Most of that information is correct in my opinion and based on the research I've done.
But none of the planes involved in 9/11 was a Boeing 757 or 767. The planes were Global Hawks modified to look somewhat like passenger planes. This is why an Air Force Lt. Colonel who was working in the Pentagon that day, and was on the scene within minutes, is on record as saying, and I paraphrase: We all wondered at what we saw. Where were the bodies, baggage,and where were the jet engines that are notoriously difficult to destroy? A sheriff in Pennsylvania who was one of the first to respond to the "crash" there said, and again I paraphrase: I have seen crash sites before, and that was no crash site. It was a smoking hole in the ground with no baggage, bodies, engines, or other debris, visible.
The Global Hawk is made of very light material and was designed to be pilotless and flown by remote.
globalhawks? Bit of a size discrepancy there.
that is lunacy, and even contradicts yogr own cherypicked testimony, a globalgawk isn't going to leave a giant smokung hole in a concrete reinforced fortress.
It would if it had explosives in it. The modifie versions would be very difficult for even experts to pick out at altitude and high speed. Several eye witnesses said the plane they saw had no windows. And where are the engines: in Pennsylvania, the pentagon, and at the WTC. You know more than an Air Force Lt. Colonel, on the scene, about all this, do you? You must be an expert.
I have seen pictures of the turbine being pulled out of there, it definately was not a globalhawk.
I do not care to speculate on the motives of this supposed lt. Colonel, but I do know that for every 1 witness that contradics the fact it was an air liner, there are dozens that don't.
I have done a lot of research on the subject and have never seen, nor heard of a jet engine being pulled out of "there," wherever you mean. Not WTC, Pennsylvania, or the Pentagon. I challenge you to show a picture of it.
If you did " a lot of research" you would defiantly come across the various conspiracy theories surrounding this very image.
Youtube videos do not constitute "research".
So you assume I only used YouTube vids. That makes you an idiot. I'm a retired professor, so I have some idea of what research means. By the way, where is the link to the picture you referred to?
view the rest of the comments →
jervybingly ago
Most of that information is correct in my opinion and based on the research I've done.
But none of the planes involved in 9/11 was a Boeing 757 or 767. The planes were Global Hawks modified to look somewhat like passenger planes. This is why an Air Force Lt. Colonel who was working in the Pentagon that day, and was on the scene within minutes, is on record as saying, and I paraphrase: We all wondered at what we saw. Where were the bodies, baggage,and where were the jet engines that are notoriously difficult to destroy? A sheriff in Pennsylvania who was one of the first to respond to the "crash" there said, and again I paraphrase: I have seen crash sites before, and that was no crash site. It was a smoking hole in the ground with no baggage, bodies, engines, or other debris, visible.
The Global Hawk is made of very light material and was designed to be pilotless and flown by remote.
glennvtx ago
globalhawks? Bit of a size discrepancy there. that is lunacy, and even contradicts yogr own cherypicked testimony, a globalgawk isn't going to leave a giant smokung hole in a concrete reinforced fortress.
jervybingly ago
It would if it had explosives in it. The modifie versions would be very difficult for even experts to pick out at altitude and high speed. Several eye witnesses said the plane they saw had no windows. And where are the engines: in Pennsylvania, the pentagon, and at the WTC. You know more than an Air Force Lt. Colonel, on the scene, about all this, do you? You must be an expert.
glennvtx ago
I have seen pictures of the turbine being pulled out of there, it definately was not a globalhawk. I do not care to speculate on the motives of this supposed lt. Colonel, but I do know that for every 1 witness that contradics the fact it was an air liner, there are dozens that don't.
jervybingly ago
I have done a lot of research on the subject and have never seen, nor heard of a jet engine being pulled out of "there," wherever you mean. Not WTC, Pennsylvania, or the Pentagon. I challenge you to show a picture of it.
glennvtx ago
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0265.shtml
If you did " a lot of research" you would defiantly come across the various conspiracy theories surrounding this very image. Youtube videos do not constitute "research".
jervybingly ago
So you assume I only used YouTube vids. That makes you an idiot. I'm a retired professor, so I have some idea of what research means. By the way, where is the link to the picture you referred to?