See other 9/11 Articles
Title: They hid 9/11 planes landing gear between 2 buildings
Source:
CNN
URL Source: [None]
Published: Apr 26, 2013
Author: .
Post Date: 2013-04-26 17:29:58 by PSUSA2
Keywords: None
Views: 1157
Comments: 46
Flippin thru the channels and saw this. The "no planes it was all a holograph truthseekers" were getting a little too close to the truth for the PTBs comfort. So, "they" stashed it between 2 buildings. Carry on.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: PSUSA2 (#0)
Get some sleep.
I know. I'm raining on your parade. There's another conspiracy for you to solve. Who put the landing gear between those buildings. I can't wait to hear the "theories". ------------------------------------------ Can you demonstrate a single instance in history where incursion by So do the no-planers acknowledge that a controlled demolition brought down all the towers? I'd guess. “The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken Holographs don't leave holes in the sides of buildings the size and shape of 767s.
Support bacteria. (The world needs more culture)
Well it doesn't do their credibility any good if they believe both no planes and controlled demolition.
------------------------------------------ Can you demonstrate a single instance in history where incursion by Oh piffle. A mere trifle. Simple shaped charge demolitions would cut thru that with no problem. See? I have an answer for EVERYTHING!!!! ------------------------------------------ Can you demonstrate a single instance in history where incursion by Problem solved - thanks! <;-)
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken I'd guess. Some might, but many seem to think it was space beams. God is always good!
I understand why some people think there were no planes, the TV video was clearly edited before being aired, but I don't think it was to add planes that weren't there, but to hide the identity of the planes that were there. Many eyewitnesses have said it was military planes that hit the towers. The government couldn't let them show that on live TV without trying to cover it up, no way.
God is always good!
Would space-beams result in destruction like controlled-demolitions? With all the videos of the squibs of explosions going off, I have to believe that it was a pre-wired event. Perhaps the planes were a holograph, but the physics of the destruction were real. “The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken I don't know what space beams would do. I have said from the start, (when I first realized it was an inside job in 2003) and still believe, that there was explosives all throughout that building on every floor. Much more explosives than would have been required to bring it down in a controlled demolition was used because the goal was to obliterate the whole structure for the effect it would have on those watching it and to destroy most evidence of what really brought the towers down.
God is always good!
There's another conspiracy for you to solve. Who put the landing gear between those buildings. I can't wait to hear the "theories". That's a good question, because I highly doubt it got there by accident and is just now being noticed. Anyone believing that is taking some powerful drugs. God is always good!
What? ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
What are you talking about? The mismatched plane parts that didn't smash the pavement? ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Part of 9/11 Plane’s Landing Gear Found In Manhattan Rachel Maddow reports on the discovery of a piece of a Boeing plane, identified ... Thanks for those links.
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken Some people just aren't able to make sense of things. Not on the board anyway. I didn't look into this much because, as you're aware, I don't believe any airliners crashed on 9/11. Not in the real world. Note Rachel's choice of words. Mismatched? Pavement not smashed? Is proof forthcoming? ------------------------------------------ Can you demonstrate a single instance in history where incursion by Not in the real world. I also don't believe that. Thanks for the links on the decoy stunt to deflect from the Boston and Newtown unravelings. As for the WTC destruction, No Planes means there had to be controlled demolitions. To what extent they were conventional and/or unconventional controlled demolitions is the question. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
You need to do some homework on that topic. I don't have time today to tutor you through all the evidence about it that's already been analyzed and discussed through the years. When you get up to speed on that subject, let me know.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
The parts could be mismatched due to the fact that the planes that hit the towers that day weren't 767s. They were beefed up military planes.
Support bacteria. (The world needs more culture)
I was under the impression that this was found recently, not years ago. Perhaps I was mistaken? Maybe we entered a time warp? What would George Noorey Say? George knows all. It's good that you dont have the time to tutor me. My remaining brain cells thank you. All we know is that this landing gear was found. They have been finding things for years because nothing was organized. But it is good to see the Internet Detective Agency is on the job. Look out, Illuminati! They're gunnin' for you. ------------------------------------------ Can you demonstrate a single instance in history where incursion by With all the videos of the squibs of explosions going off, I have to believe that it was a pre-wired event. Perhaps the planes were a holograph, but the physics of the destruction were real. There was evidence of some sort of exotic weaponry. I asked you what you were talking about because you didn't post any links. It wasn't until I saw what wudidiz posted that I found out. No identification as a 9/11 plane part was confirmed and there was no explanation of how it got there without damaging the buildings or even any damages being noticed in all this time. Maybe it wafted down with a parachute that disappeared since then? -- or perhaps you just want to insult instead of work to investigate 9/11.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
"No Planes" is planted disinformation. It well may not have been the planes "advertised" but the buildings were hit with real solid physical planes. However, the key datum, and starting point, is that the "Official Story®©" of "nineteenarabswhohateuscuzwe'refree" is false. I do agree that some form of exotic weapon was used to heat/and/or soften/break the molecular/atomic bonds of the building and its supporting structure. That is clear when you take into account all of the anomalous evidence and watch some of the videos in slow motion as the structure appears to disintegrate. What appears to have happened was the use of multiple technologies to collapse the building into a relatively tidy pile of rubble.
While I disagree with you on the "no planes" as simply more planted false data to lead people off track, BSUSA is also planting disinformation. Isn't it interesting how he "coincidentally" showed up to start a controversy just as everybody is beginning to twig to the Boston Bombing being another false terror operation conducted by a government? "No Planes" is planted disinformation. It well may not have been the planes "advertised" but the buildings were hit with real solid physical planes. However, the key datum, and starting point, is that the "Official Story®©" of "nineteenarabswhohateuscuzwe'refree" is false. "Planes" is planted disinformation. It's not too difficult to blow a plane shaped hole in the side of a building. There are eyewitnesses on video that say there was no plane, there was an explosion (Edit: and there are eyewitnesses who say there was a plane.) Given the context of the interviews it's obvious who's more believable. Let me know if you can watch the videos and if you're interested. I'll link them here. That, compounded with the lack of any convincing evidence of a plane hitting anything on 9/11 casts far more than a shadow of a doubt on the "Planes" hypothesis. I agree the official story is false. The plane hoax is part of that story. I do agree that some form of exotic weapon was used to heat/and/or soften/break the molecular/atomic bonds of the building and its supporting structure. That is clear when you take into account all of the anomalous evidence and watch some of the videos in slow motion as the structure appears to disintegrate. What appears to have happened was the use of multiple technologies to collapse the building into a relatively tidy pile of rubble. Yeah, that and what do you think of the 1400 melted vehicles around the wtc and half a mile away at FDR Drive? I can bend Iron in a manner such as the car and the iron bar (smaller scale due to forge size) but it requires concentrated, controlled heat; in three words it ain't easy. for even the highest carbon steels (quickest to melt) my forge needs to be burning in an oxidizing fire state at no less than 2800 degrees(F), a carbonizing fire fueled by kerosine (note the black smoke) of those at WTC one and two would not create the heat needed to deform the iron at the fire site let alone that which is depicted in the photos.
A pyroclastic dust cloud caused that damage to those cars. The heat generated by the nanothermite used in the demolitions was carried in the expanding dust clouds, much like the clouds seen in a volcanic eruption. At least that's the scientific theory, but it makes sense to me. Btw, your handle cracks me up. Back during high school, that,s how some of us greeted each other. Someone would say "Wudidiz" and we always replied "Wuditbelike". Support bacteria. (The world needs more culture)
Source was CNN, on the boob tube. I said as much. It's not surprising that it has gone unnoticed all this time. There is a lot of trash between buildings in NYC. If you were walking down the sidewalk and saw that between buildings, would you say "Hey! That looks like a planes landing gear!" ------------------------------------------ Can you demonstrate a single instance in history where incursion by Isn't that what whoever asserted it's 9/11 landing gear want the public to believe is what happened? It's reported to have been found at 51 Park Place and 50 Murray Street but when I used those addresses in a map search, it showed up as 47th and Lexington. So I tried 51 Park Avenue and 50 Murray Street and it showed up as Union City, New Jersey. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Lead people off track of what? The remote control theory? Remote control can't make high speed planes fly through sea level air density without risk of operational failure. I think it's logical to presume that the perps wouldn't want to risk mechanical failure. The 9/11 propagandists and their media complex don't much care if skeptics believe that insiders Let it Happen on Purpose or Made it Happen on Purpose or used remote control as long as they believe the main "drill" that the reported casualties and alleged witnesses are all real -- and especially that the reported planes were real -- because planes and revenge are their fig leaves for wars. The remote control theory gives them another option to plead "intelligence failure mistakes" for their "perpetual wars for perpetual profits" agendas. Interesting too that the Boston explosions are being described for maximal 9/11 psychological effect as "the twins", like the WTC Towers. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
the "no planers" and "remote controllers" are kinda shooting themselves in the foot if they want to blame arabs for 9/11... ...because "remote control" or "no plane" means that pilots and hijackers were not needed. . but maybe these department of mindfuck operations can screw us up so bad that we dont think of that *shrug*
but none of it makes much difference... any way it happened, the dancing israeli mossad agents were mightlily pleased, so was netanyahu, and i'd imagine the AEI's allies at exxon are, too... ...seing as how, after PNAC got its new pearl harbor, exxon has been making record profits despite the fact that their production is falling ...and the grand PNAC plan to attain benevolent global hegemony is proceeding... proceeding with setbacks, but proceeding good thing looting is an ever-reliable fallback, and the project is providing such magnificent opportunities to loot
Neither theory blames Arabs for 9/11, afaik, but the Remote Control theory serves unintentionally or not as a "faulty intel" excuse for the claims leading to war that planes were hijacked and used as WMDs by suspect Arabs. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
...but the remote control theory eliminates the need for hijackers . the remote control theory seems most likely to me, seeing as how dov zakheim was a PNAC signatory, was CEO of an outfit that made remote control for aircraft, is a rabbi, and is probably a dual isaeli american citizen remote control by GPS was in existence before 9/11... although the tech described in the stanford URL is not really "remote control"... the course is programmed into the aircraft before it takes off... GPS navigation systems can be programmed from the ground, though, while the aircraft is in flight . again, all this stuff in kinda fun to think about, at least for the first eight thousand times you think about it, but it's really not relevant whatever happened, and however it happened, it served the neocons' purpose, and ever since, we've been on the course set by the neocons on 9/11.
one other thing here about zakheim... he was the head accountant at the pentagon when rumsfeld announced, the day before 9/11, that a lot of money was missing from the pentagon...
any way it happened, the dancing israeli mossad agents were mightlily pleased, so was netanyahu, and i'd imagine the AEI's allies at exxon are, too... I agree with your second paragraph but it makes a difference, imo, how it happened because claiming falsely that 4 planes were used and largely dissolved on 9/11 means that dual use parts from 4 planes may have moved into the black market for guided missle purposes, for instance. Intimidation against any research in that direction on the grounds that it somehow offends 9/11 Truthers who think otherwise is exceedingly strange and serves to assist as cover for possible suspects. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
So does the No Planes/Media Fakery theory. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Comments (42 - 46) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers" ~ Thomas Pynchon Gravity's Rainbow
#2. To: wudidiz (#1)
niggers blacks has resulted in excellence, prosperity, or improvement owing to their presence, inventiveness, or disposition?
#3. To: PSUSA2, 4 (#0)
#4. To: PSUSA2 (#0)
#5. To: Lod (#3)
niggers blacks has resulted in excellence, prosperity, or improvement owing to their presence, inventiveness, or disposition?
#6. To: Obnoxicated (#4)
Holographs don't leave holes in the sides of buildings the size and shape of 767s.
niggers blacks has resulted in excellence, prosperity, or improvement owing to their presence, inventiveness, or disposition?
#7. To: PSUSA2 (#6)
#8. To: Lod (#3)
So do the no-planers acknowledge that a controlled demolition brought down all the towers?
#9. To: , *9-11* (#0)
#10. To: RickyJ (#8)
#11. To: Lod (#10)
#12. To: PSUSA2 (#2)
I know. I'm raining on your parade.
#13. To: PSUSA2 (#5)
Well it doesn't do their credibility any good if they believe both no planes and controlled demolition.
#14. To: PSUSA2 (#2)
Who put the landing gear between those buildings.
#15. To: GreyLmist (#14)
What are you talking about?
"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers" ~ Thomas Pynchon Gravity's Rainbow
#16. To: wudidiz (#15)
#17. To: GreyLmist, titorite, randge, christine, Lod, Original_Intent, all (#13)
What?
"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers" ~ Thomas Pynchon Gravity's Rainbow
#18. To: GreyLmist (#14)
The mismatched plane parts that didn't smash the pavement?
niggers blacks has resulted in excellence, prosperity, or improvement owing to their presence, inventiveness, or disposition?
#19. To: wudidiz (#17)
as you're aware, I don't believe any airliners crashed on 9/11.
#20. To: PSUSA2 (#18)
#21. To: PSUSA2 (#18)
#22. To: GreyLmist (#20)
niggers blacks has resulted in excellence, prosperity, or improvement owing to their presence, inventiveness, or disposition?
#23. To: Lod (#10)
Would space-beams result in destruction like controlled-demolitions?
Peculiar wilting of car doors and deformed window surrounds on FDR Drive. 
"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers" ~ Thomas Pynchon Gravity's Rainbow
#24. To: PSUSA2, wudidiz (#22)
#25. To: wudidiz (#17)
#26. To: wudidiz, Lod (#23)
#27. To: GreyLmist, BSUSA (#24)
#28. To: Original_Intent (#25)
(Edited)
"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers" ~ Thomas Pynchon Gravity's Rainbow
#29. To: Original_Intent (#26)
To: wudidiz, Lod
"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers" ~ Thomas Pynchon Gravity's Rainbow
#30. To: wudidiz (#23)
I used to be in a hurry, then I figured out I was just getting nowhere fast.
#31. To: wudidiz (#29)
#32. To: GreyLmist (#24)
I asked you what you were talking about because you didn't post any links.
niggers blacks has resulted in excellence, prosperity, or improvement owing to their presence, inventiveness, or disposition?
#33. To: PSUSA2, *9-11* (#32)
If you were walking down the sidewalk and saw that between buildings, would you say "Hey! That looks like a planes landing gear!"
#34. To: Original_Intent (#27)
While I disagree with you on the "no planes" as simply more planted false data to lead people off track,
Isn't it interesting how he [PSUSA2] "coincidentally" showed up to start a controversy just as everybody is beginning to twig to the Boston Bombing being another false terror operation conducted by a government?
#35. To: GreyLmist (#34)
(Edited)
#36. To: All (#35)
(Edited)
#37. To: lead.and.lag (#35)
the "no planers" and "remote controllers" are kinda shooting themselves in the foot if they want to blame arabs for 9/11...
#38. To: GreyLmist (#37)
(Edited)
the Remote Control theory serves...
#39. To: All (#38)
(Edited)
#40. To: lead.and.lag (#36)
but none of it makes much difference...
#41. To: lead.and.lag (#38)
the remote control theory eliminates the need for hijackers
.
.
.