Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Lt. Col. Jeff Latas, U.S. Air Force (ret) Former combat fighter pilot. Aerospace engineer. Currently Captain at a major airline. Combat experience includes Desert Storm and four tours of duty in Northern and Southern Watch. Aircraft flown: McDonnell Douglas F-15E Strike Eagle and General Dynamics F-111 Aardvark fighter/bomber. Former President, U.S. Air Force Accident Investigation Board. Also served as Pentagon Weapons Requirement Officer and as a member of the Pentagon's Quadrennial Defense Review. Awarded Distinguish Flying Cross for Heroism, four Air Medals, four Meritorious Service Medals, and nine Aerial Achievement Medals. 20-year Air Force career.
I think that we Americans need to demand further investigation just to clarify the discrepancies that you've [Pilots for 9/11 Truth] found. And I think that we need to be getting on the phone with our Congressmen and women and letting them know that we don't accept the excuses that we're hearing now, that we want true investigators to do a true investigation." Google Videos
Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report
I can't answer that. But a missile is a more plausible explanation for that hole in the Pentagon. Check out the live video footage before the building collapsed in. The hole is just way too small for a plane to have hit it. And what about all that hi-tech surveillance the Pentagon has to have? Why no video evidence of a plane hitting it? The video they did release was of such poor quality that one would have to conclude they released it intentionally to throw people off. Their surveillance equipment has to be better than that. I'm sure they could have recorded the whole thing crystal-clear from space. They are the most powerful Government apparatus on this Planet. The video footage they released was absolute Bullshit.
The 757-200 dimensions:
Tail Height: 44 ft 6 in (13.6m)
Length: 155 ft 3 in (47.32m)
Wingspan: 124 ft 10 in (38.05m)
Body Exterior Width: 12 ft 4 in (3.7m)
Fuel Capacity: 11,489 us gal (43,490l / 43,490kg)
Maximum Takeoff weight: 255,000lb (115,680kg)
Typical Cruise Speed: 0.80 Mach (573.6mph / 956kmh)
Engines used on a 757: Two 166.4kN (37,400lb) Rolls-Royce RB211-535C turbofans, or 178.8kN (40,200lb) RB211-535E4s, or 193.5kN (43,500lb) RB211-535E4-Bs, or 162.8kN (36,600lb) Pratt & Whitney PW2037s, or two 178.4kN (40,100lb) PW2040s, or 189.5kN (42,600lb) PW2043s.
Now think carefully here, how big was the hole? Did you expect to see an airplane shaped hole in a reinforced building? And how clear of a picture can you find of the hole before the building collapsed? You know without all the smoke blocking it.
Now how often do most security cameras capture an image? How fast was the plane moving across that short stretch of ground?
It's all common sense, all you have to do is think and not listen to the nut cases. You've shown in other areas on the board that you have a brain, use it.
And no there are no missiles at the pentagon, just to clear that up. there are no, zero, none air defense mechanisms at the pentagon because the building sits within a half mile of a major approach and take off lane for Ronald Reagan International Airport. How many Jet liners would the defense system lock onto every day?
Like i said,i can't answer as to where the missile came from. But just take another close look at the hole in the Pentagon before it collapsed in. There just isn't any evidence a plane crashed inside the building. Many structural engineers have come to that conclusion. But the whole thing could be resolved instantly. All the Pentagon needs to do is release just one video or photo showing a plane crashing into the Pentagon. Because their awful disgrace of a video they did release hasn't convinced anyone with even an ounce of common sense.
With all that incredible hi-tech surveillance equipment at their disposal,that's the only video footage they had? Sorry,but that really is just unbelievable fantasy. We're talking about the Pentagon here. So let them release just one photo or video showing the plane crashing,then i'll be a bit convinced. Although so much time has passed,many wouldn't believe them now. Lots of questions still unanswered about 911. So i don't think it's 'Crazy" at all to continue asking the questions.
Lt. Col. Jeff Latas, U.S. Air Force (ret) Former combat fighter pilot. Aerospace engineer. Currently Captain at a major airline. Combat experience includes Desert Storm and four tours of duty in Northern and Southern Watch. Aircraft flown: McDonnell Douglas F-15E Strike Eagle and General Dynamics F-111 Aardvark fighter/bomber. Former President, U.S. Air Force Accident Investigation Board. Also served as Pentagon Weapons Requirement Officer and as a member of the Pentagon's Quadrennial Defense Review. Awarded Distinguish Flying Cross for Heroism, four Air Medals, four Meritorious Service Medals, and nine Aerial Achievement Medals. 20-year Air Force career.
I think that we Americans need to demand further investigation just to clarify the discrepancies that you've [Pilots for 9/11 Truth] found. And I think that we need to be getting on the phone with our Congressmen and women and letting them know that we don't accept the excuses that we're hearing now, that we want true investigators to do a true investigation." Google Videos
Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report
Yes the Government has been very successful at labelling anyone questioning their 911 story as being 'Crazy.' It's not too hard for them though considering they control the MSM. Their term 'Twoofer' is a disgrace. There are very intelligent educated Americans questioning the Government's story on 911. They're not just 'Twoofer Nuts.' We have to keep asking the questions. Because their answers so far are just pure unbelievable fantasy.
Lt. Col. Jeff Latas, U.S. Air Force (ret) Former combat fighter pilot. Aerospace engineer. Currently Captain at a major airline. Combat experience includes Desert Storm and four tours of duty in Northern and Southern Watch. Aircraft flown: McDonnell Douglas F-15E Strike Eagle and General Dynamics F-111 Aardvark fighter/bomber. Former President, U.S. Air Force Accident Investigation Board. Also served as Pentagon Weapons Requirement Officer and as a member of the Pentagon's Quadrennial Defense Review. Awarded Distinguish Flying Cross for Heroism, four Air Medals, four Meritorious Service Medals, and nine Aerial Achievement Medals. 20-year Air Force career.
I think that we Americans need to demand further investigation just to clarify the discrepancies that you've [Pilots for 9/11 Truth] found. And I think that we need to be getting on the phone with our Congressmen and women and letting them know that we don't accept the excuses that we're hearing now, that we want true investigators to do a true investigation." Google Videos
Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report
Yes the Government has been very successful at labelling anyone questioning their 911 story as being 'Crazy.' It's not too hard for them though considering they control the MSM. Their term 'Twoofer' is a disgrace. There are very intelligent educated Americans questioning the Government's story on 911. They're not just 'Twoofer Nuts.' We have to keep asking the questions. Because their answers so far are just pure unbelievable fantasy.
And you have been very successful at quoting people asking questions without any specific questions......
Rap sucks balls.
Yes the Government has been very successful at labelling anyone questioning their 911 story as being 'Crazy.' It's not too hard for them though considering they control the MSM. Their term 'Twoofer' is a disgrace. There are very intelligent educated Americans questioning the Government's story on 911. They're not just 'Twoofer Nuts.' We have to keep asking the questions. Because their answers so far are just pure unbelievable fantasy.
And you have been very successful at quoting people asking questions without any specific questions......
Yes,three massive sized steel buildings just turned to powder instantly and collapsed perfectly symmetrically because of some fires. Sorry,but that just doesn't happen. And many very educated structural engineers have been saying that for years. They are not just 'Twoofer Nuts.' I have concluded that the Government's story on 911 is the loony fantasy. But i guess we'll always agree to disagree on that. I can't change your mind. You believe their story and that's it for you. I'm not going to insult you because of that though. So lets just agree to disagree and call it a day. Enjoy your Holidays.
I wonder what Ron Paul thinks??????????????????????????????
Problems with your view:Massive steel structures don't just turn to powder instantly and collapse so perfectly symmetrically from some jet fuel and minimal fire. It just doesn't happen. There had to be another cause of these collapses. This is especially true of WTC 7. That was a perfect demolition. It did not collapse from those fires. Our Government has lied to us. I know most cannot and will not accept this,but it is reality.
Problems with your view:Massive steel structures don't just turn to powder instantly and collapse so perfectly symmetrically from some jet fuel and minimal fire. It just doesn't happen. There had to be another cause of these collapses. This is especially true of WTC 7. That was a perfect demolition. It did not collapse from those fires. Our Government has lied to us. I know most cannot and will not accept this,but it is reality.
1. The towers didn't turn to "dust".
2. "SOME" jet fuel? Two commercial jets with almost full loads of fuel.
3. "MINIMAL" fires? Tell that to the people that were JUMPING from the building.
Epic fail on your part. NEXT!!!
Bullshit. You said minimal fires after including ALL buildings. I'm not hiding "behind" the victims. People don't jump out of high rise buildings due to "minimal fires", YOUR WORDS! As far as WTC 1&2 collapsing name ONE other building IN THE WORLD with that same construction. THERE ARE NONE!! Can you say DESIGN FLAW??Problems with your view:Massive steel structures don't just turn to powder instantly and collapse so perfectly symmetrically from some jet fuel and minimal fire. It just doesn't happen. There had to be another cause of these collapses. This is especially true of WTC 7. That was a perfect demolition. It did not collapse from those fires. Our Government has lied to us. I know most cannot and will not accept this,but it is reality.
1. The towers didn't turn to "dust".
2. "SOME" jet fuel? Two commercial jets with almost full loads of fuel.
3. "MINIMAL" fires? Tell that to the people that were JUMPING from the building.
Epic fail on your part. NEXT!!!
Don't make this about the 911 victims. That's just weak-minded Bullshit and you know it. Stop hiding behind the suffering of others. 'Minimal Fire' refers to WTC 7. Not nearly enough fire to cause such a massive steel structure to collapse so perfectly symmetrically. It's just not possible. And jet fuel could not have caused such massive steel to turn to powder instantly and collapse so symmetrically. It's just unbelievable. I'm willing to have a discussion with you but don't hide behind the victims to try and make a point. If you're gonna do that,then there is no point in discussing this further.
Bullshit. You said minimal fires after including ALL buildings. I'm not hiding "behind" the victims. People don't jump out of high rise buildings due to "minimal fires", YOUR WORDS! As far as WTC 1&2 collapsing name ONE other building IN THE WORLD with that same construction. THERE ARE NONE!! Can you say DESIGN FLAW??Problems with your view:
1. The towers didn't turn to "dust".
2. "SOME" jet fuel? Two commercial jets with almost full loads of fuel.
3. "MINIMAL" fires? Tell that to the people that were JUMPING from the building.
Epic fail on your part. NEXT!!!
Don't make this about the 911 victims. That's just weak-minded Bullshit and you know it. Stop hiding behind the suffering of others. 'Minimal Fire' refers to WTC 7. Not nearly enough fire to cause such a massive steel structure to collapse so perfectly symmetrically. It's just not possible. And jet fuel could not have caused such massive steel to turn to powder instantly and collapse so symmetrically. It's just unbelievable. I'm willing to have a discussion with you but don't hide behind the victims to try and make a point. If you're gonna do that,then there is no point in discussing this further.
Your entire argument is based on 1/10 of ONE PERCENT of the engineers in the world that says what you do about the collapse.
WTC7 is a different building. The front was collapsed by the falling debris, not DUST, from WTC 1&2 collapsing. I've seen the videos of the fires in 7. Name another building that had huge tanks of diesel fuel stored in the middle of the building. And don't say "free fall". They weren't.
nist determined structural damage frrom falling debri was not a factor in the collapse of wtc 7 and that stored fuel played no role in the collapse..the nist theory is that the failure of a single column # 79 due to fire is the cause of the collapse...you support offical story are yet completely ignorant to the official findings... You are a jokebullshit. You said minimal fires after including all buildings. I'm not hiding "behind" the victims. People don't jump out of high rise buildings due to "minimal fires", your words! As far as wtc 1&2 collapsing name one other building in the world with that same construction. There are none!! Can you say design flaw??problems with your view:
1. The towers didn't turn to "dust".
2. "some" jet fuel? Two commercial jets with almost full loads of fuel.
3. "minimal" fires? Tell that to the people that were jumping from the building.
Epic fail on your part. Next!!!
don't make this about the 911 victims. That's just weak-minded bullshit and you know it. Stop hiding behind the suffering of others. 'minimal fire' refers to wtc 7. Not nearly enough fire to cause such a massive steel structure to collapse so perfectly symmetrically. It's just not possible. And jet fuel could not have caused such massive steel to turn to powder instantly and collapse so symmetrically. It's just unbelievable. I'm willing to have a discussion with you but don't hide behind the victims to try and make a point. If you're gonna do that,then there is no point in discussing this further.
Your entire argument is based on 1/10 of one percent of the engineers in the world that says what you do about the collapse.
Wtc7 is a different building. the front was collapsed by the falling debris, not dust, from wtc 1&2 collapsing. I've seen the videos of the fires in 7. Name another building that had huge tanks of diesel fuel stored in the middle of the building. And don't say "free fall". They weren't.
nist determined structural damage frrom falling debri was not a factor in the collapse of wtc 7 and that stored fuel played no role in the collapse..the nist theory is that the failure of a single column # 79 due to fire is the cause of the collapse...you support offical story are yet completely ignorant to the official findings... You are a jokebullshit. You said minimal fires after including all buildings. I'm not hiding "behind" the victims. People don't jump out of high rise buildings due to "minimal fires", your words! As far as wtc 1&2 collapsing name one other building in the world with that same construction. There are none!! Can you say design flaw??don't make this about the 911 victims. That's just weak-minded bullshit and you know it. Stop hiding behind the suffering of others. 'minimal fire' refers to wtc 7. Not nearly enough fire to cause such a massive steel structure to collapse so perfectly symmetrically. It's just not possible. And jet fuel could not have caused such massive steel to turn to powder instantly and collapse so symmetrically. It's just unbelievable. I'm willing to have a discussion with you but don't hide behind the victims to try and make a point. If you're gonna do that,then there is no point in discussing this further.
Your entire argument is based on 1/10 of one percent of the engineers in the world that says what you do about the collapse.
Wtc7 is a different building. the front was collapsed by the falling debris, not dust, from wtc 1&2 collapsing. I've seen the videos of the fires in 7. Name another building that had huge tanks of diesel fuel stored in the middle of the building. And don't say "free fall". They weren't.
Bullshit. You said minimal fires after including ALL buildings. I'm not hiding "behind" the victims. People don't jump out of high rise buildings due to "minimal fires", YOUR WORDS! As far as WTC 1&2 collapsing name ONE other building IN THE WORLD with that same construction. THERE ARE NONE!! Can you say DESIGN FLAW??Don't make this about the 911 victims. That's just weak-minded Bullshit and you know it. Stop hiding behind the suffering of others. 'Minimal Fire' refers to WTC 7. Not nearly enough fire to cause such a massive steel structure to collapse so perfectly symmetrically. It's just not possible. And jet fuel could not have caused such massive steel to turn to powder instantly and collapse so symmetrically. It's just unbelievable. I'm willing to have a discussion with you but don't hide behind the victims to try and make a point. If you're gonna do that,then there is no point in discussing this further.
Your entire argument is based on 1/10 of ONE PERCENT of the engineers in the world that says what you do about the collapse.
WTC7 is a different building. The front was collapsed by the falling debris, not DUST, from WTC 1&2 collapsing. I've seen the videos of the fires in 7. Name another building that had huge tanks of diesel fuel stored in the middle of the building. And don't say "free fall". They weren't.
'Minimal Fire' referred to WTC 7. I think i already made that clear no? Those fires could not have caused such a perfectly symmetrical collapse. It was clearly a perfectly executed demolition. And what about the other WTC buildings that were directly below the Towers? They all suffered far more damage than WTC 7 did. Yet they did not completely collapse. They were all left standing after the Tower collapse. The photos and videos are out there showing this. The Government's stories just don't add up. And that's all i'm saying.
Bullshit. You said minimal fires after including ALL buildings. I'm not hiding "behind" the victims. People don't jump out of high rise buildings due to "minimal fires", YOUR WORDS! As far as WTC 1&2 collapsing name ONE other building IN THE WORLD with that same construction. THERE ARE NONE!! Can you say DESIGN FLAW??
Your entire argument is based on 1/10 of ONE PERCENT of the engineers in the world that says what you do about the collapse.
WTC7 is a different building. The front was collapsed by the falling debris, not DUST, from WTC 1&2 collapsing. I've seen the videos of the fires in 7. Name another building that had huge tanks of diesel fuel stored in the middle of the building. And don't say "free fall". They weren't.
'Minimal Fire' referred to WTC 7. I think i already made that clear no? Those fires could not have caused such a perfectly symmetrical collapse. It was clearly a perfectly executed demolition. And what about the other WTC buildings that were directly below the Towers? They all suffered far more damage than WTC 7 did. Yet they did not completely collapse. They were all left standing after the Tower collapse. The photos and videos are out there showing this. The Government's stories just don't add up. And that's all i'm saying.
Minimal fires in WTC 7? You really believe that? For 7 hours there were minimal fires?
Have you seen the videos taken that day? In particular concentrate on the south side of the building. that would be the side that the truther videos never show you.....
'Minimal Fire' referred to WTC 7. I think i already made that clear no? Those fires could not have caused such a perfectly symmetrical collapse. It was clearly a perfectly executed demolition. And what about the other WTC buildings that were directly below the Towers? They all suffered far more damage than WTC 7 did. Yet they did not completely collapse. They were all left standing after the Tower collapse. The photos and videos are out there showing this. The Government's stories just don't add up. And that's all i'm saying.
Minimal fires in WTC 7? You really believe that? For 7 hours there were minimal fires?
Have you seen the videos taken that day? In particular concentrate on the south side of the building. that would be the side that the truther videos never show you.....
Compared to past fires in comparable sized buildings,they were relatively small fires. They could not have caused such a perfect Demolition-style collapse. It just doesn't happen. And check out the other WTC buildings that were right below the Towers. They suffered far more damage than WTC 7 and yet were left standing after the collapses. The video & photo evidence shows this. So something is not right with the Government's story on WTC 7. And if that's the case,what else have they lied about?
