The ridiculous "PLANE PARTS evidence"

[pov603]

OK, an airplane slices into the south wall of the south tower WTC2 at 500 mph and stops inside except one engine and one landing gear wheel, which continue through the north wall + smoke trails and the engine lands as shown above in a crowded street and nobody gets hurt. All jet fuel arriving at 500 mph also stops inside tower high up, ignites and produces a FIREBALL! Soon after NYPD arrives and fences off the engine landing area, while people continues walking around, buying (eating!) pizzas, phoning, shopping, etc. I like the fat mama walking in the middle of the street prior fencing off. She hasn't eating cooked food for years, just chips and chips, etc. and is too busy to observe action around her. An average US observer?

The 'fat lady' is like the bow-legged Chinese Illusionist who used to make the Round fishtank appear with live fish from 'thin air' whereas in reality he used to have to act bow-legged all his working life because it was between his legs that he would carry the fish tank on 'working' days.
The 'fat lady' is really a size '0' but has been preparing for this very event at the behest of TPTB by having to carry an aircraft 'engine' at oppportune times and then 'deposit' same engine and move on unnoticed!
She may also have been in the crowd at the site of 'Flight 93'!

[hoi.polloi]

Ehh, probably not. But that's a funny idea.

[pov603]

Ehh, probably not. But that's a funny idea.

I had better qualify that what I said was in jest!

[AnonymousTruther2]

Here we have someone who complains that nobody in TV Fakery Research would look at his new WTC "declassified" video.
This troll (same name on YT) says it's proof of NON-fakery. He says jumpers are real, jet sounds are real , and there's plane debris falling in the street.


Let's see this crappy video.
http://vimeo.com/29084672

First, there's always cuts of videos and sound. It's all edited. Nothing "raw".

1:14 The ONLY TIME the camera seems to be able to clearly see the towers from the WAY TOO dark street to the sky, on the green screen WITHOUT the "white sky", "invisible Towers, "flickering Towers" and "Ghost Towers".

1:19 "Flickering Tower"

1:35 Dark to Light Streets, "White Sky" and "Invisible Towers" to "Ghost Towers".

2:30 Fake jumpers and "flickering Towers" and ALWAYS the VERY odd deep blue sky.

4:10 Fake jumpers and still horribly wrong images of the Towers.

4:52 The "Second Strike".... horrible fake sound coming from nowhere.

5:04 DEBRIS FALLING DOWN all around the cameraman!

5:38 We can see a perfect equal reflection of the Towers on a "window/mirror".
Are we supposed to believe this angle is REAL!???

5:47 The ridiculous plane parts in the streets! HAHAHAHAHAHA! Seriously? It's like 4-5 blocks away too, if not more, idk!

5:55 Still the creepy dark streets of Manhattan.
The only people that seem "excited" are the people behind the camera.

6:09 Towers color change for no reason. Except it's 9/11, that must be why... just like physics, reality took a day off.

6:43 Bizarre cut! Followed by the "white sky" and "invisible Towers".

6:59 Cut! Actor! Cut!

7:40 The really haunted "Ghost Towers". MUCH like what we saw at 1:35!

The rest is a repetition to try to "prove" plane parts, jumpers, and planes.

[Equinox]

Here we have someone who complains that nobody in TV Fakery Research would look at his new WTC "declassified" video.
This troll (same name on YT) says it's proof of NON-fakery. He says jumpers are real, jet sounds are real , and there's plane debris falling in the street.


Let's see this crappy video.
http://vimeo.com/29084672

First, there's always cuts of videos and sound. It's all edited. Nothing "raw".

1:14 The ONLY TIME the camera seems to be able to clearly see the towers from the WAY TOO dark street to the sky, on the green screen WITHOUT the "white sky", "invisible Towers, "flickering Towers" and "Ghost Towers".

1:19 "Flickering Tower"

1:35 Dark to Light Streets, "White Sky" and "Invisible Towers" to "Ghost Towers".

2:30 Fake jumpers and "flickering Towers" and ALWAYS the VERY odd deep blue sky.

4:10 Fake jumpers and still horribly wrong images of the Towers.

4:52 The "Second Strike".... horrible fake sound coming from nowhere.

5:04 DEBRIS FALLING DOWN all around the cameraman!

5:38 We can see a perfect equal reflection of the Towers on a "window/mirror".
Are we supposed to believe this angle is REAL!???

5:47 The ridiculous plane parts in the streets! HAHAHAHAHAHA! Seriously? It's like 4-5 blocks away too, if not more, idk!

5:55 Still the creepy dark streets of Manhattan.
The only people that seem "excited" are the people behind the camera.

6:09 Towers color change for no reason. Except it's 9/11, that must be why... just like physics, reality took a day off.

6:43 Bizarre cut! Followed by the "white sky" and "invisible Towers".

6:59 Cut! Actor! Cut!

7:40 The really haunted "Ghost Towers". MUCH like what we saw at 1:35!

The rest is a repetition to try to "prove" plane parts, jumpers, and planes.

"Here we have someone who complains that nobody in TV Fakery Research would look at his new WTC "declassified".

Wrong, For a start the video is not "new" is a video that been around for YEARS and is attribited to Bartvanbelle,
Secondly, the video has been looked at and already proven faked... YEARS AGO!!!!

So much so I have already gone through and archived the fake frames to the exact second.
I believe I made a copy of this archiving on my thread at lets roll ...
Ahhh here it is http://letsrollforums.com/showpost.php? ... tcount=313
3rd of september I archived that...


"BART's" video

Another video by one "Bart Van Belle" also turns out to be crafted with digital imagery technology...(Surprise, surprise! )
It's the same video which shows a lot of JUMPERS falling down from the WTC towers. http://septemberclues.info/jumpers.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Blue streak
- 0.21

Bart Van Belle's video (which was released only in 2007) looks pretty realistic at a first viewing - yet at closer inspection THIS is what "Bart's Manhattan" looks like:


For the next analysis, I really need your utmost attention. The below sequence (featuring a "Manhattan Demolition" truck
passing in front of "Bart's" view of the burning WTC) shows a reflection in the cabin window. Let's look at it:


Big red demo truck....
- 9.24

"Bart's video camera" then shows us this scenery - right after the "Manhattan Demolition truck" has passed in front of his camera:




3d rendering flaws-
9.13

Here's how it compares to a 9/11 TV scenery shown on ABC:



PERPspectives..
- 9.13 minutes.
+
09.53--- 9/11 tv archives ABC (05.33- 06.14)
http://www.archive.org/details/abc200109111733-1814

And here's how it compares with a recent Google street view (large picture):


Building "A" is a total disaster: it is huge and doesn't look even remotely like the real thing!

The Youtube troll literally shot itself in the foot from the very start claiming this is "new declassified" footage and claming ddoesn't know who the alleged "cameraman" is.... It is"bartvanbelle" Its an extremely popular piece of 9/11 footage that has been seen in history documentries. I watched it on a history channel documnetry on my TV along time ago

It was released 2007!!

NEXT!!!

[Equinox]

FIRESTONE DEMOLITION TIRES TM

LoL Thats awesome work! love the firestone tires add. !

[Equinox]

Officials said that Flight 93's flight data recorder (FDR) and cockpit voice recorder (CVR) were recovered at Shanksville.
They said the FDR was recovered 15ft underground at 4:45 pm on 9/13 and the CVR was found 25ft underground at 8:25 pm on 9/14.


“The black boxes were 15ft and 25ft into the ground.”

If Flight 93 didn't crash in Shanksville, then these black boxes must have been planted.
Some will be skeptical and will ask for evidence that the boxes were planted.

The photos of Flight 93's alleged black boxes were released in April 2006 after the Zacarias Moussaoui trial ended.


Were these photos that crucial to the prosecution’s case that we had to wait four long years to see them???

The website these photos are posted at lists the “squared-shaped” box as the CVR...


and the “cylinder-shaped” one as the FDR...


However, when the NTSB released their data analysis on the FDR, they show the FDR as the squared-shaped one, not the cylinder-shaped one as the Moussaoui site has it.


(NTSB shows the squared-shaped box as the FDR.)


(Moussaoui site shows the cylinder-shaped one as the FDR.)

So either the Moussaoui site, or the NTSB have the pictures of the FDR and CVR mixed.

The day before the first black box was allegedly found, investigators and U.S. Rep. John Murtha said that one or both of the boxes might have been crushed by the impact or incinerated by the jet fuel-fed inferno.

Wait a minute?

What inferno???


And how does fire exist under a sealed crater?


The plane also supposedly crashed into dirt that was described as "soft" and "spongy".
So doesn't it seem a tad strange that they would comment that the black boxes might have been destroyed by impacting “soft soil” or burning up in a non-existent inferno?

The CVR was supposedly found 10ft deeper in the ground the day after the FDR was.
How did the CVR manage to burrow so much deeper when both boxes are located next to each other in the tail section?



So with officials saying the boxes might have been destroyed by “soft dirt” or an inferno that didn’t exist and the CVR which allegedly recorded the terrorist’s voices found a day later because it burrowed so much deeper, kinda makes you wonder about these “recovered” black boxes, huh?

Take a look at the black boxes themselves…
How do we know that a pair of black boxes weren’t taken from a previous plane crash and those were used to stage these photos?



Now take a close look at the squared-shaped black box…

Did you notice how it was propped up nicely on a piece of metal to be level for the shot?


And notice all the wires around it too…


Kinda makes the photo look more convincing, doesn’t it?!
By the way, this would be the ONLY photo from the scene that shows any wires from the alleged plane crash.
Also, did you notice that only the labeled part of the black box was photographed?


The photo wouldn't have quite the same effect if just the other half was shown...


So what happened to the rest of the built-to-last black box? Surely it didn't just disappear.
And what's with this piece of wood in the crater???


Now take a look at the cylinder-shaped black box…
How do we know it wasn't put on the ground at some other location and photographed?
Notice how it was placed by some rocks along with a small piece of twisted metal nicely tucked underneath...


Is that twisted piece of metal aluminum from a plane, or just a piece of tin?


So was it placed by some rocks with a piece of scrap metal tucked underneath too again, make the photo look more convincing?
As with the squared box, notice that only the main labeled part was photographed...



So it just a coincidence that BOTH bottom sections of the boxes are missing and only the labeled parts are photographed to make the photos look all the more dramatic?


Also, have you ever seen black boxes from a crash scene photographed like these were?

We were told that Flight 93 crashed at a whopping 580mph and burrowed down deep into “soft dirt”…


Well if that’s so, then why isn’t there any dirt on the black boxes after they supposedly burrowed so far through dirt?


Did you notice there is no fire damage either?

One last thing...
After the alleged FDR was sent back to the NTSB for analysis their report mentions the manufacturer of the FDR: Allied-Signal



You can also tell it's an Allied-Signal because you can still make out one of the letters on its damaged label...


The NTSB released the transcript from Flight 93's alleged CVR, but never mentioned who the manufacturer was.
United Airlines Flight 93 went into service in 1996.

The CVR from Flight 93 should be by the same maker as the FDR: Allied-Signal

[Equinox]

When a plane crashes the tail section usually survives.


Sometimes fully.


Sometimes partially.


And even in very violent crashes where nothing looks to be left...



the tail still survives.




► Uncontrolled Descent and Collision With Terrain, United Airlines Flight 585
"The size of the impact crater measured approximately 39 feet by 24 feet and was about 15 feet deep.
The vertical stabilizer and rudder were in the impact crater, damaged severely by impact and fire.
The horizontal stabilizer was in the crater, in pieces and severely burned. The horizontal stabilizer parts were located at the top of the pile of destroyed airplane debris." – NTSB


On a Boeing 757, the tail section is HUGE.


So that begs the question:
What happened to Flight 93's tail section???



Some official story-huggers think they know the answer.
They say that since Flight 93 flipped and crashed going really, really fast...



that caused the plane to plow mostly underground...

"80% of the plane was in the crater."
- UA93 Memorial ambassador

in which the tail struck the ground really, really hard, thereby causing it to shatter into a million little pieces too small to be seen from a distance.

Wow!
Can you imagine what the ground that was described as:

► On Hallowed Ground
"To the casual eye, it looked like solid, consolidated ground but in reality the reclaimed expanse was loose and uncompacted. When flight 93 hit the ground..." - The Age (09/09/02)

Is a massive Boeing 757'tail shattering against the ground going to look like a fragile wine glass dropped on a hard surface?!




You would think that a huge visible mark would be left in the "loose and uncompacted" soil just like the marks the wings supposedly made...





and not some perfect imprint of itself like you see in the cartoons.



I mean that would just be ridiculous to believe!
So that begs another question:

Why IS there a "Wile E. Coyote" tail imprint in the ground?






WTF???
Who would have thought that a Boeing 757's tail would leave a near-exact impression of itself after striking loose dirt so hard that it was essentially obliterated by it?

Maybe its tail acted like a Samurai sword instead and sliced cleanly through the ground like we are supposed to believe Flight 175's tail did through the South WTC Tower's steel facade?




Well apparently not because whatever made that "tail imprint" in that Shanksville field didn't even penetrate through the ground!





Well so much for the Samurai sword theory.


So how in the world could Flight 93's tail slam down so hard against loose soil that it shatters against it like a dropped wine glass, but looks as if it was just lowered down on its edge thereby leaving a faint impression of itself in the grass from its own weight?


Could it be that this "tail imprint" is something else and just by chance looks like a tail imprint?
Well I suppose, but is it just another coincidence that there is another imprint in the ground that looks to have come from the left horizontal stabilizer?







Of course that begs yet another question:

Did Flight 93 suffer from "taco neck"?




Maybe Flight 93 kept spinning on its right-side as it burrowed into the ground causing the right tail to strike in the imprint created by the right wing?
Well not according to the NTSB’s flight path animation as it shows Flight 93 spinning slightly back to the left before it supposedly hit.



But something else really proves that the right tail didn't strike inside the right wing's imprint.

The ground!





So we have quite a mystery here.
How can Flight 93's tail section do this:



Yet only leave this:

[SmokingGunII]

The one thing missing from Killtown's analysis you show, Equinox, is the fact that a plane allegedly travellling at the speeds it was, at sea level would have broken up long before it hit the ground. We know from other plane crashes that a fuselage will normally break into sections when colliding with the ground, which is why the tail fin normally survives in some shape or form.

Out of the three crash locations, Shanksville is the easiest one to convince the non-researcher of duplicity. Strangely, in the UK, many people are still unaware of this plane crash, despite the efforts of Hollywood to promote the myth.

[Equinox]

The one thing missing from Killtown's analysis you show, Equinox, is the fact that a plane allegedly travellling at the speeds it was, at sea level would have broken up long before it hit the ground. We know from other plane crashes that a fuselage will normally break into sections when colliding with the ground, which is why the tail fin normally survives in some shape or form.

Yes I have a long time tried to find the actual factual proof of the sea level speeds, something that actually show what really would happen. I think Simon put it very well in his movie... "would Boeing let us know?" ..... well I did send a proper letter to Boeing tech deparment about 3 months ago and suprise suprise .. still no answer.

Out of the three crash locations, Shanksville is the easiest one to convince the non-researcher of duplicity. Strangely, in the UK, many people are still unaware of this plane crash, despite the efforts of Hollywood to promote the myth.

Yes the above analysis by KT was what first got me into the 9/11 no plane, stuff about half a year before I watched sept/clues, ( I placed it up here with re- uploaded photos for a historical reference in case his site ever stopped)

UA 93 is def a great smoking gun, Another classic example of why building 7 is a distraction for them... Not many people in UK no about it? no way! here in australia everyone knows about it
mind you the BBC archives do not show much on UA 93 that morning.

Now we have covered flights 175,11, 93 we should get a couple of posts up of flight 77 wreckage . Just a suggestion

[reel.deal]

.

[Equinox]

reel can you link the posts on the burnt out cars you did, you know the ones with the same cop car!

[reel.deal]

.

[whatsgoingon]

..

[reel.deal]

.