9/11 Family Member Patty Casazza: Government Knew Exact Date and Exact Targets

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Bitstream, Nov 8, 2007.

  1. if you think the video is fake.. then go whine to the mainstream media. they made it.
    #21     Nov 10, 2007
  2. i don't know what it's worth to the debate, but i witnessed the first plane's collision with the north tower from spring street between hudson and greenwich. i was facing south with a direct line of site to the north tower, and the plane came over us at extremely low altitude. as i remember it, pretty vividly, the plane came in low, swooping up into the tower. at least from my perspective it appeared to be on an upward trajectory, left wing banking down, into the building

    it's surprising to read about a downward trajectory because that contradicts what i remember seeing. i just called the person i was with. without indicating how i recall it, i asked how she recalls the trajectory of the plane from each axis, and she voluntarily described the same thing, specifically recalling it swooping up into the building
    #22     Nov 10, 2007
  3. iprph90


    #23     Nov 10, 2007
  4. And since we all know your views about how corrupt the mainstream media is.......

    And since the mainstream media is so big into club music to go along with their video postings......

    Why would you post a video like this unless you agree that it is an attempt at disinformation? Or do you agree with its' statement that it must have been on a programmed flight? What would one base that on? What limitations are they assuming to be present? Or do you think are present?

    But why do you hate your country so much... why make accusations of so many people of being "in on it"..... why do you hate my freedoms.....

    Why don't you just state your views - that you're against the war, that you feel that as a result of the security measures taken in response to 9/11 have eroded your personal freedoms, that you agree with Dr Paul's views on the whole Fed/currency/infaltion issue. Someone just might take you seriously then, although your credibilty has probably been irrepairably damaged....

    A real patriot would be a little more responsible.

    You're not one....
    #24     Nov 10, 2007

  5. you have forced me to bring out the pancake chihuahua, pancake boy.... you've been wrong more times than your neocon, idol bush.

    #25     Nov 10, 2007
  6. It is definitely possible. Not possible on take off and too fast for landing but on crashing, yes.
    #26     Nov 10, 2007
  7. More ad hom....

    Now, how did I know you'd have more....
    #27     Nov 10, 2007
  8. so a 757/767 can fly at 450 mph just above building tops for an unlimited amount of time?
    #28     Nov 10, 2007
  9. It was in a shallow dive.

    Prove that it wasn't.
    #29     Nov 10, 2007
  10. i haven't poured over the NIST document, but i can say very confidently that the downward angle they portray for flight 11 heavily contradicts what i saw and heard.

    flight 11 came in incredibly loud and low, climbing into the north tower in the last few seconds. that really is a very unambiguous aspect of how i remember it. i would estimate maybe 20-40 stories at most... with roughly the same concussive presence you would get hanging out at the end of a runway. definitely nothing even close to > 93 stories up or it wouldn't have been so freaking loud. the thing was really close at our location, seemed like maybe 1-2 blocks on our left. about a wingspan away

    it curved up into the building. in the NIST drawings, they show it angled strongly down which seems a little ridiculous from the pov we had.

    i would imagine almost anyone who witnessed it with a clear southern view from washington square downward on the west side would probably corroborate this. it could be that it just seemed that way, but that trajectory has always been one of my clearest memories of that day. pretty major contradiction with the report
    #30     Nov 10, 2007