Well I must say at first I didn't believe it, but when you look at the evidence the planes were clearly switched.
It starts off with the boarding of some of the flights, there were oddities with different gates and such, very confusing, the details of one of the planes was given, it was boarding at 2 different gates, the one it usually boarded at and another one. http://911wideopen.com/mirror/twin11-1/twin-11-mod.htm There were also reports of two of the planes landing safely at an airport, yes really. (according to the Mayor anyway: http://www.rense.com/general68/says.htm) The transponder signals were turned off over an airport and turned back on, but it would not have been possible for the plane to have pulled off the flying required for it to be where the signal turns back on. Then there is the fact that people at the commercial airport would likely have noticed the modifications (the pod which is clearly visible in all shots all on the same side). And then people saw not an airline plane but what they described as a cargo plane, with no windows, painted up to look like the right flights only not. Then there is the fact that at least one of the planes meant to have crashed was found to still be in service. (If I looked hard enough I could find that article no doubt) The fact that the crash sites at the Pentagon and Pennsylvania simply didn't fit, there wasn't a Boeing's wreckage, however there were wreckage parts that could not have come from a Boeing. (A turbine that some say is the Honeywell APU but Honeywell says isn't) The building shows no damage from the wings, jet engines or tail. People at the Pentagon say they could smell Cordite. Witnesses reported that debris rain down for minutes after the crash. Care to calculate how high (and how directly upwards) metal debris would need to be thrust upwards to rain down for minutes, the photos indeed show an increase of Debris in latter photos, were Debris being sprinkled from above? (is the idea that debris can be so high as to take minutes to fall any less absurd?) Yes, there were eye witnesses that say a plane hit the Pentagon, but there were also video cameras which were immediately taken from the hotel across the road and other locations never to be seen again, there were also other eye witnesses that gave other accounts. The employees at the hotel were told never to discuss what they had seen. (Employees watched the film several times in shock and horror before the tape was confiscated) There were ham radio operators that did pick up a transmitter from the WTC that day which ended after the hits, it was seemingly being used as a navigation aid, also the infra red laser (not seen by people but picked up by cameras) is plainly visible, it even projects on the smoke, why else would someone be projecting an infra red laser normally used for painting targets at the building?). They have previously flown large aircraft of such size by wire with no one on board, successful landings and takeoffs. Eye witnesses at Pennsylvania say they saw a small white jet hit low objects before going over a hill followed by the crash. The pilot of one the of the planes had taken part in a mock attack on the WTC in the 80's by the Pentagon, quite the co-incidence. BTW no Arabs were on the flight manifest on the plane that was meant to hit the pentagon, the autopsy report doesn't bother to invent any either. http://www.sierratimes.com/03/07/02/article_tro.htm The families of those on the flights indeed reacted differently to other victims families, for one they don't question the official report, even though many of the other victims families do, along with at this point in time a majority of people according to Zogby polls. Also it is well established that they couldn't have made the calls that were meant to be have made. (people had experimented and confirmed it) Watch Loose Change, 2nd edition: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WsyEqKQRBY On 2/22/07, leaking pen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Umm, so, if there were no suicide pilots, who was flying? On 2/21/07, John Berry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That's my point exactly. > > What I am saying has solid evidence to back it up, and you counter with > 'Bush is a twit'. > Which while obviously true, no one is claiming he did any of the technical > stuff, members of the intelligence community did that. > Further no one is claiming there were suicide pilots on the planes, of any > race, you just show how little you've looked into it to say something like > that. > > > > On 2/22/07, Zell, Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Perhaps the answer lies in the Monty Python sketch in which a building > > is maintained by hypnosis. > > > > The problem with conspiracies is the obvious contradiction with real > > world government competence. Take a good look > > at Iraq or the intellectual depth of Bush and reason accordingly. I > > don't see any reason why conspirators should haul > > Sacks of thermite and ignite them in synchrony with ( extremely > > reliable) suicide bombers - when explosives would do a > > better job. More than that, I doubt the WTC buildings were as well > > built as the Empire State building - when it survived > > A collision with a WWII vintage bomber. > > > > > > -- That which yields isn't always weak.
