Thread: Video Fakery on 911 and No Real Planes in New York

The right engine must be in between the first and second slat. The fake image shows the first slat too close to the fuselage, therefore that one fact proves it's fake. The fake engine's in front of the first slat that is too close to the fuselage.

i hate to disagree with you........people can come up with all kinds of theories as to who or what perpetrated 9/11....but one thing i know is a fact is that the buildings were hit with planes.....real planes......i know this because my husband was making a delivery up there at the time and he saw the planes hit the buildings with his own eyes......so unless they implanted tiny cameras in my husbands eyes to see a plane....it was real.

The slat looks off 7 because of the angle you are looking at. It is a simple mind trick, much like perodolia.

Originally Posted by 7forever

The right engine must be in between the first and second slat. The fake image shows the first slat too close to the fuselage, therefore that one fact proves it's fake. The fake engine's in front of the first slat that is too close to the fuselage.

Let's be a little bit grown up here and name the parts correctly:

The term "slats" has a specific meaning when talking about an airliner's wing to refer to movable aerodynamic surfaces on the leading edge of the wing.

The longitudinal trailing edge features on the undersides of the wings are the flap track fairings, which are an aerodynamic housing for the mechanism for retracting and extending the flaps--the deployable surfaces on the trailing edge of the wing. There are three on each 767 wing, two for the outboard flap and one for the inboard flap. It is correct that the engine nacelles attach to the underside of the wings at a point outboard of the first flap track fairing.

The inboard flap track on the right wing of Flight 175 clearly has the inboard flap between it and the fuselage (I can see it, clear as day), thus is not too close as you contend. The Engine nacelle also connects to the underside of the wing at a point outboard of the flap track, exactly as it should do. The rearmost point of the nacelle attachment footprint is clearly abaft of the leading tip of the flap track fairing, also as it should be.

Once again, we have a supposed anomaly which contradicts the visual evidence and that only you can see.

Originally Posted by 7forever

I'm the first 911 researcher to capture the bomb igniting in the south tower. Watch the northeast corner as it illuminates during ignition. The bomb farted backward and created explosions along the east side and drone's impact area on the southeast corner. BOO-YA! [B]The drone was used as an ignition device and to have something in the area moving toward the buildings even though it wasn't a real plane.

Another First from 7forever---I came to see what was up with your "9/11 Conspiracy". To my amazement it is even more over the top, [but it is entertaining], than "The Driver Shot Kennedy" postings.

My question is, do you actually believe in this, "..it wasn't terrorist high jacked planes, but drones and bombs.", or are you pulling our chain and sitting back laughing at our reactions to these unbelievable scenarios?

I have a suspicion that you make these up for entertainment purposes. May I suggest you do one on "Pope John Paul II's Assassination Attempt" or maybe "Pablo Escobar's Assassination." I would love to see what you come up with. I apologize ahead of time in case the moderators think I'm being crass, but after all, we did move and rename the JFK tread. After a lot of work on some AU members behalf getting lost in the mix I might add.

Nah!! IM SIRIUS the one that will get me is Greer actually fired an orb out of his gun. This was then programed to return to Earth on 9/11 and crashed into the Twin Towers thus proving that the Driver did it twice.
I am sorry I do not intend to make light of either events but is as likelly as the events 7 Forever supposedly invents.

Originally Posted by jayfor

Nah!! IM SIRIUS the one that will get me is Greer actually fired an orb out of his gun. This was then programed to return to Earth on 9/11 and crashed into the Twin Towers thus proving that the Driver did it twice.
I am sorry I do not intend to make light of either events but is as likelly as the events 7 Forever supposedly invents.

Nah!! you know Greer actually fired a gun because he did. You can't even spell programmed correctly.

Originally Posted by IM SIRIUS

Another First from 7forever---I came to see what was up with your "9/11 Conspiracy". To my amazement it is even more over the top, [but it is entertaining], than "The Driver Shot Kennedy" postings.

My question is, do you actually believe in this, "..it wasn't terrorist high jacked planes, but drones and bombs.", or are you pulling our chain and sitting back laughing at our reactions to these unbelievable scenarios?

I have a suspicion that you make these up for entertainment purposes. May I suggest you do one on "Pope John Paul II's Assassination Attempt" or maybe "Pablo Escobar's Assassination." I would love to see what you come up with. I apologize ahead of time in case the moderators think I'm being crass, but after all, we did move and rename the JFK tread. After a lot of work on some AU members behalf getting lost in the mix I might add.

Another First from 7forever---I came to see what was up with your "9/11 Conspiracy". To your amazement it is even more obvious truth, [but it is entertaining], than "The Driver Shot Kennedy" truth.

My question is, do you actually have proof of your mythical beliefs, "..it was terrorist high jacked planes, not a drone that aired live on three news stations? You can't prove there was a plane because there's no evidence that can't be shredded by reality.

Originally Posted by Ciaerin

The slat looks off 7 because of the angle you are looking at. It is a simple mind trick, much like perodolia.

The slat looks off 7 because it's not where it's supposed to be. No angle changes that...sorry.