Questions that keep coming back to haunt us.

clarky003

clarky003

Tank
Joined
Nov 8, 2003
Messages
6,123
Reaction score
1
In recent times it appears many an analysis of the inccident's on 9/11 have clearly come under some heavey scrutiny, most evidentally the official ones. Startling evidence from the origional footage, and other video recordings from multiple positions have confirmed that something doesnt run clean with what we were told. Digital testing in spain quite clearly reveals a large 'tank' of some sort attached to the underside of this claimed passenger plane , flight 175.
Its confirmed from multiple angles, along with closer inspection of the footage also revealing no passenger windows along the aircraft's fuselage. Its all a tad interesting.

Underside angle -
http://www.amics21.com/911/flight175/

Another angle -
http://www.amics21.com/911/index.html

http://www.amics21.com/911/flight175/first.html

http://www.amics21.com/911/flight175/conclusions.html

Lets try not to go down the road of conspiracey theories, it's merely a thread to point out these previously ignored findings.
 
I don't see anything. There's a black spot. That's called a shadow.
 
I really don't see anything either, just looks like a shadow.
 
It is most probably shadows, psp filters can't tell 3d objects from from true 3d objects to shadows and light spots. Yes there are military aircraft that have bulges on the underside, for example Sentinel does but it isn't a 767 and the new 767 tanker does as well that the US Air Force is using to replace the KC135. So if it wasn'ta passenger version of the 767 and these 3d objects are really 3dobjects, there are two logical explanations - a) it was a 767 tanker from the US Airforce b) it was a 767 passenger version with weird things dangling from it...
 
Yeah , I see two mysterious bulges under the aircraft.



No, wait......... they look like............engines.
 
Damn't....

Do I have to put on my tin-foil hat?
 
you guys didnt get past page one of the link did you?

not that I believe any of it but ...


here's the bumps in question:


http://www.amics21.com/911/imags/nobumps.jpg

http://www.amics21.com/911/imags/bumps.jpg


http://www.amics21.com/911/imags/notanks.jpg

http://www.amics21.com/911/imags/tanks.jpg




a quick search in google for pics of Flight 175 shows that the original image also has the "bumps"

http://mirrorimageorigin.collegepublisher.com/media/paper439/stills/8qy8fl2c.jpg

http://radified.com/911/JPEGs/911_plane_03.jpg

http://www.gp.se/bildspel/plan/preview/455850.jpg


what conclusions have I drawn from this: none, really but they do have some good points

.. it's an interesting read
 
yup, to me.. because I would care less to read the sites.
 
IF the planes got switched and so on...what happened to all the people on both planes?Some of them called friends/family on their cell phones told about how the plane got hijacked and so on.
 
Interesting so it wasnt flight 175, what happened to all the passengers. Perhaps they were flown to Cuba?
 
Tr0n said:
IF the planes got switched and so on...what happened to all the people on both planes?Some of them called friends/family on their cell phones told about how the plane got hijacked and so on.
Click to expand...
Maybe it is suppose to be that the actual plane was switched with the "plane with a shadowy thing on the bottom" and all the passengers got on the "plane with a shadowy thing on the bottom."
 
http://uplink.space.com/attachments/102183-flight175b.jpg

Have a look at the light streaks across the bottom of the fuselage, that is what is shown in the pictures. There are no phantom tanks dangling from the aircraft, it is just shadows and white paint and light streaks. That pictures dispells everything, you clearly see the same streaks as from the 9/11 pictures yet there are no mysterious dangly bits...
 
MjM said:
Interesting so it wasnt flight 175, what happened to all the passengers. Perhaps they were flown to Cuba?
Click to expand...

they were quietly taken care of

:O
 
I dont think that the images are of sufficiant quality to draw any conclusions from.
The blown up images are so degraded that the mind is subject to pareidol(look it up) ,even the authors have had to superimpose an "artists impression" of the bumps to guide you to the "right" conclusion.
In fact all 767`s have "bulges" under the wings, as can be seen in the first diagram on this page: http://www.757.org.uk/767/spec/
It all reminds me of the photos that showed the face of the devil in the wtc smokeclouds.

Thats not to say that this kind of speculation/investigation is not warranted, its just that the authors seem to be trying to make the evidence fit the theory(rather like the Downing st memos) .

A more interesting line of approach (imho) is the wing-to-fuselage comparisons. Though , again, the pictures they have opted to use are blurry and degraded.
One could make an accurate composite from the much sharper 3x4 array from elsewhere on that site.Perhaps someone else has the time and inclination?
 
http://www.anniebees.com/Photos/UnitedPages/images/UA_767-322ER_N647UA_JFK_20030714_D8845_jpg.jpg

Look at the belly of this United Airlines 767, you can see the same lines running down the aircraft, the exact same lines that also run down the exact same type of aircraft from the exact same airline that crashed into the World Trade Centre.

The Photoshop filters that the site is using is seeing white lines, shadows and patches of light where the sun is hitting it directly or reflecting off the sky scrapers near by.
 
SAJ said:
I dont think that the images are of sufficiant quality to draw any conclusions from.
The blown up images are so degraded that the mind is subject to pareidol(look it up) ,even the authors have had to superimpose an "artists impression" of the bumps to guide you to the "right" conclusion.
In fact all 767`s have "bulges" under the wings, as can be seen in the first diagram on this page: http://www.757.org.uk/767/spec/
It all reminds me of the photos that showed the face of the devil in the wtc smokeclouds.

Thats not to say that this kind of speculation/investigation is not warranted, its just that the authors seem to be trying to make the evidence fit the theory(rather like the Downing st memos) .

A more interesting line of approach (imho) is the wing-to-fuselage comparisons. Though , again, the pictures they have opted to use are blurry and degraded.
One could make an accurate composite from the much sharper 3x4 array from elsewhere on that site.Perhaps someone else has the time and inclination?
Click to expand...

One thing about their wing-to-fuselage comparison is that from the looks of the picture, it matches the type of aircraft that crashed into the wtc i.e. bigger area for wings then the forward and rear fuselage, but they seem to make the opposite judgement stating that the wing area is shorter then the front and rear fuselage part.
 
Razor said:
One thing about their wing-to-fuselage comparison is that from the looks of the picture, it matches the type of aircraft that crashed into the wtc i.e. bigger area for wings then the forward and rear fuselage, but they seem to make the opposite judgement stating that the wing area is shorter then the front and rear fuselage part.
Click to expand...
I think it is just the perspective of the shot that makes the plane look different.
 
Passengers were on those planes. That means the planes must have been stationed at the airport in plain sight for all too see for a fairly long period of time. I severely doubt no one on the ground didn't notice something unusual like that. Far too many people would have seen something odd and I doubt the entire technical crew working on the plane would have been told to keep quiet about it.
 
if you finish reading the whole article it states that they believe the plane was switched with one that was piloted remotely ...somewhere before it arrived in ny airspace


the only thing I can think that would remotely support such a devious plot is something from the Project for the New American Century where they stipulate that only a pearl harbour style attack would mobalize americans into supporting what the neo-cons wanted: mainly a ground invasion of iraq and afghanistan ...the eeirie thing is that the document was written in 1998 (I cant find it right now but given more time I could probably track it down) ...btw the author of the artlce was none other than Dick Cheney
 
CptStern said:
if you finish reading the whole article it states that they believe the plane was switched with one that was piloted remotely ...somewhere before it arrived in ny airspace


the only thing I can think that would remotely support such a devious plot is something from the Project for the New American Century where they stipulate that only a pearl harbour style attack would mobalize americans into supporting what the neo-cons wanted: mainly a ground invasion of iraq and afghanistan ...the eeirie thing is that the document was written in 1998 (I cant find it right now but given more time I could probably track it down) ...btw the author of the artlce was none other than Dick Cheney
Click to expand...
You talking about the PDF I posted...which came from a wikipedia article? :p

Here it is:

http://newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

"To preserve American military preeminence in the coming decades, the Department of Defense must move more aggressively to experiment with new technologies and operational concepts, and seek to exploit the emerging revolution in military affairs."
"Further, the process of [military] transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor."
Click to expand...
 
CptStern said:
the Project for the New American Century is NOT a conspiracy website but rather the voice of powerful neo-cons who's members include Donald rumsfeld, dick cheney, jeb bush and Paul Wolfowitz
Click to expand...


But would any western politician ever risk carrying out an attack on their own country where 3000people died and using it as an excuse to invade 2 different countries.

If people found out that, the whole political system in America would collapse in on itself. I know Donald, Dick and George and retarded, but are they really that retarded?

But when i said conspiracy theory, i was just pointing to these articles about the weird shapes when i have proven and showed evidence that these lines is just the livery of United Airlines and merely shadows beyond reasonable doubt.
 
I guess you don't know how evil human beings can be and how far are some are willing to go to get what they want.

I know from personal experience.
 
k fair enough ..oh and I dont believe they orchestrated this although there has been incidents in the past of goverment resorting to under handed deeds to accomplish their goals ...like the cia (at the time they were the OSS) recruiting the vatican to spy on fascist italy. Google operation paperclip ...basically the US smuggled in german scientists right after ww2 ...even though some of them were wanted by the authorities

or google operation mockingbird a cia mission to recruit media organizations to spread propaganda: ABC, NBC, CBS, Time, Newsweek, Associated Press, United Press International, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps-Howard, Copley News Service and more were all on the CIA payroll


or google Operation MK-ULTRA, a covert operation to drug unknowing americans:


The Deputy Director of the CIA revealed that over 30 universities and institutions were involved in an 'extensive testing and experimentation' program which included covert drug tests on unwitting citizens 'at all social levels, high and low, native Americans and foreign.' Several of these tests involved the administration of LSD to 'unwitting subjects in social situations.' At least one death, that of Dr. Olson, resulted from these activities. The Agency itself acknowledged that these tests made little scientific sense. The agents doing the monitoring were not qualified scientific observers."


google Operation CHAOS, a covert operation to illegally spy on american citizens




sometimes truth is stranger than fiction
 
Don't worry Stern, i know the American intelligence agencies and governments are most scum of the lowest order and have murdered more innocent people then Saddam and Al Quada combined, but...this wouldn't be getting caught for killing foreigners and be able to be brushed under the rug, this is getting caught doing the most evil act that the American public has ever seen, an act worse then Pearl Harbour.
 
Razor said:
Don't worry Stern, i know the American intelligence agencies and governments are most scum of the lowest order and have murdered more innocent people then Saddam and Al Quada combined, but...this wouldn't be getting caught for killing foreigners and be able to be brushed under the rug, this is getting caught doing the most evil act that the American public has ever seen, an act worse then Pearl Harbour.
Click to expand...

I agree, and as I've stated before I dont believe they would be capable of that big a deception ...oh and dont get me started with pearl harbour ...there's some evidence the US knew that the attack was going to happen ...not that I fully believe in that either :E
 
I think it's possible.

All they had to do is just ask the taliban to do it...give them the money and a few supplies.Then the taliban does it all themselves...all our goverment would have to do is sit back and watch the show.Kinda explains why his family was rushed out of the country secretly...

*takes tin foil hat off*
 
That post Stern said that America was baiting Hitler to attack and he didn't, this is incorrect as German Uboats did attack American shipping off the US coast before Hitler declared war on America and Roosevelt did nothing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top