posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 06:35 PM
Interesting site. But I feel you've missed the point. If the US government planned this attack, they would have had to use planes that were similar -
at least in size / parts / colour etc - to the planes they would later 'claim' were used - commercial airliners. Otherwise - if they used cruise
missiles, for example - it would be far more obvious that commercial airliners didn't hit the Pentagon/WTC than it actually is and hence the
government 'story' would hold no water from the start. What we are left with (in the case of the Pentagon) is wreckage, holes roughly the right
size, bits of engine, bits of fusellage, etc, from - surprise surprise - a 757.
Well, exactly! Of course! No one is going to believe that this is a government cover up BECAUSE there are bits of 757 lying around, which is exactly
what the government would have planned.
It is, therefore, not the absence of 757 that is the problem. It is the absence of bodies, luggage, personnal belongings, and big pieces of easily
identifiable wreckage. The problem is not the absence of 757. It is the absence of COMMERCIAL 757.
If I were planning this attack, and I intended to cover it up, I would have used an American military 757 refuelling plane, painted it red and white
(or whatever), loaded it with jet fuel, mounted an explosive charge in the nose to ignite the fuel on impact, and sent it merrily on its way.
Result, the charge detonates the fuel, ensuring most of the wreckage is burnt beyond recognition, and the big bits that aren't burnt beyond
recognition are those of a 757, and I then later say that everybody on board was incinerated, hence the lack of bodies/personal effects etc.
That's what I'd do, if I were a nutter. Ask yourself, purely speculatively, what would you do?
Then watch IN PLANE SITE.