Food for Thought: WTC Was Designed to Withstand Direct Impact from a 707 (vid)

Quote from JohnnyK:

Here's a Boeing 767 being used as a military tanker. No windows. Color grey.
Sounds like the description given by an eye witness of the first plane that crashed into the WTC.
 
Quote from JohnnyK:

Here's a Boeing 767 without any extra equipment on the underside of it's belly.
<b>Extra equipment? You mean like what's under the 767 on this pic</b>
<img src="http://www.letsroll911.net/images/Newsday12thLrg.jpg"/>
<b>or this pic</b>
<img src="http://www.letsroll911.net/images/fuss.gif"/>
<b>or this one</b>
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20030907_911_VIDEO/"><img src="http://www.letsroll911.net/images/Exhibit-175-1F-NYTimes.bmp"></a>

And many more photos...
 
Also, the big hole under the tail of this 767 only exists on tankers that have been refitted with their high-speed boom removed.
<img src="http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/images/picture/dov_zakhiem_and_911_3.jpg"/>
 
Tail of a 767 tanker:
<img src="http://photos.airliners.net/photos/middle/1/8/2/0861281.jpg"/>

Commercial 767's don't have a hole. Boeing 767-300 (series 300 is matches the size of the plane crashing into thw WTC):
<img src="http://photos.airliners.net/photos/middle/4/0/1/1026104.jpg"/>
 
Quote from steveosborne:

Also, the big hole under the tail of this 767 only exists on tankers that have been refitted with their high-speed boom removed.
<img src="http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/images/picture/dov_zakhiem_and_911_3.jpg"/>


don't you know anything.. that is a female plane.
 
Quote from bronks:

You brought up NIST.
NIST this, NIST that...so now when I quote something directly from them which has a direct bearing on our subject, you go off and make an excuse and start quoting something else.

To your convenience of course.[/B][/QUOTE]

Look it up. The hasty removal and export of almost all WTC debris is a matter of public record.

Fire Engineering Magazine went so far as to castigate Giuliani several times for authorizing the expeditious export of WTC debris before a comprehensive forensic analysis could be done.

Giulianis' excuse? Parenthetically - computer models provide a faster/simplified method to conduct forensic structural analysis; absolving the need to employ 'outdated' investigative techniques that actually mandate the examination of physical evidence.

Of course, computer failure models are only as accurate as the failure assumptions on which they are built.

Which makes them hopelessly tied to the biases of their programmers (and the public at large) and precludes any semblance of a independent investigation.





.
Quote from bronks:

..like talking to a box of rocks.

Look whose talking.
 
problem I see with all of this is NOTHING will ever be done no matter how hard the evidence is to convince even 100% of the public that the government's theory is not correct......


Nobody will EVER EVER EVER re-open the case and DEMAND answers..

what ya gunna do??? write your congressman??

BWAAHAHAHHAHAHA


its a shame .. truly is.. but nothing can be done imo
 
way too many blindly follow da 'leader' and drink all da piss comin' from his cock [and maybe somthin' else] and those who have doubts don't have da balls to question, on top of that all the agencies that could be involved into a possible enquiry would be easly corrupted with threats'n'money...

yes, agreed, no hope.
 
Back
Top