Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

What's everyone's take on this??? (9/11)

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

Horizon

Thrust=Weight+Drag
Joined
Jun 9, 2005
Posts
94
Last edited:
Wow, what an Excrement video.

...and the commentary is also excrement.

It's been disproven many times.

CE


It was really a C-152, with a holographic device, 200 lb of C4 and JATO packs.
The pilot had to have a tinfoil hat to protect him from the mind control rays.
 
..."and we made that decision to pull, and then we watched the building collapse".

What exactly is this statement supposed to mean?
 
CrimsonEclipse said:
It was really a C-152, with a holographic device, 200 lb of C4 and JATO packs.The pilot had to have a tinfoil hat to protect him from the mind control rays.
Yeaaaaa... duhhhhh..... everyone knows that!
 
Horizon said:
..."and we made that decision to pull, and then we watched the building collapse".

What exactly is this statement supposed to mean?

Supposedly, it's civil engineer jargon for controlled demolition. I've not seen evidence to support this other than the insistence of the conspiracy crowd.

If so, it wouldn't make much sense in the context that he used. If he was concerned with the loss of life, (previous and potential) destroying a third building would hardly be expected to improve the situation.


 
The things I have seen on 9/11 indicated that building 7 collapsed from the uncontrolled fires in the building..And that when it collapsed, it was designed to collapse that way-straight down....Wasn't it the building over the Con-Edison sub-station?

But most of these 'conspiracy' schemes I rank with someone telling me the moon is made of cheese
 
Yellowbird said:
Supposedly, it's civil engineer jargon for controlled demolition. I've not seen evidence to support this other than the insistence of the conspiracy crowd.

It's also firefighter jargon for abandoning efforts inside the building and evacuating when things get too dangerous.

The conspiracy theorists place a lot of weight in a handful of innocuous statements. They also made a big deal out of the fact that a policeman reported "numerous explosions" over the radio as one of the towers fell. Yeah, someone's going to give an observant, accurate description of something happening behind him as he runs for his life! :rolleyes:
 
Really! Oh there is a 110 story(storie?) tall building falling behind me..Let me stop and see if I hear anything out of the ordinary..Those 'explosions' he 'heard' from the building was his heart pumping to all get out as he was high tailing it to save his a$$!
 
Pantherjon said:
But most of these 'conspiracy' schemes I rank with someone telling me the moon is made of cheese

Wait a minute........ IT ISN'T MADE OF CHEESE?!?!?!


:eek: :eek:
 

Latest resources

Back
Top