IPBFacebook




POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Damage To Building Caused By Wings

Truthissweet
post Oct 28 2015, 04:43 PM
Post #21





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 556
Joined: 25-August 14
From: Falseflagville, PA
Member No.: 7,913



QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Oct 28 2015, 03:46 PM) *
Obwon it's interesting that it was the 'sound of aircraft' that convinced you no planes hit the WTC towers.

In my case it was the sound in a video that convinced me that planes DID hit the WTC towers!

When I discovered an obscure Youtube video made by an amateur on 9/11 where you can hear the WTC2 being
struck, then three seconds later hear someone in the video yelling to his friends to duck, then four seconds later
hear a building being struck (landing gear?) then a few seconds later hear another building being struck and finally
a few seconds later hear a loud thud (as the engine hit the ground) I had all the evidence I needed to abandon any
no plane theory that had been giving me doubts.



NP, do you have that video in your archives? If not, do you remember how long it was and maybe a title of the video? Odds are it may no longer exist. Thanks in advance.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post Oct 29 2015, 01:16 PM
Post #22





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 671
Joined: 25-November 13
Member No.: 7,592



QUOTE (Truthissweet @ Oct 28 2015, 04:43 PM) *
NP, do you have that video in your archives? If not, do you remember how long it was and maybe a title of the video? Odds are it may no longer exist. Thanks in advance.


Yes I do. It's one of my most important 9/11 videos.

It's still up on Youtube. Here's the link:

WTC2 strike, engine hitting ground


Key times to listen to:
20 WTC2 hit
22-24 "Get down, get down"
27 Building hit (engine)
29 Engine on street? (soft)
32 Something hit (landing gear?) (loud)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kawika
post Nov 1 2015, 09:12 AM
Post #23





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 511
Joined: 16-August 07
From: Upstate NY/VT border
Member No.: 1,719



QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Oct 29 2015, 01:16 PM) *
Yes I do. It's one of my most important 9/11 videos.

It's still up on Youtube. Here's the link:

WTC2 strike, engine hitting ground


Key times to listen to:
20 WTC2 hit
22-24 "Get down, get down"
27 Building hit (engine)
29 Engine on street? (soft)
32 Something hit (landing gear?) (loud)


This camera is at the corner of Barclay and West Broadway. The engine was found at Murray and Church. The debris they are experiencing is not the engine. An excellent first hand account of the WTC2 strike anyway.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post Nov 1 2015, 12:13 PM
Post #24





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 671
Joined: 25-November 13
Member No.: 7,592



QUOTE (kawika @ Nov 1 2015, 09:12 AM) *
This camera is at the corner of Barclay and West Broadway. The engine was found at Murray and Church. The debris they are experiencing is not the engine. An excellent first hand account of the WTC2 strike anyway.



Yes you are correct about where they were located.
They were two blocks or approximately 200 yards away from Church and Murray.

They were in a 'hot spot'.
The engine was found at Church and Murray and the landing gear was found at Park Place (between
where they were and Church and Murray).

When the engine and other debris started to fly from WTC2 they couldn't pin point where they would land.
They were heading in their general direction. That's why he shouted to take cover.

The debris that they filmed in the street shortly after the crashes are heard could have been one of the thuds
that was heard just before.

There were several thuds heard in the video. Two of them are the engine hitting the building on
Church St. and then ricocheting onto the corner of Church and Murray.

Listen more carefully. smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Truthissweet
post Nov 2 2015, 08:43 AM
Post #25





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 556
Joined: 25-August 14
From: Falseflagville, PA
Member No.: 7,913



QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Oct 29 2015, 01:16 PM) *
Yes I do. It's one of my most important 9/11 videos.

It's still up on Youtube. Here's the link:

WTC2 strike, engine hitting ground


Key times to listen to:
20 WTC2 hit
22-24 "Get down, get down"
27 Building hit (engine)
29 Engine on street? (soft)
32 Something hit (landing gear?) (loud)


Thanks for posting video. I noticed there was also a part 1 and 3. I had mentioned if it had been terminated. I think I know why it still exists. People who follow the official story will think the plane was actually 175. Whether that was filmed by an amateur or a perp acting as an amateur doesn't matter. Just that fact that your hear a plane crashing into the tower is all that is needed to convince those it was 175.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post Nov 2 2015, 12:23 PM
Post #26





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 671
Joined: 25-November 13
Member No.: 7,592



QUOTE (Truthissweet @ Nov 2 2015, 08:43 AM) *
Thanks for posting video. I noticed there was also a part 1 and 3. I had mentioned if it had been terminated. I think I know why it still exists. People who follow the official story will think the plane was actually 175. Whether that was filmed by an amateur or a perp acting as an amateur doesn't matter. Just that fact that your hear a plane crashing into the tower is all that is needed to convince those it was 175.



You're welcome!

I think you are over-thinking this way too much.

It still exists because there is nothing damaging to the official story and it hasn't broken any Youtube terms of service.

Of course, anyone who hasn't dug deep enough will think it was 175.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post Nov 4 2015, 04:04 PM
Post #27





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 671
Joined: 25-November 13
Member No.: 7,592



I know this place is just crawling with no-planers.
Come on, have some courage. Come out of your closets and
at least make some kind of attempt to debunk this 175 video. pilotfly.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Nov 5 2015, 09:38 AM
Post #28





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 4,161
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Oct 29 2015, 02:16 PM) *
Yes I do. It's one of my most important 9/11 videos.

It's still up on Youtube. Here's the link:

WTC2 strike, engine hitting ground


Key times to listen to:
20 WTC2 hit
22-24 "Get down, get down"
27 Building hit (engine)
29 Engine on street? (soft)
32 Something hit (landing gear?) (loud)



Thanks Mike. I guess I had not seen that video before. It certainly does settle the matter as to whether that engine was placed there by FBI or not.

Definite proof that it was a real airplane and not a hologram. thumbsup.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alpha66
post Dec 4 2015, 06:07 PM
Post #29





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 104
Joined: 7-April 15
From: Preussen / Westfalen
Member No.: 8,105



QUOTE (amazed! @ Nov 5 2015, 10:38 AM) *
Thanks Mike. I guess I had not seen that video before. It certainly does settle the matter as to whether that engine was placed there by FBI or not.

Definite proof that it was a real airplane and not a hologram. thumbsup.gif


Can you point out, what it proofes exactly, thanks ?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post Dec 4 2015, 07:35 PM
Post #30





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 671
Joined: 25-November 13
Member No.: 7,592



QUOTE (Alpha66 @ Dec 4 2015, 06:07 PM) *
Can you point out, what it proofes exactly, thanks ?



There are some truthers running around trying to convince people that no planes struck the WTC towers.

This video proves them wrong.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alpha66
post Dec 5 2015, 10:22 AM
Post #31





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 104
Joined: 7-April 15
From: Preussen / Westfalen
Member No.: 8,105



QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Dec 4 2015, 08:35 PM) *
There are some truthers running around trying to convince people that no planes struck the WTC towers.

This video proves them wrong.


I am asking what EXACTLY this is... maybe I am not the most clever person, so help me out a bit ?

Btw. it is certainly possible that a modified plane or drone or Tomahawk missile (etc..) hit the towers.

This post has been edited by Alpha66: Dec 5 2015, 10:24 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post Dec 5 2015, 09:05 PM
Post #32





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 671
Joined: 25-November 13
Member No.: 7,592



QUOTE (Alpha66 @ Dec 5 2015, 10:22 AM) *
I am asking what EXACTLY this is... maybe I am not the most clever person, so help me out a bit ?

Btw. it is certainly possible that a modified plane or drone or Tomahawk missile (etc..) hit the towers.



Alpha, it is a video I discovered that has a few guys a couple of blocks away from where the engine landed.
They are filming WTC2 just before it was struck.

You can hear the plane approach, then crash, then a few seconds later hear them shouting to duck (they were afraid plane debris would
hit them) and then you hear the debris hit the ground/buildings.

A modified plane/drone, yes. None of the 30+ videos show a missile.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alpha66
post Dec 7 2015, 12:10 AM
Post #33





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 104
Joined: 7-April 15
From: Preussen / Westfalen
Member No.: 8,105



I viewed the video already some time ago and found it not conclusive. But of course anyone can have his own opinion on it smile.gif
I thought you would point out something that I may have missed.

This post has been edited by Alpha66: Dec 7 2015, 12:11 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post Dec 7 2015, 09:27 AM
Post #34





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 671
Joined: 25-November 13
Member No.: 7,592



QUOTE (Alpha66 @ Dec 7 2015, 12:10 AM) *
I viewed the video already some time ago and found it not conclusive. But of course anyone can have his own opinion on it smile.gif
I thought you would point out something that I may have missed.



I may be wrong, but it sounds like you are referring to another video.
What was in the video that you saw?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Dec 9 2015, 10:33 AM
Post #35





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 4,161
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



QUOTE (Alpha66 @ Dec 4 2015, 07:07 PM) *
Can you point out, what it proofes exactly, thanks ?


A hologram could not eject a real engine that landed on a real sidewalk hundreds of yards away.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Truthissweet
post Dec 12 2015, 08:31 AM
Post #36





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 556
Joined: 25-August 14
From: Falseflagville, PA
Member No.: 7,913



From NP:
QUOTE
I know this place is just crawling with no-planers.
Come on, have some courage. Come out of your closets and
at least make some kind of attempt to debunk this 175 video.


One thing that has always confused me is the term no-plane. Does it mean a no plane object like a missle or does it mean absolutely no plane and all video fakery, or both examples? Something hit. I can't tell anyone I come in contact with what exactly hit. But it was something.

NP, were you ever at one time a no-plane believer?

This post has been edited by Truthissweet: Dec 12 2015, 08:33 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post Dec 12 2015, 10:46 AM
Post #37





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 671
Joined: 25-November 13
Member No.: 7,592



QUOTE (Truthissweet @ Dec 12 2015, 08:31 AM) *
One thing that has always confused me is the term no-plane. Does it mean a no plane object like a missle or does it mean absolutely no plane and all video fakery, or both examples? Something hit. I can't tell anyone I come in contact with what exactly hit. But it was something.

NP, were you ever at one time a no-plane believer?


The most common usage of a 'no-planer' is to describe someone who believes no airplanes were used at WTC1, WTC2, the Pentagon and at Shanksville (all four sites).
No airplanes, including drone airplanes.

Beyond that they may or may not believe any of the following was used: video fakery/editing, missiles, holograms, bombs etc.

Yes, for a brief period of time I was actually a no-planer.
That was before I discovered the folly of my ways. smile.gif

In fact, I was banned from a British 9/11 forum for simply suggesting that no planes were used on 9/11!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Truthissweet
post Dec 12 2015, 10:53 AM
Post #38





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 556
Joined: 25-August 14
From: Falseflagville, PA
Member No.: 7,913



QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Dec 12 2015, 10:46 AM) *
The most common usage of a 'no-planer' is to describe someone who believes no airplanes were used at WTC1, WTC2, the Pentagon and at Shanksville (all four sites).
No airplanes, including drone airplanes.

Beyond that they may or may not believe any of the following was used: video fakery/editing, missiles, holograms, bombs etc.

Yes, for a brief period of time I was actually a no-planer.
That was before I discovered the folly of my ways. smile.gif

In fact, I was banned from a British 9/11 forum for simply suggesting that no planes were used on 9/11!


Thanks for your honesty. Not many admit for a short time they were no-planers. I remember the first time I saw S-Clues last summer. I thought this is the answer. All fake footage. I was thankfully corrected here after one of my first posts. I still to this day can't figure out what exactly hit both towers. Someone out there has to be sitting on video of what exact type of plane/object hit.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Dec 12 2015, 10:23 PM
Post #39



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,830
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Truthissweet @ Dec 12 2015, 11:53 AM) *
Someone out there has to be sitting on video of what exact type of plane/object hit.


Video? Video won't prove anything at this point in time...

"Someone out there... " (read: govt agencies), are sitting on parts recovered from all four sites. Govt agencies claim the parts recovered are from N334AA, N612UA, N591UA, and N644AA. None of the parts recovered have ever been positively identified.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Truthissweet
post Dec 13 2015, 09:08 AM
Post #40





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 556
Joined: 25-August 14
From: Falseflagville, PA
Member No.: 7,913



From Rob Balsamo
QUOTE
Video? Video won't prove anything at this point in time...

"Someone out there... " (read: govt agencies), are sitting on parts recovered from all four sites. Govt agencies claim the parts recovered are from N334AA, N612UA, N591UA, and N644AA. None of the parts recovered have ever been positively identified.


Rob,

I should further explain video comment. I am hoping an amateur video becomes available that conclusively shows the type of plane that went into the second tower. Call it a fantasy if you want but of course the odds are slim to none.

Here is an example. The 1960 World Series game 7, Pirates vs. Yanks. There was no complete TV footage available of the historic game until one day the Bing Crosby estate came across a reel and it was the entire game filmed via kinescope. Bing, a minority Pirates partner, had an asst. film the game off of his TV via a camera while he was away in Europe. MLB was given the film and they restored it. Fifty years pass and the reel appears. You never know what a person will hold in their possession until such time as to releasing it. That is what I am hoping to happen. Someone needs to break into the Naudet brothers home and take all the video one can find........

I understand the plane parts story. I would like to see 'vaporized' Shanksville plane parts that are being kept by the govt. in some undisclosed location.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 24th November 2017 - 12:25 AM