4um: Field McConnell - Boeing Uninterruptible Auto Pilot Used On 9/11 Planes, Impossible To Hijack!

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
9/11
See other 9/11 Articles
Title: Field McConnell - Boeing Uninterruptible Auto Pilot Used On 9/11 Planes, Impossible To Hijack!
Source: [None]
URL Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5NnBQJ5at4
Published: Jan 24, 2015
Author: staff
Post Date: 2015-01-24 14:13:06 by Horse
Keywords: None
Views: 11454
Comments: 402

Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 110.
#2. To: Horse (#0) (Edited)
Nothing is uninterruptible, expect maybe a nuclear reaction. They definitely were "hijacked" in a sense because they never reached their destinations and they most definitely didn't hit the towers due to not physically being able to stay together at the recorded speeds the planes were flying at when they hit the towers at basically sea level.

RickyJ posted on 2015-01-24 16:18:47 ET Reply Untrace Trace Private Reply
#81. To: RickyJ (#2)
They definitely were "hijacked" in a sense because they never reached their destinations...

CTers usually prefer to state that the planes were *diverted* to a place or places *unknown*...congrats...you may be on the road to recovery...

war posted on 2015-04-01 9:20:34 ET Reply Untrace Trace Private Reply
#83. To: war (#81) (Edited)
CTers

The official story is a ridiculous Conspiracy Theory, war, that admittedly would be unacceptable by court standards of integrity and is why the invasion of Afghanistan was launched instead -- which makes you and others arrogantly promoting it fanatic Conspiracy Theorists in denial.
Edited for capitalization and punctuation + word insert.

GreyLmist posted on 2015-04-01 14:39:49 ET Reply Untrace Trace Private Reply
#84. To: GreyLmist (#83) (Edited)
The official story is a ridiculous conspiracy theory...

Yea...never have planes been hijacked...nor been used as missiles...a massive explosion and collision don't result in massive damage...10's of thousands of gallons of a volatile accelerant doesn't cause significant fires when introduced, ignited, in to a fuel rich environment doesn't result in fires of any significance and, my personal favorite, gravity doesn't *work* in a direct fashion but in a circuitous one...i.e. a falling object doesn't fall straight down...
PS: If we were going to bomb any nation over a pipeline in that region it would have been Russia...

war posted on 2015-04-01 15:03:46 ET Reply Untrace Trace Private Reply
#85. To: war, GreyLmist (#84)
10's of thousands of gallons of a volatile accelerant doesn't cause significant fires when introduced,
MOST of which burnt up OUTSIDE the towers, and what was left burned for only several minutes before being spent.
ignited, in to a fuel rich environment doesn't result in fires of any significance
Sure there were OFFICE fires, but they burned for less than an hour, and as the towers acted as HUGE heatsinks, there's no possible way for temperatures to have reached anywhere close enough to weaken steel.
and, my personal favorite, gravity doesn't *work* in a direct fashion but in a circuitous one...i.e. a falling object doesn't fall straight down...
Gravity doesn't pull you through the floor you're standing on now does it? Are you travelling through the core of the earth as we speak, or is the floor you're standing on remaining in place?

FormerLurker posted on 2015-04-01 15:28:00 ET Reply Untrace Trace Private Reply
#86. To: FormerLurker (#85)
MOST of which burnt up OUTSIDE the towers

You have no proof of that whatsoever...in fact, what analysis has been done puts the amount burned as ignited mist outside of the building @ around 15%...

war posted on 2015-04-01 15:38:50 ET Reply Untrace Trace Private Reply
#93. To: war (#86) (Edited)
You have no proof of that whatsoever...in fact, what analysis has been done puts the amount burned as ignited mist outside of the building @ around 15%...

You are either chronically challenged in the intellectual department, or you are a HUGE liar.
Not only do videos of the South Tower impact depict huge fireballs created outside the tower, but even FEMA states in their report that a significant percentage of fuel was spent in those fireballs, and the remaining fuel was spent after the first few minutes.
Here's a link to the FEMA report if you wish to educate yourself (see pages 2- 21 and 2-22);
WTC1 and WTC2 (FEMA PDF)
Do you not read up on anything before you make such inane declarations?

FormerLurker posted on 2015-04-01 16:19:00 ET Reply Untrace Trace Private Reply
#109. To: FormerLurker (#93)
FEMA states in their report that a significant percentage of fuel was spent in those fireballs...

In point of fact the very FEMA report you link to says no such thing...
The discussion of fuel dispersal and the fireball begins on 2-20...
Again, your bullshit has been *falsified*...

war posted on 2015-04-02 9:46:18 ET Reply Untrace Trace Private Reply
#110. To: war (#109)
Again, your bullshit has been *falsified*...

Anyone with working eyes will see on page 2-22 that FEMA states the jet fuel was spent within the first few minutes.
So that makes you a liar war, but I'm sure everyone on the net who's ever read your posts already knows that.

FormerLurker posted on 2015-04-02 10:33:52 ET Reply Untrace Trace Private Reply
Replies to Comment # 110.
#111. To: FormerLurker (#110)
Anyone with working eyes will see on page 2-22 that FEMA states the jet fuel was spent within the first few minutes.

Anyone with working eyes will see that on THIS page I never disputed how long it took for the fuel, turned accelerant, to burn...
Nice try, Strawman...

war posted on 2015-04-02 10:36:02 ET Reply Untrace Trace Private Reply
End Trace Mode for Comment # 110.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

Freedom4um