying around either of the twin towers? A lot of plane crashes occur during either take off or landing, when speeds are significantly reduced, and even if they burn, especially at t/o when full of fuel, there are often identifiable parts left. Cruise speed into a building and full of fuel is a whole different animal.

[taxme]

Did you happen to see any tail/wing sections laying around either of the twin towers? A lot of plane crashes occur during either take off or landing, when speeds are significantly reduced, and even if they burn, especially at t/o when full of fuel, there are often identifiable parts left. Cruise speed into a building and full of fuel is a whole different animal.

There are always big plane parts lying around somewhere after a crash. End story.

[On Guard for Thee]

There are always big plane parts lying around somewhere after a crash. End story.

Well once again. where are the big plane parts lying around the towers? Not there. There are just little plane parts because that's what you have left over when you hit a building at ~600 kts.

[poochy]

And I have to ask one question. Why cannot people see a conspiracy when it is flashed in front of them? AE911 website pretty well comes up with many conclusions as to what may have really happened but with most people what the media and politicians tell them has to be the gospel truth.

The vast majority or crashes don't occur at these speeds or attitudes, so unless your are some sort of expert on the subject (which perhaps you think you are) you don't have a lot of references to guide you. These aircraft are mostly empty space, and as best as i can tell a 757 were it made of only aluminum, could be crushed down into a cube that would fit on a small truck, around 4m3, of course it isn't just aluminum, but the vast majority of an anything recognizable as an aircraft will be obliterated at those speeds. There are lots of examples, you either can't understand this, or for whatever reason, refuse to. Now, try to imagine the mass of an aircraft, say weighing 100,00kgs, impacting a building at the same speed as a .45 caliber bullet, not even to mention the effects of the fuel after the impact. Now of course those two events are not directly comparable, but it should make it clear enough that most of us simply don't have a frame of reference for this kind of high energy impact. These are numbers that most people can't seem to understand, and because of that, they resort to things they think they understand. Like for example your constant reference to a missile impact, are you some sort of expert on that too?

A few years ago the myth busters fired a ping pong ball into a ping pong paddle at 1100 mph, you should go watch that and then imagine what an object that weighs, assuming 100,000kg loaded, 37 million times more, travelling at about half the speed, would do to itself and a building. 3.5 billion joules vs 325. Plus you have to add the energy of combustion of the fuel, and the building, etc. Yes, again, the math isn't exactly correct for a variety of reasons, however the relative comparison is valid, also, lets not misunderstand, i know this will make no difference to you. fyi, a Tomahawk cruise missile detonation carries less energy than these jets did at impact, before the fuel burned.

[Wilber]

PS: In one of those pictures also it showed a big hole in the wall like a missile went thru it. And there was no damage done on either side of the hole. Why is that? Surely the wings would have left some damage? Surely the tail end of the plane should be still intact and sitting there? Sorry, but those pictures have not convinced me of anything as yet. The twin towers and building 7 stories make no sense at all. And that goes also for the Pentagon.

A missile fired by who? From where?

[taxme]

A missile fired by who? From where?

That was the rumor going around at the time of 9/11. And the lack of any big airplane parts lying around would almost make one believe that a missile could have been used on the Pentagon. Hey, you never know.

[bush_cheney2004]

Yes we do know...with Boeing 757 parts, Rolls Royce engine parts, and matching serial numbers. The dead crew/passenger body parts matched DNA samples too. Sorry.

[taxme]

The vast majority or crashes don't occur at these speeds or attitudes, so unless your are some sort of expert on the subject (which perhaps you think you are) you don't have a lot of references to guide you. These aircraft are mostly empty space, and as best as i can tell a 757 were it made of only aluminum, could be crushed down into a cube that would fit on a small truck, around 4m3, of course it isn't just aluminum, but the vast majority of an anything recognizable as an aircraft will be obliterated at those speeds. There are lots of examples, you either can't understand this, or for whatever reason, refuse to. Now, try to imagine the mass of an aircraft, say weighing 100,00kgs, impacting a building at the same speed as a .45 caliber bullet, not even to mention the effects of the fuel after the impact. Now of course those two events are not directly comparable, but it should make it clear enough that most of us simply don't have a frame of reference for this kind of high energy impact. These are numbers that most people can't seem to understand, and because of that, they resort to things they think they understand. Like for example your constant reference to a missile impact, are you some sort of expert on that too?

A few years ago the myth busters fired a ping pong ball into a ping pong paddle at 1100 mph, you should go watch that and then imagine what an object that weighs, assuming 100,000kg loaded, 37 million times more, travelling at about half the speed, would do to itself and a building. 3.5 billion joules vs 325. Plus you have to add the energy of combustion of the fuel, and the building, etc. Yes, again, the math isn't exactly correct for a variety of reasons, however the relative comparison is valid, also, lets not misunderstand, i know this will make no difference to you. fyi, a Tomahawk cruise missile detonation carries less energy than these jets did at impact, before the fuel burned.

So, just how do you explain for one big hole in the wall? No further damage noted. Physics would tell me that there should be bigger damage than what we see. Maybe it is you who cannot understand this, or refuse too. I will believe what AE911 website has to say about the incident. Knowing the controlled corporate media and most politicians, and how they lie so often about things, I will go with AE911 website first, and not the others.

[taxme]

Yes we do know...with Boeing 757 parts, Rolls Royce engine parts, and matching serial numbers. The dead crew/passenger body parts matched DNA samples too. Sorry.

Believe what you want to believe.

[On Guard for Thee]

Believe what you want to believe.

So what do you reckon they did, throw 75 or so people in a 757 on a regularly scheduled flight and then...what, fly it to some remote location, kill all the people, destroy the airplane, and all the evidence, and nobody will ever know the difference? Then they fired a missile into the Pentagon, and somehow made it LOOK like a 757 actually hit the building so that the dozens of eyewitnesses that saw the plane would be fooled. Yep, that's quite a story. How do you reckon it ends?

[cybercoma]

. These aircraft are mostly empty space, and as best as i can tell a 757 were it made of only aluminum, could be crushed down into a cube that would fit on a small truck, around 4m3, of course it isn't just aluminum, but the vast majority of an anything recognizable as an aircraft will be obliterated at those speeds.

And literally held together by duct tape.

[taxme]

So what do you reckon they did, throw 75 or so people in a 757 on a regularly scheduled flight and then...what, fly it to some remote location, kill all the people, destroy the airplane, and all the evidence, and nobody will ever know the difference? Then they fired a missile into the Pentagon, and somehow made it LOOK like a 757 actually hit the building so that the dozens of eyewitnesses that saw the plane would be fooled. Yep, that's quite a story. How do you reckon it ends?

Have you checked out AE911 website at all? Probably not. I have mentioned it several times. Their explanation of what happened makes a lot more sense to me than the people or websites and their explanation of what happened that you probably listen too. Like I said already, I will go with their explanation of what may have happened rather than with what you want to believe happened. What more can I say?

[On Guard for Thee]

Have you checked out AE911 website at all? Probably not. I have mentioned it several times. Their explanation of what happened makes a lot more sense to me than the people or websites and their explanation of what happened that you probably listen too. Like I said already, I will go with their explanation of what may have happened rather than with what you want to believe happened. What more can I say?

So I'll take that as you have no answer to the obvious questions that, as usual, stump the "truthers" dead in their tracks.

[DogOnPorch]

All of this 9-11 skulduggery pulled-off by that unsung scientific mastermind, George W. Bush.

Think about that for a moment, trooooothers.

[bush_cheney2004]

Believe what you want to believe.

Thank you...I always prefer fact over fiction in my conspiracy stories.

[bush_cheney2004]

All of this 9-11 skulduggery pulled-off by that unsung scientific mastermind, George W. Bush.

Think about that for a moment, trooooothers.

For sure...it was actually a fully loaded C-5 Galaxy that hit the Pentagon, but the CIA changed all the parts to a cruise missile.

[Wilber]

That was the rumor going around at the time of 9/11. And the lack of any big airplane parts lying around would almost make one believe that a missile could have been used on the Pentagon. Hey, you never know.

Well if you want people to think it is a missile, back it up with more than "it looks like to me". You demand evidence, provide some yourself, not just conjecture.

[DogOnPorch]

For sure...it was actually a fully loaded C-5 Galaxy that hit the Pentagon, but the CIA changed all the parts to a cruise missile.

It's a little like the ol' Moon Hoaxers...their wee conspiracy 'holds water' to the weak minded who don't bother to factor into the equation basics like the Soviets watching like hawks.

Edited March 1, 2016 by DogOnPorch

[taxme]

So I'll take that as you have no answer to the obvious questions that, as usual, stump the "truthers" dead in their tracks.

What don't you understand here? You obviously haven't checked the website I told you about. And secondly, why don't you go to You tube and punch in 9/11. All you want to know about 9/11 is there. Check it out. I did. There is always two sides to every story, and it is safe for me to say that I have done just that. You??

[taxme]

Well if you want people to think it is a missile, back it up with more than "it looks like to me". You demand evidence, provide some yourself, not just conjecture.

Check out You tube. That is where one can find all kinds of information about 9/11 and what may have really happened. I wasn't there. Were you?

[Wilber]

Check out You tube. That is where one can find all kinds of information about 9/11 and what may have really happened. I wasn't there. Were you?

I said evidence.

[taxme]

I said evidence.

Do you not understand English? I told you where you can find all the information you need to know about 9/11.

[DogOnPorch]

I looked out my (car) window and I saw this plane, this jet, an American Airlines jet, coming. And I thought, 'This doesn't add up, it's really low.' And I saw it. I mean it was like a cruise missile with wings. It went right there and slammed right into the Pentagon.

--- USA Today reporter Mike Walter https://web.archive.org/web/20090630075834/http://archives.cnn.com:80/2001/CAREER/trends/09/11/witnesses/

Hmmmmmm...

Wilber is an airliner pilot, if I recall.

[Wilber]

Do you not understand English? I told you where you can find all the information you need to know about 9/11.

You demand more physical evidence than there already is that an aircraft hit the Pentagon. I'm demanding any physical evidence that something else cause the hole in the building. Get it. Do you not understand evidence.

[taxme]

You demand more physical evidence than there already is that an aircraft hit the Pentagon. I'm demanding any physical evidence that something else cause the hole in the building. Get it. Do you not understand evidence.

I want to see where the wings left their mark. That's all. I don't see anything of that nature. If the front end of the plane can leave a hole in the wall, then the wings have to have left some kind of damage to the wall. And just how am I suppose to produce evidence anyway? I do not have the time nor the effort nor the money to do so. I was not there at the time. I am just going by what I have read and heard, just like you are going by what you read or heard. I have asked for but have not yet been shown any photos of the tail end of the plane on the lawn. There has to be something left of the tail end lying around.

If you want evidence all I can say to you is go to AE911 website and inquire with them. They may be able to give you all the evidence you require, and you can go from there. What more can I tell you.

PS: Parts from the planes that hit the twin towers were never shown. Two planes, no parts? Impossible.

Edited March 5, 2016 by taxme