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: 18203
Comments: 402
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-212) not displayed.
.
.
.
#213. To: war, titorite (#193)
You at #92: Greater weight of the upper floors... Your non-counterpoint at #102: No. As they fell they began to tilt....as is clearly indicated on the videos... [Pic link] ...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... You at #193: ...and ignoring the direct effect of gravity as you did so... You again at #193: Gravity affects all objects equally...the construction of WTC7 and WTC1 and 2 were not the same. [Re-inserting the full context of my question regarding alleged burn-time duration to weaken the steel to the point of alleged structural failure -- not how long it took for WTC 7 to crumple to the ground in a heap when it started to fall, as compared to the time it took the Towers to crumble to the ground, somewhat, while largely floating away: ...smaller as it was with less steel to heat up -- or what's the difference between WTC 7 steel and the Towers?] Your gravitational-sameness oversimplification that the Tower which was hit second fell first simply because of a higher upper-floors weight-differential there (even though much of the weight was in the process of tilting overward for some length of time and so lessening strain on the floors below while doing that) has ignored those factors and every other structural issue involved which would scientifically indicate that it shouldn't have fallen first. [Ref. floors data at #196] For now, just try to address what you think the chemical difference would be between Tower steel and WTC 7 steel, since the more compact space at WTC 7 allegedly could withstand hours of supposedly "intense" fire but the Towers that had to be structurally sturdy enough for their size to meet rather intenser building codes didn't. Address any pre-planned demolition docs that likely had to be submitted for all 3 of the highest WTC buildings before any of them were approved to be built, too, please, if you're aware of such. ------- "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
Stipulating, for the moment, that is true... So freakin' what if there were no stains on the aluminum? Is it your claim that there was no visible smoke? No, my claim wasn't about no visible smoke. It was about the lack of significantly visible smoke damages to the Towers. Edited formatting. ------- "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
As I said, you're both dishonest and stupid. Seriously, which government agency do you work for? Sorry, but this isn't a place whereby when things are told often enough people believe them. Go back to whatever LP's pyscho tearoom replacement is. You don't belong here. Interesting that you're at war with everyone on everything. That's always a tell-tale sign.
I noticed that right away -- he does nothing but bitch at others and call them names in my limited experience here.
But you still felt the need to repeat it, why? Seriously, which government agency do you work for? The Ministry of Inciting Paranoia... I'm Deputy Secretary of The Internet Chatroom... Sorry, but this isn't a place whereby when things are told often enough people believe them. All evidence to the contrary... Have you noticed that not one of you has put forth a viable argument that the broad outline of 9/11...hijacked planes...crashed into WTC and Pentagon...Towers and WTC7 collapsed due to structural damage...is untrue? No...because you're too busy telling things - nonsensical at that, e.g. the planes weren't hijacked or the plane that hundreds saw crash in to the Pentagon wasn't a real plane or the plane that I stood underneath as it crashed into WTC2 wasn't a real plane or that there was very little damage to WTC7 even though every witness to the damage of WTC7 states otherwise - often enough that you hope people believe them. But when they are subject to minimal testing they are falsified... --Are you a *Jew*?
You obviously don't read my posts. --Are you a *Jew*?
I've put this challenge forth before...score a couple of 1x4s in several places and then support it on the ends and suspend the middle...put a 50'lb weight on one and a 100bln weight on the other and then bounce the boards slightly...which one breaks first. This basic test underscores how what you folks try to promote stands at stark odds with reality... For now, just try to address what you think the chemical difference would be between Tower steel and WTC 7 steel, since the more compact space at WTC7 Can you point out wherein I made this argument regarding the *chemical* differences in steel between the structures. Thanks... --Are you a *Jew*?
He stated exactly where he believed that it hit. He stated exactly what he thought the aircraft did. You and someone else chose to misstate what he said...his words stand for what they are... If you would have asked me @ 10 after 9 where I *thought* the second plane had hit I would have stated much lower than where it did hit. When I reached the Battery Park area around 9:20 and I saw the South Face of the South Tower I was a bit surprised that the entry point was as high as it was... --Are you a *Jew*?
Tell me why I should care about smoke damage at all... --Are you a *Jew*?
In other words, you *can't*. FWIW, I knew that. They get up at 7:00... I've done an hour's worth of work by then...slackers... --Are you a *Jew*?
My nomination for the funniest post of the day so far. One poster running around the room shitting on everything in sight, insisting that his shit doesn't stink while blaming everyone else for the stench. Classic! I'm sure he'll top himself, ... it's early yet.
...
--Are you a *Jew*?
Can you point out any post in which I have attacked, for lack of a better word, you in a manner commensurate to how you have attacked me? I'll wait...thanks... --Are you a *Jew*?
I've been up for 9 hours...early? --Are you a *Jew*?
You're a fool.
Since I revived this thread not one mention of the title: "Boeing Uninterruptible Auto Pilot"
Thanks...I couldn't have made my point about you any more eloquently than you have. --Are you a *Jew*?
I believe that nonsensical nature of the title was dispatched with relatively quickly... --Are you a *Jew*?
You're a fool.
"Boeing Uninterruptible Auto Pilot" LOL No doubt. Yeah, that's what happens when one single ignoramus fool hijacks the thread. It's common across message boards everywhere. Seriously, I'd bet dollars to donuts that this clown's a government op.
You repeat yourself a lot. FWIW, that comes from being ignored. In other words, you should be *NICER* to me... --Are you a *Jew*?
I have 10,000 donuts... We have a bet? --Are you a *Jew*?
This thread isn't about 9/11? It's common across message boards everywhere... How much time do you spend on the internet to make you such an *authority*? --Are you a *Jew*?
"Boeing Uninterruptible Auto Pilot" At 32:30 of the opening post video: Field McConnell: "Yes, they were...they all died in Whiskey 3-8-6 Alpha Airspace, except United 93. That airplane was destroyed by technology over Shanksville, Pennsylvania." Article excerpt from Abel Danger: Specific Companies in the World Trade Center Targeted on 9/11 - 2010 I'd disagree because that could have left trace evidence but Post #71 of 4um Title: "Airline whistleblower solves 9/11" has more info on Whiskey 386 [pilotsfor911truth audio file on the Langely jets and 2 more 4um refs. with additional linked sources]. Formatting edits. ------- "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 at #193: A) Where's your evidence for that? News footage. Ref. the film clip linked above in this thread at Post #73 for an example from the video at Post #53: first falling Tower impacting the other [at 2:09-2:31] without significantly damaging it. ------- "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
Ref. the film clip linked above in this thread at Post #73 for an example from the video at Post #53: first falling Tower impacting the other [at 2:09-2:31] without significantly damaging it. You mean that in the less than 10 seconds that you can actually see *some* of the Towers, you've concluded that? Okay...the reason that there is no counter-point is because you have no point... --Are you a *Jew*?
If you have 10,000 donuts, then surely you own a donut factory. Which makes you, my new favorite person. Though I am trying desperately to cut back on my donut consumption... It's things like this that drive me insane. You try to quit eating donuts, be healthier, then someone shows up with 10,000 donuts, or owns a donut factory. This is much like how Sisyphus must have felt. I am in hell. "Call Me Ishmael" -Ishmael, A character from the book "Moby Dick" 1851. "Call Me Fishmeal" -Osama Bin Laden, A character created by the CIA, and the world's Hide And Seek Champion 2001-2011. -Tommythemadartist
Well...if Katniss walks the walk here, I'll have $10,000 and 10,000 donuts. But I was actually making fun of his/her paranoia by channeling the *fat* side of Willard Romney... --Are you a *Jew*?
You at #193: When the North Tower was impacted and I looked out the window from my vantage point in the northwest corner of 1 Liberty, it was like a ticker tape parade and some of the papers that were fluttering were singed...I remember one piece of paper hitting the window right before my nose that had a FUJI BANK letterhead. As for your question...unless you were in the tower in the very area of the fire, you have no way of telling me what was or wasn't on fire... Autoignition temperature - Wikipedia You #129 above to FormerLurker at #121: Those temps are well capable of compromising the strength of steel... ...and spontaneously combusting paper. You're not presuming to tell me that all of the paper seen in the first two videos at 4um Title: NIST FOIA: William Cirone, Clips 01-49 (WTC Complex & WTC7 after 10:28am) would have fluttered out of the Towers before they fell, are you? -- because news footage doesn't support that. ------- "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
Forgot to PING you to above...sorry...
--Are you a *Jew*?
Did I miss something somewhere? The part where the floors which were on fire were the only floors with paper, maybe?
--Are you a *Jew*?
What point are you trying to make? Only the floors with steel compromising fire had paper that somehow withstood those temps? ------- "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
Not all the floors were on fire...not all of the paper in the WTCs burned... Is there a reason you're not *getting* this? --Are you a *Jew*?
BTW, anyone who has read Ray Bradbury knows at what temperature paper combusts...
--Are you a *Jew*?
Ref. the film clip linked above in this thread at Post #73 for an example from the video at Post #53: first falling Tower impacting the other [at 2:09-2:31] without significantly damaging it. You mean that in the less than 10 seconds that you can actually see *some* of the Towers, you've concluded that? Okay...the reason that there is no counter-point is because you have no point... I wasn't in charge that day of how fast the Tower fell at near free-fall speed or not to suit your observatory preferences. You were provided a source right in this very thread and simply have no counterpoint about the impact to the other one with insignificant damage to it, even though there are numerous other news footage clips that you could reference. Edited link formatting. ------- "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
Are you saying that if you were that they would have actually fallen at free fall speed instead of at the less than free fall speed at which they fell that day? You were provided a source right in this very thread and simply have no counterpoint about the impact to the other one with insignificant damage to it, even though there are numerous other news footage clips that you could reference. Feel free to provide them but, as I stated before, the collapsing South tower DID cause damage to the buildings around it and photos of that damage have been provided. On the other hand, your statement about not causing any damage remains...unsupported... --Are you a *Jew*?
Is there a reason you're not *getting* this? "the inferno swept through the building" [You at #443 of 4um Title: "Methodical Illusion: The 9/11 Con Begins to Crumble — Rebekah Roth (Flight Attendant)"] ------- "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
Why did you leave this part out: From the 91st floor upwards, it is believed no one got out alive, even though as many as 1,100 may have survived the initial crash. Either they would have been burned or smothered by smoke as the inferno swept through the building, or they would have been forced by the unbearable heat to jump, or else perished as the tower collapsed. --Are you a *Jew*?
Feel free to provide them but, as I stated before, the collapsing South tower DID cause damage to the buildings around it and photos of that damage have been provided. On the other hand, your statement about not causing any damage remains...unsupported... It's not my job to spoonfeed you more supporting evidence, let alone slow down the speed of the South Tower collapse for you to notice the lack of significant damage from it to the North Tower that others can readily see. Your assertion that the collapsing South Tower caused damages to buildings around it is irrelevant to that issue except that it reinforces the anomaly of it visibly only being as impactful as a huge powder puff on the North Tower. ------- "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
I was comfortable asking for that evidence because I know that it does not exist. let alone slow down the speed of the South Tower collapse for you --Are you a *Jew*?
Comments (253 - 402) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latesttitorite at #91: how come the.tower that was hit second fell first?
Me at #98: 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.
Me at #189: Tilted...toppled, either way it would be less weight on the floors below, as I said.
Me as quoted by you at #193: Shouldn't WTC 7 have fallen quicker than the Towers...
#214. To: war (#193)
(Edited)
So, since you didn't have a counterpoint to speak of, how about you try to explain other things of gravitas for us like So, since you didn't have a counterpoint to speak of, how about you try to explain other things of gravitas for us like the lack of significantly visible smoke damage to the Towers from the blasts and sooty burnings.
#215. To: war, All (#187)
(Edited)
#216. To: Katniss (#215)
#217. To: Katniss (#215)
As I said, you're both dishonest and stupid.
#218. To: NeoconsNailed (#216)
I noticed that right away -- he does nothing but bitch at others and call them names in my limited experience here.
#219. To: GreyLmist (#213)
Your gravitational-sameness oversimplification...
#220. To: FormerLurker (#212)
Well how exactly do you claim it to have cartwheeled if it didn't hit the ground?
#221. To: GreyLmist (#214)
No, my claim wasn't about no visible smoke. It was about the lack of significantly visible smoke damages to the Towers.
#222. To: randge (#211)
#223. To: war, All (#218)
You obviously don't read my posts.
#224. To: Katniss (#223)
(Edited)
#225. To: Katniss (#223)
#226. To: Katniss (#223)
I'm sure he'll top himself, ... it's early yet.
#227. To: war, All (#226)
#228. To: Katniss (#227)
#229. To: Katniss (#227)
You're a fool.
#230. To: Neo TryingtoWarnYou (#228)
Since I revived this thread not one mention of the title:
#231. To: war, All (#229)
Thanks...I couldn't have made my point about you any more eloquently than you have.
#232. To: Neo TryingtoWarnYou (#228)
Since I revived this thread not one mention of the title:
#233. To: Katniss (#231)
You're a fool.
#234. To: Katniss (#232)
Seriously, I'd bet dollars to donuts that this clown's a government op.
#235. To: Katniss (#232)
Yeah, that's what happens when one single ignoramus fool hijacks the thread.
#236. To: Neo TryingtoWarnYou (#228)
(Edited)
Since I revived this thread not one mention of the title:
Richie Allen: "Question one. Are we to presume, then, that the people on Flight 77 and the people on the other airplanes that supposedly crashed into the Towers, that those people were taken away and summarily executed somewhere else?"
some of these passenger jets may have been flown electronically into Whiskey 386 military-training airspace [...] over the Atlantic Ocean, and detonated via preplaced, embedded incendiaries.
#237. To: war (#193)
Me at #189: the first Tower that fell without significanly damaging the one next to it, as it did others farther away. How'd that happen?
You at #193: B) The South Tower was closer to the Banker's Trust building which, was directly across Liberty Street, than it was to the North Tower...IIRC, the South Tower actually collapsed in the direction of the SW and took out the Banker's Trust Building and the Winter Garden of the WFC.
#238. To: GreyLmist (#237)
News footage.
#239. To: war (#234)
#240. To: TommyTheMadArtist (#239)
#241. To: war, FormerLurker (#193)
Me at #189: What of all that indestructible paper debris which didn't spontaneously combust in the high-temperatures you claim weakened the steel?
Paper: Autoignition Celsius 218–246 °C | Autoignition Fahrenheit 424–475 °F
FormerLurker: The FEMA report states...
war: ...on 2-22 that the temps were as high as 1100c [My note: 2012 °F] at ceiling level and 400c [My note: 752 °F] to 800c [My note: 1472 °F] elsewhere...
#242. To: Katniss (#240)
#243. To: GreyLmist (#241)
#244. To: war (#243)
Did I miss something somewhere? The part where the floors which were on fire were the only floors with paper, maybe?
#245. To: GreyLmist (#244)
What point are you trying to make? Only the floors with steel compromising fire had paper that somehow withstood those temps?
#246. To: GreyLmist (#241)
#247. To: war (#238)
(Edited)
News footage.
#248. To: GreyLmist (#247)
I wasn't in charge that day of how fast the Tower fell at near free-fall speed or not to suit your observatory preferences.
#249. To: war (#245)
Not all the floors were on fire...not all of the paper in the WTCs burned...
#250. To: GreyLmist (#249)
#251. To: war (#248)
You were provided a source right in this very thread and simply have no counterpoint about the impact to the other one with insignificant damage to it, even though there are numerous other news footage clips that you could reference.
#252. To: GreyLmist (#251)
It's not my job to spoonfeed you more supporting evidence....
.
.
.
