Terror in the Skies, Again?

Terror in the Skies, Again?

Cornelia / Jedi

If you re-read my previous post, missles can be set off automatically by infrared sighting or even a laser sight when the right distance to a object is reached, say 25 feet. With the unaided eye you would not be able to see it, but with slow motion photography, the tail plume of the missle is plain to see, as is the missle strike, Before the nose of the plane hits the side of the building.

Again, the missle striking the wall of a building weakens the wall ensuring a better / more complete penetration of the plane.

I seriously doubt that whoever planed this thought ahead enough, failed to realize that there may be cameras of enough sophistication near the crash to film what happened and then to have that slowed down to where details of the Hard Points for missle fastening and the rocket plume and the missle strike.

Cornelia, You also missed a very important point and that is: are you aware that months prior to the incident major loadbearing points on the steel girders were wrapped with a primer cord looking wire? Are you also aware that the steel was VAPORIZED at those places which caused the building to Implode? Are you also aware that JP5 (Jet Fuel) or Aviation Fuel does not burn hot enough to Vaporize Steel?

Cornelia, have you ever seen a very large and tall building demolished by the method called IMPLOSION? Where by the whole building falls exactly straight down?? That is EXACTLY how those two buildings looked when they fell.

Go to "Lets Roll! 9/11 Made Simple" web site and start reading, there is alot of interesting reading.
 
Terror in the Skies, Again?

No prob, Hack. :)

StarLord: With respect to you, my friend, I have a hard time believing that a group powerful and intelligent enough to rule the world would not think ahead enough to realize that people all over New York carry cameras and vido recorders, and that many of them are incredibly advanced.

Also, and I am going to take a stab here without having been able to read that site, planting the missile on the first plane might make some sense, but the second? Surely whoever planned this would've realized a plane crashing into the first tower would've brought news crews in every shape and size to film the towers. How could they not have predicted that hundreds of people would be ready to film the second plane firing a missile into the tower? That just doesn't hold water for me.

Let me review this site that's been linked by Hack, and I'll see if I feel up to posting my comments on it. :)
 
Terror in the Skies, Again?

Jedi, either do I, But is does seem that after reading that site and the other related stuff re: implosion of the two buildings, certainly point to someone almost thinking this through and *almost* covering their tracks.

Personaly, I hope that none of this is true, but man, the information is sure damning. Add to that the way those buildings fell, I have seen 3 different buildings Imploded and ALL OF THEM fell exactly the same way. What else could be possible? If I am not mistaken it was all susposed to hit at one time.

Lastly, you cant blame the "Brains" for something an underling does, they are just told to get the job done as best as they know how.
 
Terror in the Skies, Again?

I'll probably be scoffed at, but that 'missile firing' looks like sunlight reflecting off the skin of the plane for a second. I see stuff like that all the time. It just doesn't look like a missile to me at all.
 
Terror in the Skies, Again?

Originally posted by JediStryker@Jul 22 2004, 10:19 PM
I'll probably be scoffed at, but that 'missile firing' looks like sunlight reflecting off the skin of the plane for a second. I see stuff like that all the time. It just doesn't look like a missile to me at all.
​
Click to expand...

My question really concerned whether anyone with knowledge in the field could identify the obviously-added materials on the plane's fuselage as innocuous materials. We need more information before coming to a conclusion.

I think it takes tremendous courage to state in public, as a member of the armed forces, that you would take up arms against the government if this was necessary. The government is definitely not what most people who take such oaths regard as an example of a potential "domestic" enemy-- such an enemy is usually considered to be civilian, and nongovernmental.
 
Terror in the Skies, Again?

I just half heard a TV news report on the original story in this thread. It is a true story but the FAA has investigated and has no reason to believe they were anything but 14 Syrian musicians acting very strangely.

ooooo k . . .



;) ;)
 
Terror in the Skies, Again?

An Urban Legends or Snopes.com search on the original article holds the writer's interpretation as a bust. You can read their version at Terror in the Skies

It's a great website that you find out if "stuff" going around the net has any validity or not. There have been several virus warnings circulating by email that have turned out to be BS and snopes.com / urban legends had the scoop on them. Saved myself a lot of hassle by disregarding the emails (after checking it our first). Snopes.com usually has some research and facts that will help to either prove/disprove some of the wild claims you see and hear about in our inter-connected world.

Cary
 

Top