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: 18295
Comments: 402
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-88) not displayed.
.
.
.
#89. To: war (#88)
Congrates, you FINALLY admit to something that is true. And why would they be falling on you? Even if they did, YOU'D be squished like a bug, but the floors below ALWAYS supported the weight above. Now sure, if the floor you're standing on is damaged, IT might fail, but not the 70 or so floors below it. ESPECIALLY when the floors above you turned to dust as they collapsed and much of the mass of those floors went UP or OUTWARDS due to air pressure blowing them in those directions as they "fell". how come the.tower that was hit second fell first?
______________________________________ Suspect all media / resist bad propaganda/Learn NLP everyday everyway ;) If you don't control your mind someone else will.
Greater weight of the upper floors... --Are you a *Jew*?
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); Do you not read up on anything before you make such inane declarations? LOL!!! thats not a very good guess if you are.trying to argue fire as the cause. see when the second tower allegedly got hit the big fire ball we all saw was supposed to be all the fuel burning outside. see the first tower allegedly got a direct hit putting most of the.fuel into the.building BUT the.second tkwer was a corner hit distrubuting most of.the.fuel into the air . so if you wanna say fire caused it and tbat it fell first because it had more weight on a fire weakened load... thats fine.... can you tell me what floor the impact was on in both buildings? ______________________________________ Suspect all media / resist bad propaganda/Learn NLP everyday everyway ;) If you don't control your mind someone else will.
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... Don't be absurd. That planes have been hijacked before doesn't mean they were that day in the conventional sense of terrorist pilots aboard commandeering the aircraft. A condundrum for Official Story indoctrinees is explaining how, for instance, our Military jets could intercept the foreign-based and far distant Achille Lauro hijack for a safe landing but somehow missed doing so here 4 times in one day. There's nobody in this forum that I'm aware of who is under any impression that planes couldn't be used as missiles before then. Those who question the official version have continually been pointing out, lo these many years, that the Pentagon staff, too, were well aware of that as a possibile occurrence and defensively drilled for it. It's G. W. Bush and his civilian admins who claimed to be clueless about such; so taunt them about it, not us. The WTC was not engulfed in flames -- just localized fires that diminished, as news footage shows. The alleged strikezone jumpers at the windows weren't even demonstrably under threat of smoke inhalation, much less about to be incinerated. The alleged plane impact damage to the buildings is comparable to an axe blow on tree trunks that likewise wouldn't be much structurally destabilized so easily. Your pipeline assertion about Russia doesn't match the reported intimidations of Afghanistan in Pre-9/11 "negotiations". We can discuss "circuitous" demolishment of the Towers, perhaps by electrification of the steel framing (which could even reduce it selectively to the consistency of iron-sand, if need be) in conjunction with strategically placed welding "erasers"/arc gougers (at salvageable-steel points, which would sound explosive) and by sound waves directed through the concrete to alter its chemistry, powered by the Consolidated Edison plant underground there -- right about the time you get done explaining the gov-issued "cell phone calls" in-flight that the technology then doesn't. Edited spelling, spacing + rewording at 5th, last and next to last sentences. ------- "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
Sure, if you don't mind mushroom clouds appearing everywhere on the horizon, or directly over your head. Greater weight of the upper floors... Didn't you say elsewhere that the upper floors angularly toppled over rather than falling directly downward? -- which would be less weight on the floors below. Comparing the Towers to steel box beams and the alleged impact zones as similar to the first deconstruction dismantling-step of material removal to make segments of a beam topple over, a welder could take out triangular parts on each side of that space, pointed towards the back like this: < > and it likely still wouldn't slant forward that far up and topple off until they stepped around to the back area and blowtorched it across from one triangular point to the other. Edited for a word replacement. ------- "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
Sure, just let me know. I'm not sure you'd want to live in the SS/Wheaton area today. When's the last time you were up this way?
And what it would have, a missile strike. I'm sure that there were cameras on the property covering the perimeter in the event of anything suspicious approaching, and as you say, the helipad would have been on video too, some if not most of which would have had a horizon shot.
I took a bunch and was chased off by some stooge cop decided that he was the most important person on the planet that evening. And frankly, what should have been to hide from pictures being taken several hundred yards away? It was public, If I had been elsewhere with a tele lense it would have been OK? Good luck with that VDOT footage. I'm guessing that was part of the confiscated lot and that since then it's been erased. I can't imagine that they would keep them that long anyway. Under normal circumstances there wouldn't be any reason to.
No. As they fell they began to tilt....as is clearly indicated on the videos... Here's a pic from a CT site so it will have credibility in your *mind*: In fact, it tilted for a number of reasons not the least of which was because the damage to the supporting columns was not uniformly horizontal...another annoying fact that the controlled demolition crowd cannot accept... Note also the visible fire...which FormerLurker claims were *out*.... --Are you a *Jew*?
See my previous comment about gravity...add on to that something hundreds of feet in the air over my head with nothing holding it up... Even if they did, YOU'D be squished like a bug Thank you, Mr. Obvious...now apply that to the floors in the path of a falling object that weighs millions of tons... --Are you a *Jew*?
The Pentagon has a very wide *no photo* zone around it. Very wide... --Are you a *Jew*?
Good thing that I'm not guessing then but merely stating fact which is ALWAYS good. if you are.trying to argue fire as the cause. see when the second tower allegedly got hit the big fire ball we all saw was supposed to be all the fuel burning outside Uh...no...about 15% of the fuel burned outside... can you tell me what floor the impact was on in both buildings? North Tower...90-100...center impact ~95 South...75-85...center impact ~78... --Are you a *Jew*?
If they weren't hijacked why did they not reach their destination? --Are you a *Jew*?
17 floor difference in center of impact = millions of tons... --Are you a *Jew*?
That kind of answers that doesn't it? Also, IIRC, the Taliban didn't control the area where the still yet to be built pipeline will traverse... --Are you a *Jew*?
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*... --Are you a *Jew*?
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. 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... --Are you a *Jew*?
the south tower was not a.direct impact not even according the the governments nist offical story. it was alleged to be an indirwct corner impact. i think you may care more about arguing and less about facts. ______________________________________ Suspect all media / resist bad propaganda/Learn NLP everyday everyway ;) If you don't control your mind someone else will.
The plane hit the tower...that makes it a *direct* hit...for it to be an *indirect* hit it would have had to have hit something *else* first...where it directly hit is inconsequential... You're trying to pick gnat shit out of pepper, outdoors, in the winter... --Are you a *Jew*?
Tell me, what's it like being a poster-boy for the establishment?
I'm anything but... You have no idea how I wish that this bullshit was true... --Are you a *Jew*?
I'm sorry, but anyone that thinks that a plane came in at a vertical angle, entirely disappeared through that hole, then through several other walls at a no angle, i.e. horizontal to the ground, is either a moron or a willing dupe/willful ignoramus. There is no other alternative.
You come across as a defender of establishment lies.
You don't need to apologize but who *thinks* that 77 went in *vertically*? Given that it took out 5 light poles...some hundreds of yards from the Pentagon, that would have been a neat trick... --Are you a *Jew*?
For nearly 14 years no one has demonstrated that they are lies... On the other hand, what has been presented to me over that same time period, and is on display on this very page, has been very easily falsified... I am a big believer in Occam's Razor... --Are you a *Jew*?
Which way do you want it...vertically or horizontally? I ask because your statements are wholly incongruous to each other... Any plane going from inflight to the ground is following a vertical flight path...for any object to hit one object and then continue through that object to impact an object existing on a horizontal plane directly behind that object would have to be, at some point, traveling horizontally...that's basic geometry... --Are you a *Jew*?
Nice try, Strawman... So what exactly was your point in saying "10's of thousands of gallons of a volatile accelerant doesn't cause significant fires when introduced, " in a sarcastic response? 10's of thousands of gallons DID NOT enter either WTC tower, and what DID enter was spent within the first few minutes. The FEMA report states that it can be assumed that approximately 4000 gallons of fuel entered the impact areas and was available for combustion. They also stated that IF the upper bound of 10,000 gallons entered (the amount of fuel each aircraft would have been carrying), the fuel would have been exhausted after 5 minutes. So get off your high horse, since you are doing nothing more than tossing shit against the wall to see what sticks. So how do you explain how a large heavy aircraft such as a 757 could be flown at over 500 mph while at ground level, its engines 3 feet off the ground, and enter the ground floor for the Pentagon while flying level, not touching the lawn on its way? Do you not see a major problem with that? That a whopper of a lie in and of itself.... Apparently war has been assigned to 4um, since we were lacking government stooges and clowns, they felt bad for us and gave us our very own forum shillster.
It was in response to you claiming that I don't accept physical laws. The FEMA report states that it can be assumed that approximately 4000 gallons of fuel entered the impact areas and was available for combustion. They also stated that IF the upper bound of 10,000 gallons entered (the amount of fuel each aircraft would have been carrying), the fuel would have been exhausted after 5 minutes. That same report you are quoting also states that fuel started fires across MAJOR portions of several of the impacted floors... --Are you a *Jew*?
Nothing that you have stated as fact - except for how long the fires in WTC 2 burned and you did that by accident - has withstood scrutiny...nothing... I've heard all of this crap almost from the get go...in fact, the FEMA report that you are promoting here is what started all the CT bullshit... Here's a helpful hint...planes that are deliberately commandeered and do not reach their destination are hijacked. Saying that the planes on 9/11 were NOT hijacked when they fully fit the above definition - regardless of who did it and why - is pretty freakin' *dumb*... --Are you a *Jew*?
It was piloted. That's how. At some point, any plane that is landing is 3 feet off the ground... Occam's Razor... --Are you a *Jew*?
Why does a squirrel prefer oak trees? --Are you a *Jew*?
Comments (129 - 402) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestCongrats...you finally stated something *truthful*...
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#90. To: war (#87)
Unless the 17 floors above me are falling on me...
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#91. To: war (#88)
#92. To: titorite (#91)
how come the.tower that was hit second fell first?
#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%...
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#94. To: war (#92)
Greater weight of the upper floors...
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#95. To: war (#92)
#96. To: war (#84)
(Edited)
The official story is a ridiculous Conspiracy Theory...
#97. To: war (#84)
PS: If we were going to bomb any nation over a pipeline in that region it would have been Russia...
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#98. To: war (#92)
(Edited)
how come the.tower that was hit second fell first?
#99. To: christine (#72)
(Edited)
I would like that. Thanks. I'll be in Maryland mid May for my niece's wedding, but only for a weekend and won't have time for anything or anyone other than family. I was actually born and raised in the Silver Spring/Wheaton area.
#100. To: GreyLmist (#79)
Likely, the footage was seized because of what it wouldn't have recorded -- a plane strike.
#101. To: GreyLmist (#80)
I think you're the third person, afaik, to report having been prevented from taking pictures there soon after. Maybe Judicial Watch could file a Freedom of Information Act request for the Virginia Department of Transportation footage during the time period in question that day. It managed to get 2 additional films released by the Pentagon in 2006.
#102. To: GreyLmist, FormerLurker (#98)
(Edited)
Didn't you say elsewhere that the upper floors angularly toppled over rather than falling directly downward? -- which would be less weight on the floors below.
#103. To: FormerLurker (#90)
(Edited)
And why would they be falling on you?
#104. To: Katniss, GreyLmist (#80)
I'll take you down there and show you where everything used to be, where that 'cab' was, the flight path, where I was run off by an abusive and brainless LEO for publicly taking pics in public a day later, where gas station used to be, which IMO is no a coincidence that it's no longer there, i.e., part of the ongoing coverup.
#105. To: titorite (#95)
thats not a very good guess
#106. To: GreyLmist (#96)
That planes have been hijacked before doesn't mean they were that day
#107. To: FormerLurker (#94)
LOL!!!
#108. To: FormerLurker (#97)
Sure, if you don't mind mushroom clouds appearing everywhere on the horizon, or directly over your head.
#109. To: FormerLurker (#93)
FEMA states in their report that a significant percentage of fuel was spent in those fireballs...
#110. To: war (#109)
Again, your bullshit has been *falsified*...
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#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.
#112. To: war (#105)
#113. To: titorite (#112)
(Edited)
the south tower was not a.direct impact not even according the the governments nist offical story. it was alleged to be an indirwct corner impact.
#114. To: war (#109)
#115. To: Katniss (#114)
Tell me, what's it like being a poster-boy for the establishment?
#116. To: All (#113)
#117. To: war (#115)
#118. To: Katniss (#116)
I'm sorry, but anyone that (sic) thinks that a plane came in at a vertical angle...
#119. To: Katniss (#117)
You come across as a defender of establishment lies.
#120. To: Katniss (#116)
then through several other walls at a no angle, i.e. horizontal to the ground
#121. To: war (#111)
Anyone with working eyes will see that on THIS page I never disputed how long it took for the fuel, turned accelerant, to burn...
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#122. To: war (#120)
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#123. To: war (#119)
For nearly 14 years no one has demonstrated that they are lies...
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#124. To: Katniss, war (#117)
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#125. To: FormerLurker (#121)
So what exactly was your point in saying "10's of thousands of gallons of a volatile accelerant doesn't cause significant fires when introduced, " in a sarcastic response?
#126. To: FormerLurker (#123)
That a whopper of a lie in and of itself....
#127. To: FormerLurker (#122)
So how do you explain how a large heavy aircraft such as a 757 could be flown at over 500 mph while at ground level, its engines 3 feet off the ground, and enter the ground floor for the Pentagon while flying level, not touching the lawn on its way?
#128. To: FormerLurker (#124)
Apparently war has been assigned to 4um, since we were lacking government stooges and clowns, they felt bad for us and gave us our very own forum shillster.
.
.
.