Jet engine of wrong type found near Ground Zero

Anders Lindman said:
The perpetrators needed to make sure that people, including experts, would be fooled for enough period of time so that the media or politicians, or experts or other people in positions of power and/or influence would not be able to revert the story about a terrorist attack. Say one or two days. After that there was no turning back and a cover-up HAD to be done because the public could not be told the truth without it having grave consequences for the entire society.

This means that the jet engine was probably of the CORRECT kind. Am I making a flip-flop here? You betcha! I'm faster than lightning.

So, then how to prove that the jet engine core was planted? Easy. Simply check the serial numbers on the different parts of the jet engine and the landing gear, and compare that to the actual listings for Flight 175 and Flight 11. As I understand it, all parts of an airliner must have a serial number or something to that effect.
Click to expand...


How to easily prove a troofer is full of crap.......evidence
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/aircraftpartsnyc911
 
Anders Lindman said:
So, then how to prove that the jet engine core was planted? Easy. Simply check the serial numbers on the different parts of the jet engine and the landing gear, and compare that to the actual listings for Flight 175 and Flight 11. As I understand it, all parts of an airliner must have a serial number or something to that effect.
Click to expand...


Easy huh? Why haven't you posted your findings? Ohhh, I get it. You mean to say it's easy for the gubmint to do that, and since they haven't done so, well.......you get the idea. :rolleyes:

Here's an idea: just admit you were wrong! Jeez, I know it takes a man to be able to do that, but it really isn't hard. I'd be humiliated if this was my thread.
 
god-kills-kitten-troll.jpg
 
Originally Posted by walkyrie
I am studing that video of the airplane hitting WTC South tower , apparently is a edited video because the airplane must start to explode outside and before the whole airplane completely and utterly disappear inside the building, but what we can see in that edited video is the airplane completely and utterly disappear inside the south tower and after that, the explosives inside the building are detonated


NoahFence said:
Then why didn't the building collapse right then and there? You're describing something totally different from Controlled Demo.

(The likelihood of you actually realizing that is pretty much nil)
Click to expand...

The plane must start to "partially smash" and must start to "partially explode" OUTSIDE the south tower,but the fact that the airliner disappear fully utterly and completely inside the south tower and denn the explosion developed fully inside the WTC south building , tell me that the video have been edited
 
Last edited:
Anders Lindman said:
The evidence fits my theory! Listen to the sharp bang in this clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNRatnY5ymM Is that the sound of a plane crashing into a building? :confused: No way. It's the sound of explosives used to shoot out a part of a jet engine plus a landing gear out from the tower.
Click to expand...

I'm sure someone has asked this...

Anders, HOW did 'they' get an airliner engine and landing gear into the WTC to subsequenty "shoot it out"?

Did the use the elevators?

Smuggle it in piece by piece in breifcases?

Do tell.

:rolleyes:
 
walkyrie said:
Originally Posted by walkyrie
I am studing that video of the airplane hitting WTC South tower , apparently is a edited video because the airplane must start to explode outside and before the whole airplane completely and utterly disappear inside the building, but what we can see in that edited video is the airplane completely and utterly disappear inside the south tower and after that, the explosives inside the building are detonated




The plane must start to "partially smash" and must start to "partially explode" OUTSIDE the south tower,but the fact that the airliner disappear fully utterly and completely inside the south tower and denn the explosion developed fully inside the WTC south building , tell me that the video have been edited
Click to expand...


The fuel starts at the wings ya dummy, No fuel in the nose.
 
Anders Lindman said:
The evidence fits my theory! Listen to the sharp bang in this clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNRatnY5ymM Is that the sound of a plane crashing into a building? :confused: No way. It's the sound of explosives used to shoot out a part of a jet engine plus a landing gear out from the tower.
Click to expand...


Well there's that saying we have in the 9/11 debunking community - that it's impossible to parody truthers. This post is another example of this. I'm off to check the Stundie nom thread to see if maybe this gem has been glossed over.

Welcome to ignore, Anders.
 
walkyrie said:
Originally Posted by walkyrie
I am studing that video of the airplane hitting WTC South tower , apparently is a edited video because the airplane must start to explode outside and before the whole airplane completely and utterly disappear inside the building, but what we can see in that edited video is the airplane completely and utterly disappear inside the south tower and after that, the explosives inside the building are detonated




The plane must start to "partially smash" and must start to "partially explode" OUTSIDE the south tower,but the fact that the airliner disappear fully utterly and completely inside the south tower and denn the explosion developed fully inside the WTC south building , tell me that the video have been edited
Click to expand...

Please develop this theory further, using the phrase "feet per second." For extra credit, you may also use "feet per second per second."

Essays using these terms incorrectly will be penalized at double rate.
 
Animal said:
How to easily prove a troofer is full of crap.......evidence
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/aircraftpartsnyc911
Click to expand...
Wow. Thanks for the pointer. It's hard to read through those experiences and photos, and then come back here to worry about counting some stupid bolt holes that some troll has misrepresented to give itself a few laughs.

I wonder where Anders thinks all the human body parts scattered alongside the airplane parts came from. On second thought, I don't wonder what he thinks about that. Back onto ignore he goes.
 
Anders Lindman said:
Is that the sound of a plane crashing into a building? :confused: No way. It's the sound of explosives used to shoot out a part of a jet engine plus a landing gear out from the tower.
Click to expand...


This is your way of having fun? What a poor use of the privilege of being able to use the internet freely.
 
ApolloGnomon said:
B'sides, you're wrong. Do the calculations for speed of sound and you'll see why.
Click to expand...

As I said, the video frame rate has likely been tampered with, and sound added, and even shifting of the sound time-wise may have been done. So I would put doubtful trust in timing the audio on that video clip.
 
NoahFence said:
'Cuz yea - you really have to look in the total opposite direction to see the other one.
Click to expand...

Even watching the towers from far away, most people would still have missed the onset of the fireball explosion, because it takes a fraction of a second to shift attention to that new event.

Watch from about 10:40 is this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_Y4zfl8yy4 Notice the reaction of the tourist looking straight at the WTC towers. When does he react?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom