The ridiculous "PLANE PARTS evidence"

[whatsgoingon]

IMHO it seems that the really significant comments get lost for it seems more fun (?) to discuss minor details of a scam:

A lie or false story is flawed always in its details. I agree there are bigger fish to fry but why not brainstorm on the issues around the absurd jet engine.

[Jonathan]

You are right IMO - both of you!

The point I saw was:

in the much lengthier discussion of impossible or - and there comes in the weakness - implausible details -
the main thing becomes almost invisible.

To someone fairly new on the subject, that is.

And less likely to be significant or important - as is the nature of secondary ... tertiary ... arguments.

I just wanted it to be present

[HonestlyNow]

I don't know why postimage.org is not giving me a code for the original size image. Click on image to see correct placement of the engine prop.

[Equinox]

BTW. EQUINOX, eh you are on the building in block letters catty-corner to the place where the jet engine landed. B)

I was little bit unsure of that meant, but I googled street viewed the corner of Church and Murray ….

I almost spat my morning coffee all over the computer screen.
And funnily enough yes I did see myself in bold letters, right next to a hot girl.



My rare random name right on the corner! What are the odds of that?

[whatsgoingon]

I don't know why postimage.org is not giving me a code for the original size image. Click on image to see correct placement of the engine prop.

Thanks. That is consistent with the spot I think the images point to for the supposed Jet Engine crash.

BTW. EQUINOX, eh you are on the building in block letters catty-corner to the place where the jet engine landed. B)

I was little bit unsure of that meant, but I googled street viewed the corner of Church and Murray ….

I almost spat my morning coffee all over the computer screen.
And funnily enough yes I did see myself in bold letters, right next to a hot girl.



My rare random name right on the corner! What are the odds of that?

Equinox, I thought that was you in the nice leggies there. Now you are going to tell me you are a dude and ruin it for me

[Brutal Metal]

*


So here's a more correct graphic of how it is meant to have gotten under that scaffolding - after exiting the North face of WTC2...

maybe there was a large parachute attached to it

[Makkonen]

*


So here's a more correct graphic of how it is meant to have gotten under that scaffolding - after exiting the North face of WTC2...

maybe there was a large parachute attached to it

[Mickey]

Did they forget the engine detachment sequence from the CGI along with forgetting people getting knocked out of the building (holding hands of course ) after the impact ???

The simplest explanation I can think of why they didn't use planes - they didn't use planes because they didn't have to. The tomfoolery was enough to get it done on the vast TV audience.

[reel.deal]

.

[Equinox]

A month ago I had the same problem... So I decided to upgrade to "Pro" account on Photobucket.
Gifs and pics load in seconds and I have unlimited MB to upload. It works soooooo good.
Rookie turned "pro" lol

[Equinox]

Some one asked me this on another forum.

euqinox911... Just out of curiosity...

Can you answer this:

1) A huge crowd of people trashed a 767, put the parts on a truck and drove around the worlds busiest city, scattering parts around to make it look like a plane crashed into the towers. Nobody noticed them doing it.

In regards to how a big part like that may have been placed there. Well there would be many ways of staging that big plane part there. They definitely would not have needed a truck and HEAPS of people. Experience tells me you could pull it of with just one person in 5 minutes.

I used to work with frame scaffolding; it’s pretty much the same worldwide as also in New York as appears in these photos.


A classic way of making the horizontal walk way on scaffolding is by using tempory attachable aluminum planks which very easily clip on and of with great ease from the frame…. As demonstrated here.


So they wouldn’t need a big truck or a heap of people to plant some heavy wreckage like that.
The plane engine could have been placed on the level of scaffold above the sidewalk, easily weeks before 9/11. And after the 2nd impact someone could have taken away as little as two aluminum planks and with a pre ready rope n chain and pulley system could have lowered that sucker on to the sidewalk.
In a rush a I could probably do it in 4 minutes flat.


Just a theory on how it may have been done.

(Equinox: I've just replaced the above image with a copy of mine - with corrected street names / - simon )

[SmokingGunII]

I would like to extend a welcome to some of our newer members that have joined this thread and hope they can contribute to other parts of the 9/11 hoax. However, my one concern is that this thread "Why they didn't use planes", is becoming "How did the engine part land at Church & Murray?".

This subject was discussed mnay moons ago over at Perpitout (Pumpitout for the newbies) much to the amusement of many longer standing memebers on here. You see, Jeff Hill and his cohorts have to create these diversionary threads to maintain the lie and convince the layman that planes were involved.

Next, we will be discussing how singed passports and boarding passes came to rest or why pristine red bandanas were found at Shanksville in a crash that was so violent it destroyed any evidence of human remains? Come on, let's not regress 9 years, please.

Admin - perhaps the posts referring to the location of the engine part can be moved to its own thread?

[simonshack]

Admin - perhaps the posts referring to the location of the engine part can be moved to its own thread?

Done!
Thanks for the good idea, Smokey.

[Gary-Welz]

*

Here is its exact location - (I have inserted the "FLIGHT 175 engine part" onto a current Google Maps view) :

Is that a recent snapshot from Street-view? The red-coloured "roofing" (still?) shows up green on my end.

Green or red?


9/11


It are obviously different pictures so google Street-view differs depending the region you're in - the new pictures might have yet to be included in my neck of the woods.

*Edit

Issue 'solved'

[simonshack]

Is that a recent snapshot from Street-view? The red-coloured "roofing" (still?) shows up green on my end.

Yes, you'll have to go here : http://maps.google.com/maps/place?um=1& ... 4567319947

...and click on the image(at bottom right on that page) featuring the INSIDE VIEW of the Star Pizza joint. Then 'walk out' of the Star Pizza place and look down Church street.