WTC Core Column Lies from NIST

This is it. I will discuss the WTC seperately. But the Pentagon was definitely not hit by a commercial airliner. It was done by , guess what---------------- UAV Global HAwk RQ4a. it is an unmanned vehicle that is pretty skinny compared to a 767, but yet its wingspan can be deceptive for uneducated public. By the way, RQ4a can carry bombs under the wings as well, thus increasing the havoc it was suppossed to wreak. It can fly autonomously and can be preprogrammed to any route. It can land and take off autonomously, as well. What you guys need to do ,is to do a scrupulous research as how many of them were manufactured, and how many can be held track of.

reply to post by Advancedboy


Well there were plane parts at both sites.
Although the approaching planes seem to go unnoticed.
I did not see the South Tower plane on live TV.
One witness gave an account of a plane missing the Empire State
Building so they were pretty determined to hit the North Tower.

ED: The multi floor hit can only be explained away as a doctored
video. Thus we have no video of the hit as in the North Tower.
The north east explosion in the South Tower makes for a plant
if a plane could not traverse all those floors.


[edit on 8/8/2009 by TeslaandLyne]

reply to post by TeslaandLyne


So can you or turbo or anyone explain how they managed to make a hole in the same exact shape, wingspan, and size of a 767? Come on now. or the jet fuel? Or the 767 debris?

Originally posted by Advancedboy
This is it. I will discuss the WTC seperately. But the Pentagon was definitely not hit by a commercial airliner. It was done by , guess what---------------- UAV Global HAwk RQ4a. it is an unmanned vehicle that is pretty skinny compared to a 767, but yet its wingspan can be deceptive for uneducated public. By the way, RQ4a can carry bombs under the wings as well, thus increasing the havoc it was suppossed to wreak. It can fly autonomously and can be preprogrammed to any route. It can land and take off autonomously, as well. What you guys need to do ,is to do a scrupulous research as how many of them were manufactured, and how many can be held track of.

Ok, its almost impossible to point out all the wrong things you just said there. Lets start with the obvious: The Global Hawk is NOT a bomber. It was not designed for carrying bombs. Global Hawks are not designed to carry anything under the wings. I dont know what garbage site you got that from, but it is completely false.

Now I recently saw the Global Hawk at the Dayton US Air Force Museum. You would have to be a totally blind moron to mistake a Global Hawk for an AA 757. Also the Global Hawk doesnt carry as much fuel as a 757. Its also not a twin engined aircraft with engines under the wings.

Please stop with the disinfo.

i would like to come forward the engineers at RollsRoyce , so they could swear to their Queen and approve that the engines that were pulled out of rubbles are their origin. Actually it is quiet simple, even if we don`t have tapes or videos, because they have been confiscated, you can simply get the videos of prior days. Then calculate on average, how many people are at that vicinity at the given day . Starting form people entering subway and ending with a janitor that cleans the floor around the souvenir kiosk on the first floor. An approximate number of people that are around that time in surrounding of 200 meters, could actually be the real eyewitnesses. Then calculate ,what percentage of people could be tracked and `warned of the consequences`. of all the people we still have 5-10 percent who are either missed , or are ready to blow a whistle. Guys, it is quiet simple, the truth tends to follow the money. Follow the path....

global hawk is not a bomber, but was secretly used as a testbed for autonomous bombing raids. Predator UAVs are today used in iraq as well and also can use attached bombs under the wings. Global hawk was pretty much a testbed for the upcoming x-47b/c Although these Hawks RQ4A/ B are used for recce missions the final goal is to consolidate an attack platform with a recce one. And you don`t need 2 engines, especially if only one was recovered from the crash site.

reply to post by Advancedboy


Ah you mean John W. Brown, spokesman for Rolls Royce (Indianapolis)?
His quote: "It is not a part from any Rolls Royce engine that I'm familiar with, and certainly not the AE 3007H made here in Indy"

www.aerospaceweb.org...

The article describes John Brown as a spokesman for Rolls-Royce in Indianapolis, Indiana. This location is home to the Allison Engine factory that builds the AE3007H turbofan used aboard the Global Hawk. Brown's quote regarding the mystery wreckage states that, "It is not a part from any Rolls Royce engine that I'm familiar with, and certainly not the AE 3007H made here in Indy." Furthermore, the article correctly notes that the RB211 is not built in Indianapolis but at the Rolls-Royce plant in Derby, England. Since Brown is a spokesman for Allison Engines, which was an independent company that only became a subsidary of Rolls-Royce in 1995, it stands to reason that an engine built in the United Kingdom would be one he's not "familiar with." The article even goes on to point out that Brown could not identify specific parts from one engine or another since he is not an engineer or assembly line technician who would be familiar with the internal components of turbine engines.

Do you know what the AE 3007H is produced for? A Cessna Citation private jet. Guess what else? Its also used in Global Hawk. So in effect, this guy just debunked your claim of Global Hawk being used there. He is familiar with the engines used for private jets and Global Hawks. Not for 757s.

[edit on 8/8/2009 by GenRadek]

reply to post by Advancedboy


Can you please direct me to a credible source on that claim it was used in autonomous bombing runs?

The X-47B has internal bomb bay doors. If anything, the Global hawk would be used in tandem to locate targets FOR the X-47B.



[edit on 8/8/2009 by GenRadek]

reply to post by Advancedboy


I have also been around the Pentagon this year. Also in the morning. Do you have any idea of the amount of traffic around there? Thousands of potential witnesses. Not a hundred or ten, but thousands. 95% have seen the plane and the impact. Others have seen the impact only. Some only the plane. NONE have seen any magic flyovers.

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by TeslaandLyne

 

So can you or turbo or anyone explain how they managed to make a hole in the same exact shape, wingspan, and size of a 767? Come on now. or the jet fuel? Or the 767 debris?

Explosives might do it.
A nice round hole made by explosive design engineers.
You want I should head up a design team to prove it.
Paid for in government funds that funded the first engineers.
Or could you accept the technology already exists.

Tesla technology exists but hardly any one knows or suspects.
ED: Explosives in the plane. Or otherwise is possible.


[edit on 8/8/2009 by TeslaandLyne]

reply to post by TeslaandLyne


but hang on, why is the debris from the outside pushed into the WTCs? i dont recall seeing explosives on the exterior, did you? And how did they manage to plant all that explosive on the exterior panels in the correct dimensions of the 767s without a soul noticing them doing that?

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by TeslaandLyne

 

but hang on, why is the debris from the outside pushed into the WTCs? i dont recall seeing explosives on the exterior, did you? And how did they manage to plant all that explosive on the exterior panels in the correct dimensions of the 767s without a soul noticing them doing that?

Everything was pushed out on Tower Two.
The plane going in the South Side is questionable.
The motion of the plane going in on the south pushed out all the
fire and pillars out on the north east corner.
I'd say explosives unless another Pentagon 'special' was used
and came in the south to explode inside and push out the north
east corner.

The tower one hole is perhaps the same type plane as the Pentagon.
A good shaped charge to put a hole the size of an airliner.
So that is a push in.
Unless we find the man that says he saw the airliner miss the
Empire State Building.
Then we are back to airliner.

Hey, try the supposed Pentagon plane type in a sneak into the south
on tower two and explode out the north east.
The nose in nose out error on FOX doesn't help but says explosion
inside.

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne


Everything was pushed out on Tower Two.
The plane going in the South Side is questionable.
The motion of the plane going in on the south pushed out all the
fire and pillars out on the north east corner.
I'd say explosives unless another Pentagon 'special' was used
and came in the south to explode inside and push out the north
east corner.

The tower one hole is perhaps the same type plane as the Pentagon.
A good shaped charge to put a hole the size of an airliner.
So that is a push in.
Unless we find the man that says he saw the airliner miss the
Empire State Building.
Then we are back to airliner.

Hey, try the supposed Pentagon plane type in a sneak into the south
on tower two and explode out the north east.
The nose in nose out error on FOX doesn't help but says explosion
inside.

No I am talking about the exterior columns that were impacted INTO the WTC. how did that happen? How did they get pushed in?
If you didnt notice, the South Tower was impacted at a slight angle so the debris ended up going through the NE corner. The plane never hit dead center in a straight line.

Again, explosives would have had to been planted on the exterior columns to do that. AND the jet fuel fireball, how was that managd?

Try to imagine the situation like this. if you were the one involved in setting up these explosions, what would you be most likely doing after the explosions? Right, trying to remove the evidence as fast as possible. What was the evidence there?debris and leftovers of steel structure and beams. Now the question is, where did all those steel beams go, how fast did they go and who was in charge of this? The beams were actually quickly sent to China as scrap metal and melted. Why such a haste? Actually Us is sending huge amounts of scrap metal to China, for a simple reason they sell whatever they can.

Who saw beams pushed in.
Guess I never saw those videos.

Originally posted by GenRadek

No I am talking about the exterior columns that were impacted INTO the WTC. how did that happen? How did they get pushed in?
If you didnt notice, the South Tower was impacted at a slight angle so the debris ended up going through the NE corner. The plane never hit dead center in a straight line.

Again, explosives would have had to been planted on the exterior columns to do that. AND the jet fuel fireball, how was that managd?

Oh the plane hit a lot more central than the explosion that followed.....

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/efb0b3a6d685.jpg[/atsimg]

Care to try and explain this?, yet more bending of the laws of physics and ballistics from the fateful day that science took a back seat.



[edit on 30/07/2009 by Seventh]

reply to post by Seventh


An assymetrical impact would result in an assymetrical outcome. The fuel laden right wing was closest to the outside of the building where the fuel flashed.

Reading the photo caption leads me to believe that this may have been from a no-plane website. You are really reaching.

reply to post by Advancedboy


The last of the steel was removed from Ground Zero, Memorial Day weekend, 2002....over eight months after 9/11/2001. Some of it is STILL at the landfills where ALL of the debris from that day was taken so it could be sorted and studied. Not to mention the large amount of structural steel that is thought to have been key portions of the collapse is stored in a hanger at JFK.

Not to mention that the rest of it did not all go to China. It went to China, India, Canada, Mexico and quite a bit of it stayed right here in the United States.

Originally posted by pteridine

An assymetrical impact would result in an assymetrical outcome. The fuel laden right wing was closest to the outside of the building where the fuel flashed.

Reading the photo caption leads me to believe that this may have been from a no-plane website. You are really reaching.

Look at the picture, the point of impact, the centre of explosion, and tell me who is reaching, the only pure case of asymmetrical`s here is the explosion in comparison to the initial point of impact.

reply to post by Seventh


I did look at the photo. Read my previous post.

Are you now a no-plane supporter?