Israeli involvement in 9/11 and spying on the U.S.

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

Robert Wagner wrote:You are thinking of the relative hardness (scratch resistance) of steel and aluminum, which would be an issue if the plane were used as a cutting tool. You should be thinking of tensile strength of steel pipes, because the plane was used as a hammer or projectile. Here is an example, which is pretty close to what happened. Suppose you build a table whose legs are four wooden dowels half an inch in diameter. You put a thousand pounds of stuff on the table top and the legs hold. That's because wood has high compression strength, or what engineers call bulk modulus. Now hit one of the table legs in the middle with a hammer. It breaks and the table tips over. Note that it breaks as easily with a hardened steel hammer as with a rubber hammer. In both cases, the breaking is a function of the hammer's mass times velocity squared, not its hardness. You're not cutting the dowel, you're stretching it until it breaks. Wood has low tensile strength, which engineers call Young's modulus. If you wanted to make table legs resistant to a blow from the side, you would have used thin steel I-beams. You didn't because the engineering spec talked about supporting weight, not resisting blows from the side. Notice the hammer's velocity is squared. If you could increase the hammer's speed from 20 mph to 600 mph, it wouldn't be 30 times stronger, it would be 900 times stronger. If you could move a two pound hammer at 1,000 feet per second, it would be equivalent to swinging a one ton hammer. Do you imagine a one ton hammer could break a 30 foot steel pipe? Consider that a Boeing 767 is a 400,000 pound hammer. Weren't the WTC buildings built to withstand an airplane crash? Yes, but that tensile strength is in the central core, not the peripheral frame. The spec didn't say the plane would bounce off, it said the building wouldn't topple nor collapse on itself. It didn't .. not from the plane crash. Robert, it sounds like you're saying the same type of thing as if you were to say that you could punch a hole in the engine block of a car if you can just punch it hard enough and fast enough. Your fist wouldn't go through. Aluminum planes crash into steel-framed buildings. They don't slice into them like a knife through butter. It doesn't happen. Also, your table analogy isn't on point. Those towers were built to withstand airplane impacts. The legs of a table aren't meant to withstand a sideways blow from a hammer. Those towers, as you agree, were built to withstand airplane impacts. The planes in the videos don't even slow down on impact. This is your first indication that they are fake planes...fake images. Aluminum doesn't win against steel. It just doesn't. Even if the planes could have somehow penetrated, which they could not have, notice that the wings didn't snap off, the tail sections don't come off, the planes don't slow down at all, and most of all, different networks show the planes coming in conflicting directions. Here are a couple of clips from a documentary called "9/11 Mysteries" where they actually interview the designers of the buildings. Look at the size of the steel that made up the perimeter of those WTC towers. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwayjX4i ... ipFcRobert Wagner wrote: There is a foolproof way to coordinate media -- make it happen in reality. It has the additional benefit of agreement between media reports and eyewitnesses, plus they don't have to kill snitches. The evidence shows that what the media showed us was video fakery. Whether they were all getting their information from one source or not is something I can't answer. What I do know is that what they showed was fake. I don't know if you're aware of this or not, but I also posted links right from those major media sources just in case someone like you might question whether the documentaries are showing the actual news footage.Robert Wagner wrote:Here is evidence: scientists find active nano-thermite in WTC dust gathered from multiple sites.http://www.bentham.org/open/tocpj/artic ... .pdfTurner Construction had offices in the basement of WTC 1, did extensive refurbishing on structural beams in elevator shafts and also fireproofing sprayed on beams. It was one of the contractors who hauled away wreckage. It has extensive experience with demolition, often works with Controlled Demolitions Inc (CDI), does classified work for DoD, and is the only source for nano-thermite in NYC. Its CEO in 2001 was Tom Lepper, who went on to become mayor of Dallas and was named to President's Commission on White House Fellows by George Bush.I don't buy into the "nano-thermite" issue either. I think it's another false lead that a good number of 9/11 truthers out there are buying into. I've never even heard of "nano-thermite." I've heard of thermite, but not "nano-thermite." I think it's a false lead. When I post the following link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLKYr5hA6s8) and ask you if this looks like a "power dive" to you, you say...Robert Wagner wrote:You are seeing the tail end of a power dive, after it leveled off. A bicycle can't go faster than 30 mph on level ground (without drafting), but it can easily hit 60 mph coasting down a steep hill. After it hits level ground at the bottom of the hill, it will continue going 60 mph for awhile. Descending 10,000 feet per minute is a 20% grade. One of the steepest LONG roads in the US descends 5,000 feet in 10 miles, from Cloudcroft to Alamogordo NM. That's only 10%. (I've done it several times.) The steepest roads in San Francisco are less than 20%. Pittsburgh and Los Angeles have a few short roads over 20%. They have stairways instead of sidewalks.The plane was in a steep dive expressly to build up speed greater than it could achieve in level flight. Remember, the speed of the hammer is squared. You're making up cartoon physics here now. The reason a bicycle continues going fast from going downhill to level ground is completely different from an airplane coming out of a "power dive" and then leveling off and continuing at an impossible speed in level flight. It just doesn't happen. Boeing 767s cannot go 500+ mph while flying horizontally anywhere close to sea level. It just doesn't happen. Even if they did do a power dive, the news footage doesn't even show that. It shows the plane or planes coming in basically horizontally. THIS is a power to you? Your making up physics here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLKYr5hA6s8Robert Wagner wrote:You just said we can't believe news coverage. Those were cartoon planes, remember? Boeing 767s cannot go 500+ miles per hour in level flight anywhere close to sea level. If NIST and FEMA and whatever other "authorities" say that Boeing 767s can fly 500+ miles per hour in level flight at sea level, they're lying to you. Those plane images certainly WERE fake. They have to be. Robert Wagner wrote:FAA knew AA11 was hijacked at 8:20, because a flight attendant told them. They notified NORAD at 8:38, 18 minutes later. Fighters were scrambled from Otis at 8:46, same time WTC 1 was hit, airborne at 8:53.FAA suspected UAL175 was hijacked at 8:47, because it changed transponder code and flight path. They notified NORAD at 9:03, 16 minutes later, same time the plane hit WTC 2. FAA knew AA77 was hijacked at 8:47. They notified NORAD/NEADS at 9:34, 38 minutes later, when NEADS called THEM to ask whether they had missing planes. The plane hit the Pentagon at 9:37 or 9:32, depending on whom you believe. FAA suspected UAL93 was hijacked at 9:28. They called NORAD at 10:07, 39 minutes later, 4 minutes after the plane had already crashed in Shanksville. Fighters were launched from Langley at 9:30, but no one told them where to go nor what to look for. So they flew their training route over the Atlantic Ocean until someone told them what to do at 10:00. With government like this, diversionary exercises and stand-downs proved to be superfluous.So, you don't see anything strange in any of this? You're going to just buy the idea that the Air Force and the authorities who control our air defenses just made a mistake? I don't buy it. Interestingly, you're pushing the nano-thermite idea and not supporting what you can see with your own eyes (evidence of fake planes and Israeli involvement). There is a lot more evidence of 9/11 being an Israeli false flag operation involving rogue factions of our government and the mainstream media. In my opinion, 9/11 truthers who are misled (or who are intentionally misleading others) push the "nano-thermite" idea and they poo-poo the fake plane idea as well as poo-poo and viciously attack anyone who brings up evidence of 9/11 being an Israeli operation. The evidence is very clear. What is the political/religious affiliation of people who basically dominate the media in this country? These are the same people who won't expose their own even when they commit crimes. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qxzZY4J ... JjSzXkm55o

[Robert Wagner]

Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Robert, it sounds like you're saying the same type of thing as if you were to say that you could punch a hole in the engine block of a car if you can just punch it hard enough and fast enough.Do you think it's possible to cut steel with high speed water .. not water carrying abrasives, just plain water? "A waterjet is a tool used in machine shops to cut metal parts with a (very) high-pressure stream of water. As amazing as it sounds, if you get water flowing fast enough it can actually cut metal."http://science.howstuffworks.com/enviro ... tmPasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Those towers, as you agree, were built to withstand airplane impacts. The planes in the videos don't even slow down on impact.Here are a couple of clips from a documentary called "9/11 Mysteries" where they actually interview the designers of the buildings. Look at the size of the steel that made up the perimeter of those WTC towers. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwayjX4ipFcThe video shows an analogy of a pencil puncturing a screen. It doesn't say planes would bounce off.Peripheral columns were 14 inch box sections made of A36 steel of varying thickness, thinner toward the top. Tensile strength where planes hit was 30,000 psi. Breaking point can be calculated and tested, you can't tell by looking. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:I don't buy into the "nano-thermite" issue either. I think it's another false lead that a good number of 9/11 truthers out there are buying into. I've never even heard of "nano-thermite." I've heard of thermite, but not "nano-thermite." I think it's a false lead. Your "evidence" proving nano-thermite doesn't exist is that you never heard of it. Encyclopedia publishers could save lots of money by deleting everything you never heard of. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:You're making up cartoon physics here now. The reason a bicycle continues going fast from going downhill to level ground is completely different from an airplane coming out of a "power dive" and then leveling off and continuing at an impossible speed in level flight. No, it's exactly the same . Aerodynamic drag is the speed limiting factor for bicycles and airplanes. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote: Even if they did do a power dive, the news footage doesn't even show that. It shows the plane or planes coming in basically horizontally. Of course Jew media didn't show how they did it. Besides, news footage was fake. Whoever Photoshopped planes, got the speed wrong. You have to admit planes looked realistic. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Interestingly, you're pushing the nano-thermite idea and not supporting what you can see with your own eyes (evidence of fake planes and Israeli involvement). I'm pushing physical evidence. You offer conjecture, not evidence. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:The evidence is very clear. What is the political/religious affiliation of people who basically dominate the media in this country? These are the same people who won't expose their own even when they commit crimes. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qxzZY4J ... Xkm55oYour "very clear evidence" is Jew bashing videos that say nothing about 9/11.

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

Robert Wagner wrote:Do you think it's possible to cut steel with high speed water .. not water carrying abrasives, just plain water? "A waterjet is a tool used in machine shops to cut metal parts with a (very) high-pressure stream of water. As amazing as it sounds, if you get water flowing fast enough it can actually cut metal."http://science.howstuffworks.com/enviro ... .htmYou're using the same kind of argument style that all those experts used to explain the magic bullet theory. LOLThose planes that hit the towers were NOT in a power dive as you claim. The videos show that they were not a in a power dive. You even admitted that they were not in a power dove. The other issue is that Boeing 767s cannot fly 500+ mph in level flight anywhere near sea level. So, I don't care about water cutting metal. There was no power dive (as evidenced by any video footage available), and Boeing 767s CANNOT fly 500+ mph at anywhere near sea level in level flight.You seem to be using the same argument as if you were saying that if you can just punch an engine block fast enough and hard enough you just might poke a hole through it. It doesn't happen. Your fist would smash against it. Your argument contradicts what you say. It's like a circular argument you're making. First you agree that Boeing 767s cannot fly 500+ mph anywhere near sea level in level flight. Then you claim that the planes were in a "power dive" and that THAT is how they exceeded their flying capabilities. Then I reference the video footage showing the planes coming in basically horizontally and not in a power dive. Then you agree that they were not in a power dive, and then you claim that they were maintaining the same "power dive" speed after having come OUT of a power dive. Then you change the subject and bring up water cutting metal. You're grasping at straws now.Robert Wagner wrote:The video shows an analogy of a pencil puncturing a screen. It doesn't say planes would bounce off.Nice try on that one. The pencil analogy was used in that video to explain the intricate steel frame perimeter of the building. It had a massive core of steel columns, and the perimeter was also steel too, and even if a plane DID puncture it, it would have been as effective as poking a hole through a screen door with a pencil. That's the use of the pencil-through-the-screen-door analogy in the documentary. You're misrepresenting the information. Robert Wagner wrote:Peripheral columns were 14 inch box sections made of A36 steel of varying thickness, thinner toward the top. Tensile strength where planes hit was 30,000 psi. Breaking point can be calculated and tested, you can't tell by looking. Again, those towers were designed to withstand airplane impacts, and, if I remember correctly, they were built with the idea of the largest commercial jet hitting them at the time they were built, which I think was the Boeing 707. They were even designed to withstand hurricane winds. Robert Wagner wrote:Your "evidence" proving nano-thermite doesn't exist is that you never heard of it. Encyclopedia publishers could save lots of money by deleting everything you never heard of. Woops. Allow me to explain my comment. I've never heard of nano-thermite in the context of building demolitions. Robert Wagner wrote:No, it's exactly the same . Aerodynamic drag is the speed limiting factor for bicycles and airplanes. Aerodynamic drag? LOLYour analogy is NOT "exactly the same." You're trying to say that a commercial jet (like a Boeing 767) going 500+ mph in a "power dive" can level off and still maintain that impossible speed in level flight being "exactly the same" as a bicycle that is traveling downhill and continuing from that hill onto level ground at a very high speed. They are not exactly the same, and you know it. In the bicycle example, the ground that the bicycle is traveling on is the biggest difference between the two scenarios. They are not "exactly the same." They are very different scenarios. Maybe you shouldn't have dropped out of high school as you said earlier, eh? Robert Wagner wrote:Of course Jew media didn't show how they did it. Besides, news footage was fake. Whoever Photoshopped planes, got the speed wrong. You have to admit planes looked realistic. The media showed what they wanted us to think happened. They got the speed wrong and they got the physics of airplane crashes wrong too. Those fake planes that they created on video also look like crap once you examine them. Robert Wagner wrote:I'm pushing physical evidence. You offer conjecture, not evidence. You have it exactly backwards. When I say that the planes are fake images, I gave MANY EXAMPLES in the form of documentaries and actual news footage. I provide actual analysis. That is called backing my claim. When you claim that a commercial jet can exceed 500+ mph anywhere close to sea level while flying in level flight, you're not providing any evidence at all. You even claimed those planes that hit the buildings exceeded their speed capabilities at sea level because they were in a power dive, but the news videos don't show what you claim at all. So, you have it exactly backwards. You're the one offering conjecture and no evidence.Your examples (such as hitting the leg of a table with a hammer being the same as the planes hitting the towers) are not even close to being on point. Remember? The legs of tables are not designed to withstand sideways blows from hammers. In your "aerodynamic drag" example, you tried to somehow prove that a plane in a "power dive" can somehow continue at the same impossible speed after it is leveled out. You said it was just a like a bicycle going downhill and continuing on level ground at break-neck speed. That's probably the most silly thing I've heard you say. It's conjecture on your part with NO evidence. So, you have it exactly backwards. I'm the one offering evidence, and you're the one offering conjecture.Robert Wagner wrote:Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:The evidence is very clear. What is the political/religious affiliation of people who basically dominate the media in this country? These are the same people who won't expose their own even when they commit crimes. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qxzZY4J ... Xkm55oYour "very clear evidence" is Jew bashing videos that say nothing about 9/11.I'm not Jew bashing. How about you back up your claim? Where have I said that Jews are bad people.Again, you have everything perfectly backwards. You accuse me of Jew bashing, which I never did, and then you attack my ethnic background in earlier posts. You can't have it both ways and try to remain credible. You can't accuse someone of "Jew bashing" and then bash another ethnic group (like you did with Italians) and remain credible. When I put you to task for bashing Italians, you passed it off like it was a joke. It shows that you're a hypocrite. Also, accusing someone of "Jew bashing" with no proof makes you a liar too. So, you are making hypocritical statements and making false statements as well. You accuse me of conjecture and presenting no evidence regarding the issue of Israeli involvement in 9/11, but I offer lots of evidence to it. You also claim that those links I presented are "Jew bashing." It seems that you're making things up now. Here are those links again for the rest of you.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qxzZY4J ... ew-bashing? You appear to be the bigot. You're the one who started bashing Italians. I never said, nor would I ever say, that Jews are bad people. This whole topic that I started is called "Israeli Involvement In 9/11 and Spying on the U.S." I present, and so do others here, evidence of Israeli involvement in 9/11 and spying on the U.S. There are also Jews who don't agree with what the state of Israel does either. There ARE Jews who are not Zionist and who are against the state of Israel. Are THEY "Jew-bashers" too? I've heard self-righteous hypocrites like you actually call those Jews (who don't agree with Israeli policy) "self-hating" Jews. Here is a website started by some of those Jews who are against Zionism and Israel.http://jewsagainstzionism.com/People like you have no problem at all talking about Italian mafia. Then when someone talks about evidence regarding a Jewish or Israeli-based mafia, people like you claim it's Jew-bashing. You're the one who did and is still doing the name calling here, not me. I'm beginning to think that you actually are Jewish and just taking it personally. I don't care what your ethnicity is because I'm not racist like that. If you're hiding your Jewishness, that's on you. It doesn't matter me. If you are Jewish and are just taking this personally, you need to just admit it and move on. Besides, accusing me of "Jew bashing" also doesn't refute the evidence. It's just you pulling the "race card" which is typical of people like you who have no argument. When all else fails, it seems that people like you pull the "race card" and accuse people like me of being racist or whatever.

[Robert Wagner]

Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote: It's like a circular argument you're making. First you agree that Boeing 767s cannot fly 500+ mph anywhere near sea level in level flight. Then you claim that the planes were in a "power dive" and that THAT is how they exceeded their flying capabilities. Then I reference the video footage showing the planes coming in basically horizontally and not in a power dive. Then you agree that they were not in a power dive, and then you claim that they were maintaining the same "power dive" speed after having come OUT of a power dive. Then you change the subject and bring up water cutting metal. You're grasping at straws now.UAL175 was going 600 mph (520 knows) when it hit WTC 2. Similar speed measurements came from two professionals using radar data and several amateurs who timed it passing known landmarks on videos. If you insist that's impossible, you're denying reality. If we're going to figure this out, we must explain how it was done, not bury our heads in the sand and deny it happened. Radar data (which I posted twice) shows it was done with a 10,000 feet per minute power dive. The plane's speed and descent are verifiable facts, not conjecture nor media lies. If you can't deal with facts, you discredit the CT movement. It is worth pointing out that controlling a commercial plane at that speed is very difficult, like driving a semi at 120 mph. It's not something a typical commercial pilot can do well, much less the Arab patsies. When experienced pilots tried it on a simulator (yes, they could get speed up to 600 mph), they kept missing the WTC. Whoever flew the plane was a ace. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Robert Wagner wrote:No, it's exactly the same . Aerodynamic drag is the speed limiting factor for bicycles and airplanes. Aerodynamic drag? LOLYour analogy is NOT "exactly the same." You're trying to say that a commercial jet (like a Boeing 767) going 500+ mph in a "power dive" can level off and still maintain that impossible speed in level flight being "exactly the same" as a bicycle that is traveling downhill and continuing from that hill onto level ground at a very high speed. They are not exactly the same, and you know it. In the bicycle example, the ground that the bicycle is traveling on is the biggest difference between the two scenarios. If you think aerodynamic drag is a joke, this discussion is pointless. Just for grins, explain how a plane coming out of a dive decelerates from 600 mph to 350 mph in one second. Also, how the pilot survives a few hundred Gs. And why the addition of rolling resistance makes a bicycle or roller coaster decelerate slower than an airplane rather than faster. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Robert Wagner wrote:Your "very clear evidence" is Jew bashing videos that say nothing about 9/11.I'm not Jew bashing. How about you back up your claim? Where have I said that Jews are bad people.You let David Duke speak for you. Video titles are:No War for Israel in Iran - Keep Americans Safe (David Duke)Expose Senator Schumer and Israeli Terrorism! (David Duke)How Zionists Divide and Conquer (David Duke)Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:People like you have no problem at all talking about Italian mafia. Then when someone talks about evidence regarding a Jewish or Israeli-based mafia, people like you claim it's Jew-bashing. You're the one who did and is still doing the name calling here, not me. I thought your gripe was with the Israeli government. I don't recall any discussion of Israeli mafia here. The Israeli government is not controlled by the Israeli mafia, in the way Russia, Sicily, Columbia and some US cities in the 1930s are/were controlled by their respective mafias. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Besides, accusing me of "Jew bashing" also doesn't refute the evidence. It's just you pulling the "race card" which is typical of people like you who have no argument. When all else fails, it seems that people like you pull the "race card" and accuse people like me of being racist or whatever.Your choice of videos, irrelevant to 9/11, shows you started with a conclusion -- the Jews did it -- and are looking for evidence to support it. I'm starting with facts -- expert flying, demolition -- and trying to figure out who did it. So far, I haven't seen any evidence Israel did it. The guy who appears to have placed demolitions is a Baptist who received a Thank You award from the Bush government. I'm thinking ISI did the hijacking and the rest was a US operation.

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

Robert Wagner wrote:UAL175 was going 600 mph (520 knows) when it hit WTC 2. So you say. That's what we're discussing here. Saying it doesn't make it so. Show me. Robert Wagner wrote:Similar speed measurements came from two professionals using radar data and several amateurs who timed it passing known landmarks on videos. If you insist that's impossible, you're denying reality. I'm telling you that Boeing 767s cannot fly 500+ miler per hour at anywhere close to sea level in level flight. You can ask any "expert" you like. The air is too thick at anywhere near sea level for a Boeing 767 to fly in level flight at 500+ mph. It can't be done. They engines would need something like six times the thrust and the plane would probably start shedding parts. You're living in a fantasy if you believe otherwise. Robert Wagner wrote:If we're going to figure this out, we must explain how it was done, not bury our heads in the sand and deny it happened. Radar data (which I posted twice) shows it was done with a 10,000 feet per minute power dive.What radar data did you post? What does your radar data prove? That "blips" on a radar screen were doing a "10,000 feet per minute power dive?" Those are blips on a radar screen! Also, I'm not burying my head in the sand. It seems that you are. Commercial jets, like the Boeing 767, cannot fly 500+ mph at anywhere near sea level in level flight. They cannot maneuver like military fighter jets. Robert Wagner wrote:The plane's speed and descent are verifiable facts, not conjecture nor media lies. If you can't deal with facts, you discredit the CT movement. You haven't verified anything. Whatever was seen on those radar screens cannot be verified as commercial jets, particularly because of the way they moved. Blips on a radar screen are not proof that those blips were commercial jets. Regarding the CT movement, it's people like you who seem to discredit it. Is that your job here? I don't even refer to my colleagues as "CT" people. Was that a slip on your part? Robert Wagner wrote:It is worth pointing out that controlling a commercial plane at that speed is very difficult, like driving a semi at 120 mph. It's not something a typical commercial pilot can do well, much less the Arab patsies. When experienced pilots tried it on a simulator (yes, they could get speed up to 600 mph), they kept missing the WTC. Whoever flew the plane was a ace. Um...getting up to "600 mph" on a "simulator" isn't reality. LMAO Who is burying their head in the sand and ignoring reality? You are. A flight simulator is not the same as flying the plane for real. Don't you know that? That's why they call it a simulator. Again, for the record, I'm saying that Boeing 767s cannot fly at 500+ mph anywhere near sea level in level flight. The air is too thick. So, who is doing more damage to the "CT" movement as you say? You're saying that using a plane simulator is the same as actually flying the plane. WTF? LOL If YOU represented the "CT" movement with that sort of nonsense, nobody would take us seriously. You demonstrated that you are well aware of the fact that planes like the Boeing 767 cannot fly anywhere near sea level in level flight at speeds of 500+ mph because you THEN claimed that the planes that hit the towers were in a "power dive." You see, you had to use the "power dive" excuse to justify the planes supposedly going that fast. So, you obviously KNOW that Boeing 767s cannot fly anywhere near sea level at 500+ miles per hour in level flight, that's why you CLAIMED that the planes that hit the towers were in a "power dive," remember? Then, in response to your "power dive" argument, I referenced the videos showing the planes basically coming in sideways, or basically horizontally. Horizontal flight is NOT a power dive. THEN, you gave me the example of a table getting hit with a hammer on one of its legs. So, you acknowledged that those planes came in basically sideways (and NOT in a "power dive"). You know what your arguments are and why they don't make sense, and yet you continue to tell stories here? Get it? Who is denying reality? You are. Also, the radar operators were literally looking at blips on their radar screens. Those blips could have been other aircraft besides commercial jets, such as military aircraft or missiles. So, when you tell me that radar operators saw an aircraft flying over 600mph, you cannot say that they were commercial aircraft. You then said that "several amateurs" timed the planes passing known landmarks. How about you provide the information rather than just talking about it. What "amateurs?" What landmarks? Wait! Are you going to say that you were there at ground zero on 9/11 too? Robert Wagner wrote:No, it's exactly the same . Aerodynamic drag is the speed limiting factor for bicycles and airplanes. Aerodynamic drag? LOLYour analogy is NOT "exactly the same." You're trying to say that a commercial jet (like a Boeing 767) going 500+ mph in a "power dive" can level off and still maintain that impossible speed in level flight being "exactly the same" as a bicycle that is traveling downhill and continuing from that hill onto level ground at a very high speed. They are not exactly the same, and you know it. In the bicycle example, the ground that the bicycle is traveling on is the biggest difference between the two scenarios. Robert Wagner wrote:If you think aerodynamic drag is a joke, this discussion is pointless. No, if you're going to compare a bicycle going downhill to an airplane in a "power dive" and claim they are identical situations, then YOU are pointless. Maybe you shouldn't have dropped out of high school as you claim you did. Robert Wagner wrote:Just for grins, explain how a plane coming out of a dive decelerates from 600 mph to 350 mph in one second. Also, how the pilot survives a few hundred Gs. And why the addition of rolling resistance makes a bicycle or roller coaster decelerate slower than an airplane rather than faster. Just for grins, how about you explain to me why you are comparing airplane flight to roller coasters and bicycles. They are not same. Also, just for grins, I never said that commercial airplanes like Boeing 767s can just decelerate from 600mph to 350mph in one second. You're the one saying it! LOLI don't think they can. You said it. That's kind of my whole point. Military aircraft and missiles are a different issue. They can maneuver much better than commercial jets. So, just for grins, why don't YOU prove that a commercial jet can do what you claim it does? Robert Wagner wrote:You let David Duke speak for you. Video titles are:No War for Israel in Iran - Keep Americans Safe (David Duke)Expose Senator Schumer and Israeli Terrorism! (David Duke)How Zionists Divide and Conquer (David Duke)Oooooo...my bad for posting David Duke links. You still haven't refuted a word he says about Zionist influence on our government and media. You haven't refuted a thing. All you can do is stand there like a school kid and say "OOooooo...Look! He's posting a David Duke link! I'm telling on him!" LMAO You still haven't refuted anything he said about Zionist influence on our government and Zionist terrorism on Palestinians and on the U.S. Robert Wagner wrote:I thought your gripe was with the Israeli government. I don't recall any discussion of Israeli mafia here. The Israeli government is not controlled by the Israeli mafia, in the way Russia, Sicily, Columbia and some US cities in the 1930s are/were controlled by their respective mafias. I've said this many times on this forum. I have never said that Jewish people were bad people. I have always maintained that there is strong evidence of an Israeli based/Zionist based mafia, or Jewish mafia, that was behind 9/11 and that is also controlling or heavily influencing our government. What is funny about you is that you' claim that the Israeli government is not controlled by the "Israeli mafia, in the way Russia, Sicily, Columbia and some US cities in the 1930 are/were controlled by their respective mafias." Look at how silly you sound. You're saying that other countries and cities ARE/WERE controlled by "their respective mafias," but NOT Israel. LMAO How do you know that Israel is not controlled by an Israeli mafia? Are you Israeli? Do you have some inside knowledge? Are you going to add even more to your resume here? Robert Wagner wrote:Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Besides, accusing me of "Jew bashing" also doesn't refute the evidence. It's just you pulling the "race card" which is typical of people like you who have no argument. When all else fails, it seems that people like you pull the "race card" and accuse people like me of being racist or whatever.Your choice of videos, irrelevant to 9/11, shows you started with a conclusion -- the Jews did it -- and are looking for evidence to support it. I'm starting with facts -- expert flying, demolition -- and trying to figure out who did it. So far, I haven't seen any evidence Israel did it. The guy who appears to have placed demolitions is a Baptist who received a Thank You award from the Bush government. I'm thinking ISI did the hijacking and the rest was a US operation.My videos are very relevant to 9/11. You saying that they are not is also irrelevant. I didn't say the "Jews" did it. You are lying and misrepresenting what I said. Why do you tell tales like that? Your "expert flying" facts don't make sense, and you know it. It is interesting that you blame Bush and whoever and won't even entertain any evidence at all about Israeli involvement. I've presented lots of evidence here. You saying that I didn't doesn't change that fact.I also posted facts that there are Jews, and even Orthodox Jews, who are against Zionism and policies of the state of Israel. That is a fact. I even posted a picture of some of them. Are they racist too? Even those Jews (who are against the policies of the state of Israel) would agree with what David Duke says about Israel. Does that make those Jews "Jew bashers" too? Nope! So, Robert Wagner, when you accuse me of being racist or whatever, you are making false statements. Everyone can read what you wrote here on this forum. They also have read and can read what I wrote here. I You accusing me of being a "Jew basher" or racist or whatever, is you simply making false statements about me.

[Robert Wagner]

Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Robert Wagner wrote:UAL175 was going 600 mph (520 knows) when it hit WTC 2. So you say. That's what we're discussing here. Saying it doesn't make it so. Show me. Robert Wagner wrote:Similar speed measurements came from two professionals using radar data and several amateurs who timed it passing known landmarks on videos. If you insist that's impossible, you're denying reality. I'm telling you that Boeing 767s cannot fly 500+ miler per hour at anywhere close to sea level in level flight. You can ask any "expert" you like. The air is too thick at anywhere near sea level for a Boeing 767 to fly in level flight at 500+ mph. It can't be done. They engines would need something like six times the thrust and the plane would probably start shedding parts. You're living in a fantasy if you believe otherwise. You are denying reality. First you said fake planes were added to videos by a major media conspiracy. Second you said planes hit the buildings, but they couldn't have been a commercial flights claimed. Passenger DNA in the buildings proves planes were the ones claimed. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Robert Wagner wrote:If we're going to figure this out, we must explain how it was done, not bury our heads in the sand and deny it happened. Radar data (which I posted twice) shows it was done with a 10,000 feet per minute power dive.What radar data did you post? What does your radar data prove? That "blips" on a radar screen were doing a "10,000 feet per minute power dive?" Those are blips on a radar screen!Now you are denying evidence I posted twice. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Regarding the CT movement, it's people like you who seem to discredit it. Is that your job here? I don't even refer to my colleagues as "CT" people. Was that a slip on your part? Here you stoop to personal insults.Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:A flight simulator is not the same as flying the plane for real. Don't you know that? That's why they call it a simulator. This is a made-up fact. They call it a simulator because it mimics reality, including forces that cause structural failure. Pilots go from simulator directly to real planes with paying passengers. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Then, in response to your "power dive" argument, I referenced the videos showing the planes basically coming in sideways, or basically horizontally. Horizontal flight is NOT a power dive. THEN, you gave me the example of a table getting hit with a hammer on one of its legs. Here you employ a straw man argument. You misrepresent my table leg analogy as relevant to plane speed, so you can shoot it down. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Robert Wagner wrote:Just for grins, explain how a plane coming out of a dive decelerates from 600 mph to 350 mph in one second. Also, how the pilot survives a few hundred Gs. And why the addition of rolling resistance makes a bicycle or roller coaster decelerate slower than an airplane rather than faster. Just for grins, how about you explain to me why you are comparing airplane flight to roller coasters and bicycles. They are not same. Also, just for grins, I never said that commercial airplanes like Boeing 767s can just decelerate from 600mph to 350mph in one second. You're the one saying it! LOLWhen backed into a corner, you turn your fallacious argument on its head by alleging I made it. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:So, just for grins, why don't YOU prove that a commercial jet can do what you claim it does? My proof is reality. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Oooooo...my bad for posting David Duke links. You still haven't refuted a word he says about Zionist influence on our government and media. You haven't refuted a thing. All you can do is stand there like a school kid and say "OOooooo...Look! He's posting a David Duke link! I'm telling on him!" LMAO You still haven't refuted anything he said about Zionist influence on our government and Zionist terrorism on Palestinians and on the U.S.Here you change the subject with irrelevant arguments.Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:I've said this many times on this forum. I have never said that Jewish people were bad people. I have always maintained that there is strong evidence of an Israeli based/Zionist based mafia, or Jewish mafia, that was behind 9/11 and that is also controlling or heavily influencing our government. What is funny about you is that you' claim that the Israeli government is not controlled by the "Israeli mafia, in the way Russia, Sicily, Columbia and some US cities in the 1930 are/were controlled by their respective mafias." Look at how silly you sound. You're saying that other countries and cities ARE/WERE controlled by "their respective mafias," but NOT Israel. LMAO How do you know that Israel is not controlled by an Israeli mafia? Are you Israeli? Do you have some inside knowledge? Are you going to add even more to your resume here? I'm going by what I've read about the Israeli mafia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_ma ... ized_crime) and discussions with co-workers from Israel, some of whom were formerly from Russia. They say the Russian government is run by the mob, the Israeli government is not. You're claiming the Israeli/Zionist mafia not only controls the government of Israel but also the US government. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:So, Robert Wagner, when you accuse me of being racist or whatever, you are making false statements. Everyone can read what you wrote here on this forum. They also have read and can read what I wrote here. I You accusing me of being a "Jew basher" or racist or whatever, is you simply making false statements about me.Now you stoop to victim pleading.I'm seeking truth; you are seeking to win the debate. Fallacious argumentation isn't helping either of us.

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

Robert Wagner wrote:Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Robert Wagner wrote:UAL175 was going 600 mph (520 knows) when it hit WTC 2. So you say. That's what we're discussing here. Saying it doesn't make it so. Show me. Robert Wagner wrote:Similar speed measurements came from two professionals using radar data and several amateurs who timed it passing known landmarks on videos. If you insist that's impossible, you're denying reality. I'm telling you that Boeing 767s cannot fly 500+ miler per hour at anywhere close to sea level in level flight. You can ask any "expert" you like. The air is too thick at anywhere near sea level for a Boeing 767 to fly in level flight at 500+ mph. It can't be done. They engines would need something like six times the thrust and the plane would probably start shedding parts. You're living in a fantasy if you believe otherwise. You are denying reality. First you said fake planes were added to videos by a major media conspiracy. Second you said planes hit the buildings, but they couldn't have been a commercial flights claimed. Passenger DNA in the buildings proves planes were the ones claimed. Nope. I'm not denying reality at all. I also never definitively said that planes hit the buildings. I said that I don't think commercial jets hit them and that the commercial jets that the mainstream media showed on 9/11 look like fakes to me. If anything hit the towers, it seems like missiles to me. It is my opinion that the videos shown by the media were faked. I presented strong evidence showing this in the other topic about the media hoax on 9/11. Also, so what about passenger DNA? You're saying that the authorities found passenger DNA? Are these the same types of authorities who made up the magic bullet theory? Are these the same types of authorities who said that the collapse of the twin towers and building 7 was normal? LOL Who is "denying reality?" Robert Wagner wrote:Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Robert Wagner wrote:If we're going to figure this out, we must explain how it was done, not bury our heads in the sand and deny it happened. Radar data (which I posted twice) shows it was done with a 10,000 feet per minute power dive.What radar data did you post? What does your radar data prove? That "blips" on a radar screen were doing a "10,000 feet per minute power dive?" Those are blips on a radar screen!Now you are denying evidence I posted twice. What you posted, I guess, was information that air traffic controllers were tracking BLIPS on their radar screens. They didn't actually SEE the planes. Get it? I'm not "denying evidence." I am DEBATING the evidence with you and showing you, hopefully, how to LOOK at evidence. Just because an air traffic controller saw a blip on a screen doesn't automatically mean it's a commercial airplane. Do you understand? TWO-WAY communication is needed to identify the aircraft. Weren't the transponders TURNED OFF? LOLRobert Wagner wrote:Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Regarding the CT movement, it's people like you who seem to discredit it. Is that your job here? I don't even refer to my colleagues as "CT" people. Was that a slip on your part? Here you stoop to personal insults."Personal insults?" You mean like when you were personally insulting my ethnicity? What's the matter? You can dish it out, but you can't take it? It wasn't even meant as an insult. I was, and am, questioning your motives. That wasn't a joke. Robert Wagner wrote:Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:A flight simulator is not the same as flying the plane for real. Don't you know that? That's why they call it a simulator. This is a made-up fact. They call it a simulator because it mimics reality, including forces that cause structural failure. Pilots go from simulator directly to real planes with paying passengers. Robert, now YOU'RE making up fact. Simulators are not the same as actually flying. That is why they are called simulators. They are not real life. Also, pilots don't just train on simulators and then go and fly jets with "paying passengers." You're making that up. They have to actually fly REAL planes as part of their training. Robert Wagner wrote:Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Then, in response to your "power dive" argument, I referenced the videos showing the planes basically coming in sideways, or basically horizontally. Horizontal flight is NOT a power dive. THEN, you gave me the example of a table getting hit with a hammer on one of its legs. Here you employ a straw man argument. You misrepresent my table leg analogy as relevant to plane speed, so you can shoot it down. Nope. You're making a false statement again. The quote below this line is what you wrote previously here on this topic just a few days ago: Robert Wagner wrote:If you wanted to make table legs resistant to a blow from the side, you would have used thin steel I-beams. You didn't because the engineering spec talked about supporting weight, not resisting blows from the side.Notice the hammer's velocity is squared. If you could increase the hammer's speed from 20 mph to 600 mph, it wouldn't be 30 times stronger, it would be 900 times stronger. If you could move a two pound hammer at 1,000 feet per second, it would be equivalent to swinging a one ton hammer. Do you imagine a one ton hammer could break a 30 foot steel pipe? Consider that a Boeing 767 is a 400,000 pound hammer.Weren't the WTC buildings built to withstand an airplane crash? Yes, but that tensile strength is in the central core, not the peripheral frame. The spec didn't say the plane would bounce off, it said the building wouldn't topple nor collapse on itself. It didn't .. not from the plane crash. So, you see. I did not misrepresent your table-leg analogy. You just made that up. You also brought it up. I was telling you that your analogy is not on-point because the legs of tables are not designed to withstand sideways blows from hammers or whatever. The WTC towers were specifically designed to withstand airplane impacts. Comparing the two is not a real comparison. Robert Wagner wrote:Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Robert Wagner wrote:Just for grins, explain how a plane coming out of a dive decelerates from 600 mph to 350 mph in one second. Also, how the pilot survives a few hundred Gs. And why the addition of rolling resistance makes a bicycle or roller coaster decelerate slower than an airplane rather than faster. Just for grins, how about you explain to me why you are comparing airplane flight to roller coasters and bicycles. They are not same. Also, just for grins, I never said that commercial airplanes like Boeing 767s can just decelerate from 600mph to 350mph in one second. You're the one saying it! LOLWhen backed into a corner, you turn your fallacious argument on its head by alleging I made it. I'm not backed into a corner, and you're the one asking ME to "explain how a plane coming out of a dive decelerates from 600 mph to 350 mph in one second." You said those words. I never said that commercial jets did that on 9/11, so why ask me to explain it? LOL You see. You're the one who said it. Robert Wagner wrote:Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:So, just for grins, why don't YOU prove that a commercial jet can do what you claim it does? My proof is reality. I'm sorry, but saying "my proof is reality" to prove your point doesn't really cut it in the real world. You actually have to prove what you think reality is. Just claiming "My proof is reality," is silly. Robert Wagner wrote:Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Oooooo...my bad for posting David Duke links. You still haven't refuted a word he says about Zionist influence on our government and media. You haven't refuted a thing. All you can do is stand there like a school kid and say "OOooooo...Look! He's posting a David Duke link! I'm telling on him!" LMAO You still haven't refuted anything he said about Zionist influence on our government and Zionist terrorism on Palestinians and on the U.S.Here you change the subject with irrelevant arguments.How have I changed the subject? You're making a false statement, again. You're the one who keeps pointing out the SOURCE of some of the information I'm posting about Israel and Zionist influence on our government. You're the one who made a big deal out of the fact that some of those links were from David Duke. My response to you was basically this. "So what! Can you refute the information?" That is not changing the subject. That is putting you to task for your insinuations that what I'm posting is somehow wrong or bad or "Jew bashing." If the information is correct, how is it "Jew bashing?" You haven't even addressed the information presented in those links. So, you're the one who is AVOIDING the issue here. Robert Wagner wrote:Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:I've said this many times on this forum. I have never said that Jewish people were bad people. I have always maintained that there is strong evidence of an Israeli based/Zionist based mafia, or Jewish mafia, that was behind 9/11 and that is also controlling or heavily influencing our government. What is funny about you is that you' claim that the Israeli government is not controlled by the "Israeli mafia, in the way Russia, Sicily, Columbia and some US cities in the 1930 are/were controlled by their respective mafias." Look at how silly you sound. You're saying that other countries and cities ARE/WERE controlled by "their respective mafias," but NOT Israel. LMAO How do you know that Israel is not controlled by an Israeli mafia? Are you Israeli? Do you have some inside knowledge? Are you going to add even more to your resume here? I'm going by what I've read about the Israeli mafia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_ma ... ized_crime) and discussions with co-workers from Israel, some of whom were formerly from Russia. They say the Russian government is run by the mob, the Israeli government is not. You're claiming the Israeli/Zionist mafia not only controls the government of Israel but also the US government. So, your co-workers from Israel, some of whom "were formerly from Russia" just tell you what they think and it becomes FACT in your mind? Really? LOL You're almost getting what I'm saying. I'm saying that our government and media are heavily influenced, if not dominated, by Israeli entities or Israeli-friendly entities (aka Zionist entities). Between guys like Silverstein and the Mossad, and the "dancing Israelis, etc., the only way I can describe them is some sort of organized crime network that is Israeli based and probably corporate based, aka Israeli organized crime or Jewish mafia. Robert Wagner wrote:Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:So, Robert Wagner, when you accuse me of being racist or whatever, you are making false statements. Everyone can read what you wrote here on this forum. They also have read and can read what I wrote here. You accusing me of being a "Jew basher" or racist or whatever, is you simply making false statements about me.Now you stoop to victim pleading.I'm seeking truth; you are seeking to win the debate. Fallacious argumentation isn't helping either of us.Victim pleading? Didn't you imply that I'm being a bigot or pushing "Jew bashing" information? You did. I certainly am seeking truth, and it appears that you are the one who is trying to "win" the debate by using deceptive debate tactics. You appear to me to be a disinformation personality. The way you argue looks like you have an agenda. What "fallacious" argumentation are you accusing me of? You mean "fallacious" like when you claimed that flight simulators are exactly like flying a real plane? You can't be serious.

[Robert Wagner]

Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Nope. I'm not denying reality at all. I also never definitively said that planes hit the buildings. I said that I don't think commercial jets hit them and that the commercial jets that the mainstream media showed on 9/11 look like fakes to me. If anything hit the towers, it seems like missiles to me. It is my opinion that the videos shown by the media were faked. I presented strong evidence showing this in the other topic about the media hoax on 9/11. Also, so what about passenger DNA? You're saying that the authorities found passenger DNA? Are these the same types of authorities who made up the magic bullet theory? Are these the same types of authorities who said that the collapse of the twin towers and building 7 was normal? LOL Who is "denying reality?" You say we can't use videos, radar, DNA nor (I assume) Flight Data Recorders. What real world evidence can we use? Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:What you posted, I guess, was information that air traffic controllers were tracking BLIPS on their radar screens. They didn't actually SEE the planes. Get it? I'm not "denying evidence." I am DEBATING the evidence with you and showing you, hopefully, how to LOOK at evidence. Just because an air traffic controller saw a blip on a screen doesn't automatically mean it's a commercial airplane. Do you understand? TWO-WAY communication is needed to identify the aircraft. Weren't the transponders TURNED OFF? LOLThe transponder on UAL175 was never turned off, it was switched to a different ID. One flight controller, Dave Bottiglia, followed it from point of hijack until it hit WTC 2. There was no opportunity to switch planes. Here's Dave saying so:http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1doqa ... wsPasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Robert, now YOU'RE making up fact. Simulators are not the same as actually flying. That is why they are called simulators. They are not real life. Also, pilots don't just train on simulators and then go and fly jets with "paying passengers." You're making that up. They have to actually fly REAL planes as part of their training. Here's a pilot trainer confirming my points about a simulator detecting stress failure, pilots going from simulators to real planes, and describing how they duplicated 911 on a simulator. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bm58cPH8L78Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote: The WTC towers were specifically designed to withstand airplane impacts.At what speed? Not 600 mph, because that's impossible. I believe the design parameter was 180 mph. The difference in kinetic energy between 180 and 600 is 11.1 times. Buildings weren't designed to withstand 11.1 simultaneous plane impacts. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Robert Wagner wrote:Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:So, just for grins, why don't YOU prove that a commercial jet can do what you claim it does? My proof is reality. I'm sorry, but saying "my proof is reality" to prove your point doesn't really cut it in the real world. You actually have to prove what you think reality is. Just claiming "My proof is reality," is silly. Radar shows UAL175 hitting WTC 2 at 600 mph. Videos show the same speed.Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:You're almost getting what I'm saying. I'm saying that our government and media are heavily influenced, if not dominated, by Israeli entities or Israeli-friendly entities (aka Zionist entities). Between guys like Silverstein and the Mossad, and the "dancing Israelis, etc., the only way I can describe them is some sort of organized crime network that is Israeli based and probably corporate based, aka Israeli organized crime or Jewish mafia. Even if what you say were true, it doesn't tell us who organized the 911 attack. I could much more easily make a case the US government is controlled by Christians. That doesn't prove Christians were behind 911. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote: Didn't you imply that I'm being a bigot or pushing "Jew bashing" information? You did. Your decision to cite irrelevant and biased videos made that implication. I just pointed it out, in case anyone missed it.

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

Robert Wagner wrote:You say we can't use videos, radar, DNA nor (I assume) Flight Data Recorders. What real world evidence can we use? I'm sorry. Were the black boxes actually recovered from Ground Zero? Regarding the DNA, I was jumping the gun a little. I'm sure that people died in the buildings, and therefore I'm sure their DNA was recovered or at least some or most it that wasn't blown to bits. If the videos showing the planes impacting the buildings seem to contradict each other, one can only reasonably assume that they were faked. Based on that idea, I'm doubting that planes hit the buildings at all. So, if you're referring to DNA of people who were supposedly on those planes, I'm doubting its existence at Ground Zero.Regarding the radar information from air traffic controllers, I'm not doubting what the radar operators say they saw. I'm just pointing out that they didn't actually, literally SEE the airplanes. They saw blips on their radar screens. Regarding the videos, I'm TOTALLY using them. They are videos that were presented to the world by the mainstream media. That's the beauty of those videos. They contradict each other and show very strong evidence that those planes were fake images. So, contrary to what you claim, I'm not saying to throw out all the evidence. I'm saying that it might be a good idea to examine the evidence a little closer. Robert Wagner wrote:The transponder on UAL175 was never turned off, it was switched to a different ID. One flight controller, Dave Bottiglia, followed it from point of hijack until it hit WTC 2. There was no opportunity to switch planes. Here's Dave saying so:http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1doqa ... alies_news Okay, is there any way that the signal that the air traffic controllers were receiving was from a different aircraft and that they were assuming it was from the same craft as before because of it's position? Is there any possibility that there could have been a switch done like that to fool air traffic controllers? Robert Wagner wrote:Here's a pilot trainer confirming my points about a simulator detecting stress failure, pilots going from simulators to real planes, and describing how they duplicated 911 on a simulator. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bm58cPH8L78Flight simulators are not like flying real planes. They simulate reality. Robert Wagner wrote:Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote: The WTC towers were specifically designed to withstand airplane impacts.At what speed? Not 600 mph, because that's impossible. I believe the design parameter was 180 mph. The difference in kinetic energy between 180 and 600 is 11.1 times. Buildings weren't designed to withstand 11.1 simultaneous plane impacts. I'm sorry, but Boeing 767s cannot fly 500+ mph anywhere close to sea level in level flight, like the videos show them doing. The air is too thick. Robert Wagner wrote:Radar shows UAL175 hitting WTC 2 at 600 mph. Videos show the same speed. If the videos were faked, they can show whatever they want. It doesn't make it reality. Also, the radars showed radar BLIPS going at 600mph at the building. Robert Wagner wrote:Even if what you say were true, it doesn't tell us who organized the 911 attack. I could much more easily make a case the US government is controlled by Christians. That doesn't prove Christians were behind 911. Well, unfortunately, there seem to be Israeli or Zionist entities at almost every turn regarding 9/11. There's Larry Silverstein, Jewish Zionist and very connected to Israel, there's the Israei shipping company, ZIM, that moved out abruptly before the 9/11 attacks, costing them something like $50,000 in broken lease fees, there the airport security company ICTS that was Israeli based that ran the security at the airports involved, there's the "dancing Israelis" who worked for Urban Moving System, which was owned by another Israeli. (Those "dancing Israelis" had cameras pointed at the buildings before the attacks and then were cheering afterward, like they knew. They were detained for two months by the feds who then released them to Israel.)There are many other clues that lead to Israel regarding 9/11 and that 9/11 was an Israeli false flag operation to incite the western world, the U.S., against Arabs and Muslims. Then there's the Jewish/Zionist dominated media who basically don't question what happened on 9/11 or even mention anything about Israeli involvement. So, there are a lot of clues there. I'm not just making this up. Robert Wagner wrote:Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote: Didn't you imply that I'm being a bigot or pushing "Jew bashing" information? You did. Your decision to cite irrelevant and biased videos made that implication. I just pointed it out, in case anyone missed it.They are VERY relevant links, and I encourage people to look at them. You are the one making an implication of "Jew bashing." Being critical of Israel and Zionists, and talking about a Jewish organized crime network, is NOT "Jew bashing." Talking about the Italian mafia is not Italian bashing. Get it? Basically, you would probably accuse me of "Jew bashing" even if I didn't post anything by David Duke. When I posted another link to a source that WASN'T David Duke's, you had the same reaction. This is the problem with many people, including you, regarding the Israeli or Zionist issue. It's because of social conditioning. If anyone like me says anything critical about Israelis or Jews who appear to be involved in organized crime, we are accused of "Jew bashing" by people like you because you have bought into the myth that saying ANYTHING critical about Israel or ANY Jews is automatically a "bad" thing.You are mistaken. You also HAVE NOT REFUTED any of the information presented by David Duke, or any of my other sources, regarding Zionism and it's influence on the United States and evidence of Israeli involvement in 9/11.

[Robert Wagner]

Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Robert Wagner wrote:You say we can't use videos, radar, DNA nor (I assume) Flight Data Recorders. What real world evidence can we use? I'm sorry. Were the black boxes actually recovered from Ground Zero? Regarding the DNA, I was jumping the gun a little. I'm sure that people died in the buildings, and therefore I'm sure their DNA was recovered or at least some or most it that wasn't blown to bits. If the videos showing the planes impacting the buildings seem to contradict each other, one can only reasonably assume that they were faked. Based on that idea, I'm doubting that planes hit the buildings at all. So, if you're referring to DNA of people who were supposedly on those planes, I'm doubting its existence at Ground Zero.Regarding the radar information from air traffic controllers, I'm not doubting what the radar operators say they saw. I'm just pointing out that they didn't actually, literally SEE the airplanes. They saw blips on their radar screens. Regarding the videos, I'm TOTALLY using them. They are videos that were presented to the world by the mainstream media. That's the beauty of those videos. They contradict each other and show very strong evidence that those planes were fake images. So, contrary to what you claim, I'm not saying to throw out all the evidence. I'm saying that it might be a good idea to examine the evidence a little closer. You have no evidence of who did it. All you have are claims Major Media tried to fool us and Jews can't be trusted. You're not going to figure this out without evidence. One set of black boxes was recovered from the Pentagon. We can't trust the data because they (the Establishment) got possession first.Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Robert Wagner wrote:The transponder on UAL175 was never turned off, it was switched to a different ID. One flight controller, Dave Bottiglia, followed it from point of hijack until it hit WTC 2. There was no opportunity to switch planes. Here's Dave saying so:http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1doqa ... alies_news Okay, is there any way that the signal that the air traffic controllers were receiving was from a different aircraft and that they were assuming it was from the same craft as before because of it's position? Is there any possibility that there could have been a switch done like that to fool air traffic controllers? No, because Dave Bottiglia would have seen another plane approaching UAL175's flight path. Also, there's the question of how they moved passenger bodies to another plane. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:I'm sorry, but Boeing 767s cannot fly 500+ mph anywhere close to sea level in level flight, like the videos show them doing. The air is too thick. Ok, disregard major media videos and radar, consider only videos taken by private citizens, which show a plane hitting WTC 2 at 600 mph. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Well, unfortunately, there seem to be Israeli or Zionist entities at almost every turn regarding 9/11. There's Larry Silverstein, Jewish Zionist and very connected to Israel, there's the Israei shipping company, ZIM, that moved out abruptly before the 9/11 attacks, costing them something like $50,000 in broken lease fees, Companies abandon office leases all the time. The Atlantic Bank of New York moved out of WTC in July, while continuing to pay the remainder of its lease on vacant space. Its CEO and CFO are named Ficarola and Ciampa. Proof positive Italians had foreknowledge!Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:there the airport security company ICTS that was Israeli based that ran the security at the airports involved, there's the "dancing Israelis" who worked for Urban Moving System, which was owned by another Israeli. (Those "dancing Israelis" had cameras pointed at the buildings before the attacks What about those supposedly French movie makers who just happened to have cameras pointed at WTC 1 when the cruise missile hit? Coincidence? Yeah, right. Need I point out the Dreyfus Affair, in which a French Jew was (wrongly) convicted of treason? If he wasn't guilty of that treason, he was probably guilty of another. Has anyone looked into the ethnicity of the movie makers? Here it is:"Naudet brothers are rather mysterious. They would seem to be Jewish - certainly, Gédéon would seem to be a Jewish name. I wonder whether they are really French, as we have been told, or whether they are perhaps Israelis posing as Frenchmen. Although we are told that they are French, we are never told anything about their background in France. Biographical information is virtually non-existent, even on a French 9-11 website (http://www.onze-septembre.com). The only reported facts are that they 1) moved from Paris to New York in 1989 (when Jules and Gédéon would have been aged 16 and 19 respectively) and 2) graduated from the (NYU) Tisch School of the Arts film school in 1995. I am curious about their move from Paris to New York (did they go with or without their parents?) and when and how they came to study at the Tisch school, which is one of the most competitive such institutions in the world. Entry is, reportedly, more competitive than to any of the Ivy League universities. So who arranged it?Could it be that their entire purpose in pursuing film studies in the U.S. (if indeed they really ever attended the Tisch school) and in making Hope, Gloves, and Redemption was to establish their credentials as film makers in time for 9-11? And that having made and publicized 9-11, they have now discarded their phony identities? In short, could the Naudet brothers and their celebrated documentary have been just another Ziohoax? This webpage here casts doubt on whether they are even brothers - a question I now consider perfectly reasonable to ask."http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=503_1258736317There you have it -- Tisch school education paid by Mossad, Ziohoax, phony identities. more Jewish spies.