Conspiracy? OR Truth??

[Guest]

this one is sure to start some arguments....It sure has me believing it!!!

http://members.iinet.net.au/~sperna/omgkool.swf

 

[peterescue]

cant find it. Error, file not found.

 

[SnakeWrangler]

Yeah, especially the shot at the moment of impact, I don't see any plane there at all. Maybe the tower strikes were just a diversion to cover the hit on the pentagon??

 

[hugsta]

I have read about this ages ago not long after Sept 11, but have not seen as much footage and not quite as much info as what this gave. Certainly makes you wonder........

 

[Noskcajam]

Conspiracy the whole way.

But the whole of 911 is a bit off. You know what they say about 'Sacrifice for the greater good'.

 

[Guest]

Yeah, im on agreeance with the missile due to the (supposed) proof in all the pics and footage.

There was no plane thats for sure.

 

[hugsta]

If it was a missile, the where the hell did it come from?? I don't believe it was a boeing either, but maybe a small fighter jet, even that doesn't add up.

 

[instar]

maybe a missile accidently fired by one of the yanks own fighter pilots patrolling that airspace after the tower attacks. big embarressment that, makes sense to claim it was another plane. :?

 

[hugsta]

True inny, who knows........

 

[Guest]

that sounds pretty good inny, and its not like the yanks are the type to admit they sexed up to the rest of the world ay, they are pretty head strong when it comes to admitting they are wrong.

I guess only our grandkids will know when they open the files to the public in 47 years time...unless they happen to "accidently" get misplaced.

 

[NCHERPS]

I reckon the plane(B757) was taken down before it reached the Pentagon by American fighters.
The Americans may then have fired a missle into the pentagon, into the area that was being renovated, just to cover up that they had shot down the passenger aircraft.
I think this is what the makers of the video were probably thinking to.

Oh well, just another theory.

What do you think about the first Moon landing? Fake or real??

 

[Fuscus]

Actually, the yanks are very good at airing their dirty laundry, look at Abu Ghraib.

 

[instar]

By many accounts the moon landing was faked, evidence by way of lighting, shadows direction, a "blowing" flag, lack of blast off crater beneath the lander and so on. Does make you wonder why there not been a return to the moon in 35 yrs or for that matter why the russians never made it there. I read one side of the russian story claiming it was faked due to sheer impossibility of safe passage thru the radiation belt. They claim a capsule would have to have been lead 1 meter thick to sheild sufficiantly, however the lunar module was only inches thick. Then there are sinister theorys regards the deaths of several astronauts in nasda. Was it because they refused to keep their mouthes shut???? More questions than answers. Irrefutable evidence would be surface showing stuff apparently left behind, this could easily be done today, yet no current photos of the lunar surface seem to exist. :?

 

[Fuscus]

and read this
http://www.rense.com/general32/phot.htm

 

[instar]

Does seem a very small hole for an airliner to make, even if the wings were sheered off, they would have remained outside the hole? moreover look at the angle of the hole, very low to the ground, how does an airliner plunge from the air, travel some distance at very near zero altitude at terrific speed(if it peirced several rings of building) , without hitting other things like street lights, other buildings etc first? You would think an airline hijacked in the air would have a much steeper angle of descent and would have gone thru the roof not a side wall.
Also all that volatile airline fuel would surly make for huge explosion immediatly on impact? Could wreckage images of another crash been used?
Maybe it was a yank fighter jet, remember the italian cablecar fiasco?

 

[Guest]

Actually, the yanks are very good at airing their dirty laundry, look at Abu Ghraib.

Yeah, that was only put out there cause some idiot had an issue with one of his/her higher ranks.

If it was up to the heirarchy of the American defence force, it would have never been known to the outside world.

Inny, also, i have seen missiles that can do the exact same destruction. There is not one plane in the world with a fuselage strong enough to pierce that amount of cement and structure.

So, in effect, i personally do not believe that there was a plane involved in that incident.

 

[instar]

If it was an american fighter jet, perhaps sheer velocity might make it penitrate that far at say mach 2 or 3 ? Did look like landing gear in one of those shots. :? Still think it would be hard to get a plane in at that angle and velocity, certainly a bulky airliner anyway. Also notice no apparent damage to the outer wall beyond the entry point, how big are an airliners wings?

 

[Switch]

All sounds suss

 

[nuthn2do]

Everyone loves a good conspiracy, but just so you get both sides of the story
http://www.rense.com/general32/phot.htm

 

[Fuscus]

Nice link Nuthn2do - but did you read my post at the bottom of page 1 ? :shock: