Plausible.

Thanks for not calling me a nut. Sorta high so I didn't even think about which direction or it's locality respective of NY. Still...

It was shot down before the "crash" at Shanksville. The scar in Shanksville was visible in the 90s. Early traffic copter reports said "there was no debris larger than a phone book".

Yet they found whole passports for the supposed terrorist. Shot down by whom? I've never heard anything other than it was foiled by heroic passengers.

USAF. I have the video, but it's on a computer that needs a virus cleaning. I also have video of Rumsfeld referring to the "plane that was shot down", along with Bush referring to seeing "the first plane hit the tower", an impossibility unless he had CCTV.

Oh, and cell phones don't work @ 30,000 feet.

ಠ_ಠ

Not to mention the flight data recorder showed that the door to the cabin to Flight 93 was not opened from the time that the flight left the airport to the time that is hit the ground.

Seriously and I don't feel like being called an antisemite. Was it the israelis?

My research indicates the Pakistani ISI, elements of Mossad, the Russian Mafia, the FBI, CIA, and upper levels (read: Rumsfeld, Cheney and others) of the US Gov't were involved.

But 9/11 was a cover-up itself for a massive bond fraud perpetrated by GHW Bush, and his Secretary of the Treasury, Paul O'Neil, which was designed to crash the Russian economy, which is an historic fact. Both planes that hit the towers hit one floor below the bond trading firms involved. Both 757s and 767s could be remotely landed and taken off, so aiming them (which leads to suspicions that there were homing beacons in the computer rooms of the bond trading firms) would be a piece of cake, compare to having to land them.

Oh, and the date the fraudulent bonds were to "come due" (need to be paid off)? 9/12/01.

Bingo + gold + WTC7 had any files that the CIA/NSA/SEC/FBI wanted to to stash to get rid of + any other financial fraud you can tie up by rigging contracts knowing of the impending attack

ever hear of Richard Grove? His 9/11 story is good. I'd be curious as to any links you have on the bond fraud or any other good HW stuff

All video and audio I have is on a tower I no longer use. It's safe there, but I don't know for sure if I can access it. I do have printed data on the Securities fraud, which I will have to re-type for this venue. I will do so over the next few weeks. It includes a list of those who profited from the events of 9/11. All of the usual suspects are there.

My research indicates the Pakistani ISI, elements of Mossad, the Russian Mafia, the FBI, CIA, and upper levels (read: Rumsfeld, Cheney and others) of the US Gov't were involved.

Saudi intelligence as well?

The Saudis, if they were involved, were purely financial (ei, the "put" options on the airlines).

Look at this!

Come on, don't you see that "antisemitism" is the tool they use to silence you? All that word means is "somebody the Jews hate." Since when is waking up to the truth anti-ANYTHING?

Israel, along with their sayanim and useful Goyim, perpetuated 9/11 and profited TREMENDOUSLY.

To learn how and why please read Bollyn's excellent (and free) book. Here's the link:

http://www.bollyn.com/solving-9-11-the-book#article_11261

yeah that's why I said I didn't feel like hearing it. I agree it's a total ploy to subvert the truth. Just because a group of people suffered tragedy shouldn't mean they are exempt from criticism. Especially when you go back and look at the history of the jews being wholesale expelled from just about every nation on earth at one time or another. I've always said stereotypes and the like are there for a reason.

Israeli Minister "We always use the anti-Semitism trick or bring up the Holocaust"

I have seen this article.

It was actually the flight deck door on Flight 77 that was never opened. That's the plane that allegedly hit the Pentagon.

At least that is what the data indicated that was released through an FOIA demand.

You are correct.

Flight 77's FDR showed no cabin door breach from the time the engines were spooled up until the time it hit the Pentagon.

The vid of Rumsfeld : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0v0_HDwg84

If you really have this I'd certainly like to see it. I'm sure others would too. If it actually plainly shows what you claim. That would certainly be something.

Was just given this

It's been a while since I accessed my old XP with the Tornado. I should be able to do it again. Just don't be holding any breath, I am a procrastinator, and my muse/inspiration is fickle. But having been away from loosechange and the whole issue for a while, and seeing that there is some genuine interest (along with the inevitable gov't ops and trolls, though they seem to leave us mostly alone here...for now), I have more motivation than I've had in a while.

EDIT: The old computer needs cleaning of a smartvirus. This will be a while, as $$ are in very short supply, here and now.

Did I misunderstand your comment by chance?

I read it as though you said you have video of the plane being shot down. Perhaps I misinterpreted the comment.

No. I have video of the first aircraft on the scene after the shootdown. It was a local traffic copter, from which the report came of "No debris larger than a phone book", with video of the debris field.

Oh okay okay. Yes I've seen that one. Lot of eye witnesses said that too.

Sorry for misunderstanding.

NP.

Need the video.

Of what?

Video you commented about ya dingus!

I commented on three videos. Try Youtube.

Cheney. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5GgZa9V0A8

The truck full of explosives being driven by Israelis might have been planned to go off at building 7. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3aKj6uJ5Mt4

It's like taking the pill and waking up in the matrix and recognizing it for what it really is. Why have I never heard that before?

not sure why this got downvoted. I think its a pretty accurate analogy.

analogy isn't the word your looking for, but thanks.

Never Forget! http://rememberbuilding7.org/7-facts-about-building-7/

Preaching to the choir man. I know 7 was bullshit.

It amuses me how indefensible any explanation of what happened to Building 7 is.

Apologist's kryptonite.

Check Wikipedia for the flight paths for all of the hijacked flights. It may help to solidify your theory:)

just did and I guess it's pretty inconclusive. From where it crashed or was shot down it could have been headed towards the capitol or looping around to NYC.

Compared to the other two flights it looks similar to me. the odd course change near the end could have had something to do with pursuit. All speculation here just find it interesting that 7 fell just as the towers did except for lack of a plane hitting it

it's def suspicious. It had never occurred to me until last night though.

I thought of it only a few weeks ago while watching the BBC broadcast of building 7 having already fallen when it was clearly still standing. Gave me chills to think of what that meant.

Israel with its bitch America is the biggest threat to world peace. Their constant false flags and genocides will only lead to their inevitable demise.

The true threats to World Peace are bad foreign policies, centralized banking, corrupt government officals, and bad business practices. And all of those are a world wide problem and a constant threat to our progression towards a free and peaceful society as a whole. VERY UNFORTUNATE (Tears.)

Anyway, hopefully one day we will be able to dismantle the Oligarchy that has been put in place and the people will finally have freedom, liberty, and equality. Sorry to say we probably won't live to see that day, but we can teach our children to lead the way and we can help by starting on coming up with solutions NOW.

Nah, the world is heading for inevitable demise.

Unlikely. The flight path for a plane traveling at the speeds of those that hit the towers would necessarily run into several other buildings on the way in. Anyone creating such an elaborate plan to run planes into buildings would likely have checked to see if the path was clear.

He means flight 93, you know, the one that supposedly crashed in the field in PA?

What's very interesting about both the WTC and the flight 93 crash is Israeli's were arrested near both the WTC and just a couple of miles away from the Pennsylvania crash site.

For me and 9/11, how it was done is less important although there is obvious clues, the perpetrators are much more important.

"Furthermore, on 09/11/2001, [blank] of the Pennsylvania State Police detained a yellow Penske box truck upon the request of Newark. [Blank] inspected the vehicle and determined that the vehicle's two (2) occupants, [blank] and [blank] both identified as Israeli nationals, were on their way to Columbus, OH. When Newark later questioned [blank] of Urban Moving Systems about the vehicle's presence in Pennsylvania, he could not offer an explanation. According to the moving company's [blank] the two (2) occupants and their vehicle were supposed to complete a moving job in a different part of the country. [Note: By a bizarre 'coincidence', the route from Weehawken, NJ to Columbus, OH passes within 2 or 3 miles of Shanksville and Indian Lake in PA.]"

This is from the official FBI reports on the men arrested and the only thing that holds any water to this being debunked is the fact that they were eventually released back to Israal although that is obviously not really a good enough conclusion as its not impossible for a higher up to make that happen.

Read it all, it's the most compelling thing about 9/11 because it comes from the FBI and Police, not a YouTube video or some guy making anything up.

http://www.takeourworldback.com/dancingisraelisfbireport.htm

some pretty chilling stuff

Np problem there. The idea put forward by the OP has been around since shortly after the event.

The flight path for a plane traveling at the speeds of those that hit the towers would necessarily run into several other buildings on the way in

Note that those other buildings conveniently collapsed prior to the time Flight 93 would have arrived. It crashed sometime between 10:03 AM and 10:10 AM, depending on the source. WTC2 collapsed at 9:59 AM and WTC1 collapsed at 10:28 AM. With the Twin Towers gone there was a clear path from the south to get to WTC7.

The OP's hypothesis is interesting though not original as it's been brought up since shortly after the event. The problem I see is that the planes that hit the towers came in over the water and thus had a clear path. They also went for the tallest structures. Coming from PA '93 would have to negotiate a lower flight path over an area that has many buildings of similar height. As I see it a sure hit on Bldg 7 would require a steep descent without electronic aid. That would be nearly impossible for an experienced pilot and quite impossible for an inexperienced one or a person operating the plane by radio control.

Looking at this picture and imagining the Twin Towers gone, it's clear that a plane coming from the south (the right side of the pic) could miss the tops of other buildings and still hit somewhere in the top 10 floors of WTC7. Considering the 270 degree turn and steep descent of Flight 77 into the Pentagon this seems quite plausible to me.

That would be nearly impossible for an experienced pilot and quite impossible for... a person operating the plane by radio control

I'm sorry but I disagree with that assertion (based on Flight 77 flight path) and would need evidence to change my mind.

Bear in mind that I used the word "unlikely" rather than "impossible". We have to keep in mind that the aircraft that hit the towers were flying level and at full throttle. They were in fact moving faster than design specifications allow. The aircraft that hit the pentagon lost speed during it's maneuvers and came in at less than normal landing speed. (I don't have a reference at hand for the actual speed). An aircraft of that type would be, in effect, in a ditch rather than a controlled landing. Flying into the WTC7, over the tops of other buildings, at maneuvering speed is unlikely.

I think it more likely that any perpetrators expected much heavier damage to WTC7 and were depending on that as a cover story for the collapse. In the end it would likely have been decided to go ahead with demolition regardless because the whole series of events were so traumatic. WTC7 would make no difference in the peoples' minds, which it hasn't.

Well, "quite impossible" was a direct quote from your comment.

I mostly agree with you and am actually unsure of what the target was for Flight 93. I'm simply saying that building 7 was not an implausible target.

WTC7 would make no difference in the peoples' minds, which it hasn't.

Considering only a small fraction are even aware WTC7 collapsed, then that is absolutely true.

Something was bothering me after I posted that last comment. Too late - I didn't specify that my "unlikely" came from my first comment. My fault for confusion. Something else came to mind late last night that I had considered as far back as late 2001; the hole in the pentagon was at ground level. Maneuvering speeds of the aircraft only became a topic of interest once pilots weighed in on the issue. It's too bad that much of what they had to say has become lost in the arguments over the physics behind collapse. It would be nice to see a reconstruction of a possible flight path to WTC7.

Maneuvering speeds of the aircraft only became a topic of interest once pilots weighed in on the issue.

In discussions like this I frequently post a link to Pilots for 9/11 Truth. There's a lot of great information there including released FDR data. There's also a forum there that's still pretty active.

this is a very good point. It seems to me that if a passenger airliner hit where it supposedly did it would just about have to land.

there's not really any evidence that these people hijacked these commercial planes and flew them into those buildings. in fact it's very implausible that they pulled this off.

With this in mind, it would be more simple to assume that the third drone/bunker buster attack on NYC was scuttled for some reason - maybe the E4B air fortress couldn't stick around, or the targeting laser wouldn't work in all the dust. So now they have a 3rd plane with nothing to do with it, and a building full of explosives. .what to do? Tell a story that a hijacking was thwarted and the building comes down due to uncontrolled fires. they'll believe it. especially if we make a movie about the heroes of flight 93

There's definitely another plane on 9/11 in New York and that has no official explanation.

There are no "Arabic" or middle-eastern names on any of the passenger manifests of those four flights.

Two, count 'em, two, jets were scrambled on the East Coast that day. The USAF will tell you they normally scramble ~100 times/year for various reasons.

More fighters were scrambled for Golfer Payne Stewart's ill-fated last flight (third paragraph) than were scramble for four passenger jetliners with their transponders turned off on 9/11/01.

OP, this same thing actually came to my mind last week when I was watching another 9/11 truth documentary. I think it's plausible myself. We'll never know for sure though.

i think that they just crashed one in order to make it seem like there were heroes who prevented a highjacking from "hitting the white house" so that hollywood could make bank off of the movies that resulted

well this is r/conspiracy after all

Most likely 7 was supposed to be blown up in the dust cloud of the twin towers and be covered up that way. CNN in fact reported a collapse of a third building around the same time, but then retracted it. The plane might have been frighteningly set to crash into the U.S. Capitol Building which would have really ramped things up on the terror scale.

Not sure though besides this: http://rememberbuilding7.org/7-facts-about-building-7/

This has been discussed several times here and at /r/911Truth.

Either Flight 93 was suppose to hit WTC 7 or it was meant for the Pentagon. Perhaps the internal perpetrators concluded it would be easier and less questionable to hit the Pentagon with a missile and just say it was a plane. After all, they did seize all the videos of the attack on the pentagon... Is that not unusual to say the least? AND FOR THE DEBUNKERS OF WTC 7 I have only this to say... First of all, it was admitted that the building was "pulled". Secondly, many eye witnesses stated that they heard "bombs go off" and "it was like a controlled demolition". Thirdly, and the BIGGEST evidence of all other than the admittance of the demolition would be that pools of thermite (still burning at up to 2,000 degrees up to 2 weeks after the attacks, similar to liquid lava.) were found at all three collapsed building sites under the debree.. That to me equals, smoking gun.

Since the explosives were already in place If they were already in place dipshit how did they get there? Most certainly not in a days work. If that tower was rigged, they all were.

because there hasn't been any evidence of explosives in either of the other two towers right? tryharder

There's nothing unususal about what happened with building 7. http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

Yeah, you're right, nothing at all...just an event that had never before happened in the history of construction!

Somehow, that day, it happened three times. Wish I would have played the Lotto that day!

Excuse me for a minute; I have some hearty laughing to do at the "debunkers."

Nobody has deliberately flown fully fuelled jets into New York skyscrapers before 'in the history of construction'. Funny then, that there are so many YouTube experts on what usually happens in this situation. The physics of what happened are not difficult to grasp, unless you expect buildings to fall in a 'timmmmbbbeerrr' motion like a tree felled in a looney tunes cartoon in spite of not having any sideways force applied to them. Truthers are the laughing stock of the internet, and with good reason.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKeENdyIluI

A completely different building, on a much, much smaller scale, collapsing under completely different circumstances. That's me convinced! Have you come up with the answer yet to how such a wide ranging and powerful conspiracy could plan such an intricate operation and yet neglect to find out the 'proper' way that buildings collapse, endangering their plan on account of the fact that laymen with no engineering experience can tell just by looking that 'that's not how buildings collapse'?

the fact of the matter is that when you have the media in your pocket there really isn't any need to worry about if it looked legit or not. I'm not saying I'm an expert, but these people are.http://ae911truth.org/en/evidence.html although it would be a lot easier to youtube videos of controlled demolitions and compare them to the world trade centers. It's completely evident. That's ok though it doesn't hurt my feelings if you stay willfully ignorant to the facts.

How come you don't accept the vast majority of experts who say the way the buildings fell was not unusual?

Such as: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/1227842

Because you're very gullible and easily led, and will accept wholeheartedly anything anyone says as long as it re-enforces what you want to believe.

The conspiracy religion thrives on fear and anger, something you have in abundance. It's no wonder you were such an easy convert for the people who make their living peddling fiction to people like you.

you take one article written for the purpose of debunking "conspiracy theories"(which brings into question where there journalistic integrity was) from popular science in which the main experts quoted are Ronald Greeley(who worked on the Apollo missions to the moon that some people here would probably say were fake) who came to the conclusion after intense study that the "pod" was the right fairing where the landing gear drops down. Here is a picture of the aircraft in dispute. Notice how the plane is perfectly symmetrical and that the landing gear are down front and center.http://www.airplane-pictures.net/photo/199803/n76151-united-airlines-boeing-767-200er/ The other expert that stood out Allyn E. Kilsheimer states he picked up parts of the plane and human remains and all. I can't find anything on him, but I've never seen those pictures before and the ones I have seen makes the one in the article seem like bullshit. I'll also say that when I went to the KCE structural engineering website when stating all of the places they've conducted business they name Israel first instead of alphabetical order which to me seems pretty suspect. There just too much evidence showing otherwise newfriend. All of the points made in your article may be researched by experts, but there are also experts who make opposing claims. You can believe whatever you want though like i said before.

the only person quoted is a stein. so downvote because jew.

There are many people quoted. But even if there weren't, anti-Semitic much?

Where there is smoke there is fire. You can spit that anti-semite bs until you're blue in the face.

Well, "downvote because jew" sounds pretty anti-Semitic to me.

[deleted]

dumbass

dumbass

Compared to the other two flights it looks similar to me. the odd course change near the end could have had something to do with pursuit. All speculation here just find it interesting that 7 fell just as the towers did except for lack of a plane hitting it