CIA Pilot Swears Oath: Planes Did Not Bring Towers Down On 9/11

Planes did not hit the twin towers on 9/11, says Ex-CIA pilot under oath

Former CIA officer and commercial jet pilot John Lear has sworn an affidavit stating the Twin Towers were not bought to the ground by planes crashing into them on 9/11.

In Lear’s expert opinion the official claim that two planes crashed into the towers is actually “physically impossible.”

With reports from the Kremlin that President Putin is ready to release satellite images proving that the Twin Towers were destroyed by “controlled demolition” rather than by the force of two planes, enormous strides towards disproving the official 9/11 Commission version are taking place.

An affidavit is serious business in law. Unlike any other form of statement, an affidavit becomes “truth in law” if it is not rebutted. It is now up to the opponents of John Lear’s theory to present evidence and attempt to disprove his statement point by point.

If they cannot or do not rebut the theory, the US Government will “by omission” be admitting that the official account provided by the 9/11 Commission is not the truth.

And believe me, John Lear’s statement makes a very strong case. He is not just a simple pilot throwing his opinion around. He is as close as you can come to being American intelligence and aerospace aristocracy.

The grandson of Learjet founder Bill Lear, John himself is a retired airline captain and former CIA pilot who has flown over 100 different types of plane during 40 years of active flying. He holds more FAA airman certificates than any other FAA certified pilot. He has flown covert CIA missions in Asia, Africa, Eastern Europe and the Middle East.

Ex-CIA Pilot John Lear says that flying a plane into the Twin Towers is "physically impossible"
John Lear, a retired airline captain and former CIA pilot with over 19,000 hours of flight time, has sworn an affidavit stating that no planes flew into the Twin Towers as it would have been “physically impossible”.

Basically, you don’t want to argue with John Lear about flying and planes. You don’t want to argue with him about planes flying into tall buildings and bringing them to the ground. Here is what he has to say in his sworn affidavit about the planes that supposedly bought down the Twin Towers:

No Boeing 767 airliners hit the Twin Towers as fraudulently alleged by the government, media, NIST and its contractors. Such crashes did not occur because they are physically impossible as depicted, for the following reasons:

In the case of UAL 175 going into the south tower, a real Boeing 767 would have begun ‘telescoping’ when the nose hit the 14 inch steel columns which are 39 inches on center.

The vertical and horizontal tail would have instantaneously separated from the aircraft, hit the steel box columns and fallen to the ground. The engines when impacting the steel columns would have maintained their general shape and either fallen to the ground or been recovered in the debris of the collapsed building.

No Boeing 767 could attain a speed of 540 mph at 1000 feet above sea level ‘parasite drag doubles with velocity’ and ‘parasite power’ cubes with velocity. The fan portion of the engine is not designed to accept the volume of dense air at that altitude and speed.

The piece of alleged external fuselage containing 3 or 4 window cutouts is inconsistent with an airplane that hit 14 inch steel box columns, placed at over 500 mph. It would have crumpled.

No significant part of the Boeing 767 or engine could have penetrated the 14 inch steel columns and 37 feet beyond the massive core of the tower without part of it falling to the ground.

The debris of the collapse should have contained massive sections of the Boeing 767, including 3 engine cores weighing approximately 9000 pounds apiece which could not have been hidden. Yet there is no evidence of any of these massive structural components from either 767 at the WTC.

Such complete disappearance of 767s is impossible.

It takes a highly skilled pilot to interpret the “EFIS” (Electronic Flight Instrument Display) display, with which none of the hijacker pilots would have been familiar or received training on, and use his controls, including the ailerons, rudder, flaperons, elevators, spoilers and throttles to effect, control and maintain a descent.

RELATED: CIA Pilot Presents Evidence That No Planes Hit Towers On 9/11
This article was originally published in 2016 and is frequently updated

Baxter Dmitry

Baxter Dmitry

Baxter Dmitry is a writer at Your News Wire. He covers politics, business and entertainment. Speaking truth to power since he learned to talk, Baxter has travelled in over 80 countries and won arguments in every single one. Live without fear.
Follow: @baxter_dmitry
Baxter Dmitry
  • Yohan Luechtefeld

    Those involved by association would be wise to separate themselves and whislteblow on those responsible. 3k murdered victims is a LOT of jailtime

  • Mauricio Massa

    Dimitri Khalezov explains 95% of 911.

    • anton
      • Britton George

        They used multiple methods to take the building down. Firefighters report explosions in the basement. BIG buildings that need all means to bring them down. Understructure the first part to take out first, simple physics plus you can ask any demolition expert.

  • city zen

    First of all, anyone who was in manhattan that day knows this is nonsense. Could there have been a conspiracy? Sure. Could demolition have been involved? Sure. But no planes? No, you are an idiot. There were planes. We all saw, heard and felt them.

    Second, an affadvit being “truth in law” doesnt mean the CLAIMS it contains are true. It means it is assumed true that the person did indeed swear out the statements in it, and it means any thing they claim FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE of, is assumed true if not rebutted.

    It doesnt mean that if someone claims in an affadvit “the moon is made of cheese” and no one takes the time to disprove that, then the moon is legally considered to be made of cheese. Lear makes claims in an affadavit of which he has no direct knowledge. He isnt saying “I blew up the towers” or “I created the CGI to fool everyone”. He is saying “i’m an expert and here’s what I think”

    So we can presume he really does believe this, but his claims have no force or truth in law just because he swore them out.

    For pete’s sake, before you write about law, talk to a lawyer!

    • Big Dan

      Lear has about 10 specific points in the article that can’t be true, and you haven’t disputed one of them…such as the “telescoping”.

      • ifreemantoo

        Why not share those 10 points with substance instead of saying “just because”. Why is “telescoping” not true?

        For instance if you follow the logic behind Lear’s claims about the planes and buildings 1 and 2, then Lear’s similar claim about building 7 and the plane in Penn seem illogical. In my mind this puts a big hole in his theories about 3D/CGI planes.

        If 10 should be disputed what shouldn’t be disputed?

        • 69troyjan

          The pentagon was hit by a missile, even Bill Clinton screwed up and said it was bombed ! Hence no video tape.

          • Bob Shuttleworth

            An airliner with several thousand pounds of jet fuel on board, is a bomb. It wasn’t a slip of the tongue, it was fact.

          • rickie

            jet fuel does not burn or melt steel.

          • Bob Shuttleworth

            The steel neither burned nor melted. But go watch a blacksmith someday. They bend and shape hot metal all the time. Think about thousands of gallons of hot, burning jet fuel, plus all the flammables within the towers, – paper, wood desks, doors and cabinets, books, etc. The steel in the towers didn’t have to melt. That is the big fallacy in your thinking. But when hot enough, it can bend. The structures were already e=weakened from the impacts of the aircraft. The burning fuel heated the steel shell that was the exterior supporting structure of the towers.
            Remember, the first plane hit much earlier, and higher (Floors 93-99 of 110 stories) than the second, (floors 75-85 of 110) and the second building collapsed first. After the second impact that tower had an obvious list to the 35 floors above the impact area, It also had much more weight pressing down on the damaged area. (the first only had 11 stories) Add a little heat, the wall buckle outward until the weight of the structure collapses downward. Think, 35 floors of steel and concrete smashing down and picking up more and more debris weight and speed as in goes. The first building had about 1/3 the weight initially pushing down, so naturally it took longer to collapse, but again, once started, gravity was the master, and nothing would stop it.
            Still not convinced? Take a few cinder blocks and place them atop a metal tube Light a fire inside of that cylinder and make sure it keeps burning. Maybe get some jet fuel. After a while that metal tube will weaken and collapse.

      • D Thomas

        I will dispute all of them. He’s a living pilot, therefor he has crashed 0 planes into buildings, therefor he has no experience in this.
        As to the telescoping. The plane didn’t hit a solid wall of steel, at that momentum the steel beams in the building probably cut through the softer aluminium of the plane. Kinda the same was a potato doesn’t telescope when you put it through a French fry cutter.

        • Cathleen Burke Zuabi

          I knew and I was at Captain John Ogonowski’s funeral, he was the captain from AA flight 11 out of Boston. Trust me, the guy behind this story is a lunatic. I knew John for over 10 years and I still know his wife and 3 children. Stories like this piss me off and it is an insult to the victims and their families. So STFU!

    • ifreemantoo

      “First of all, anyone who was in manhattan that day knows this is nonsense.” You must be a newbie to the questions about 9/11. Plenty of people video recorded in 9/11 and after 9/11 that disagree with the status-quo.

      The one who signs and affidavit is saying the claims are true. If you’re outright lying that can cause you a lot of problems. You left that out. I know I’ve use a few of them all successfully and I’m not a legal thief lawyer.

      Let’s say that a bank sends you a legal notice that you owe money where you don’t. Let’s say it was a stolen credit card. You don’t respond for whatever reason to the legal notice or affidavit making same claim you owe, well you’ve got a big problem on your hand and at least for awhile the moon my be made out of cheese. Most affidavits sit in a file somewhere to do something later or nothing at all; can prevent legal mischief avoid courts and legal proceedings. I know.

      Are all of Lear’s claims lacking direct knowledge? Direct knowledge of what? How pilots are trained; how commercial planes fly?

      Likewise real experts like Architects & Engineers for 9/11- are making a case for reopening and have a real investigation about 9/11 and that affidavit could later turn into real testimony.

      Over killing the affidavit trying to dismiss much substance and merit. Now isn’t there some sort of legalese saying that an error in one part of a contract doesn’t dismiss the whole. How does the nose of a plane appear to go through a building where there is no hole in the building? I’m not sayin’ I’m buying into CGI 3D planes, but that sure puts up an interesting question of ‘how”…

      Oh excuse me you were making the fact of the affidavit as having more substance than the expert pilots experience and knowledge. I guess you must be a legal thief expert and can only comment on your expertise.

      Lawyers are the problem.

      • city zen

        As I said, we can assume he isnt lying, ie, he believes his claims are true. They are still just claims. Just because he swore them out doesnt make them any more credible.

      • city zen

        and, no, no one who was in manhattan that day thinks there were no planes. No one who wasnt high on crack, anyway.

      • DRLJR

        I happen to be one of the people who saw the 2nd plane go in.

        And I had to avoid falling debris as well – both from the building and the plane.

        • Richard

          that falling debris.. it was real right? Let me ask you a hypothetical question… when the bulding came down?… where did all the debris go? There should have been thousands and thousands of pounds of debris and massive mounds of building materials and structural steel… did it disappear? What I know that I saw is that there was pulverized dust…almost as if it was blown to smitherenes… that’s right blown I said… not flown… where did the mass of materials go? I guess you are going to say you were there, you saw it, it was all there. Makes sense.

          • DRLJR

            A lot was blasted out into the surrounding area as dust and debris. I and a person I was with came close to getting hit by a piece of metal that was at something like 10 feet long and around 2 feet in basic diameter. It just missed an ambulance in the intersection by building 4. A lot fell down into the plaza area. It is a massively deep hole. The floors in the towers were open space. They were not built like the Empire State Building or the the other skyscrapers.

          • Cathleen Burke Zuabi

            were you there that day???????? Seriously shut up.

          • Bob Shuttleworth

            HOw much do you know about how cthe towers were bui;lt? look it up some time. and by the way. I took months to truck out all of the tons of Concrete and steel fron the sub basements. Go to the museum some time ans see how dee tose below ground level floors go, it scary,

          • kdracco

            3 9000 pound engines should be accounted for. I would have thought THAT to be in the museum.

          • Bob Shuttleworth

            There are parts of the aircraft engines on display at the 911 museum – at least what was left of them. Yes they were accounted for.

          • Bob Shuttleworth


            This is part way down the elevators into the sub basements of the former Twin Towers (now the 9/11 Museum). Yes, there was a lot of space down there for the buildings to collapse into.

          • rickie

            only implosions go straight down. and mr.know it all, what happened to building 7 when their hologram failed, and it was imploded and went straight down?

          • Bob Shuttleworth

            What BS book are you reading. “straight down” it the result of a loss of structural support. If your scenario were real, they would have collapsed immediately, not an hour or more later.

          • rickie

            why so much destruction? it was caused by military top secret implosive devices, implanted in the buildings before hand.

          • Bob Shuttleworth

            Right, you are going to secretly slip thousands of pounds of explosives into office spaces filled with hundreds of working civilians without anyone being the slightest bit suspicious? You are dreaming. Implosions, such as those used to take down old buildings, take weeks of preparation. Buildings are basically gutted and thousands of feet of detonation cord and thousands of pounds of high explosive, normally attached to the steel girders supporting the building. Unfortunately, in the twin towers there are no internal steel girders. The supporting steel structure on the Twin Towers was the outer skin. SO to =use such explosives on the twin towers, they would have needed to strap those explosives to the exterior walls. Funny, but not one person has ever reported such a thing.
            More Facts,:
            The Boeing 767-200 was used on both towers; (Flights 11 & 175)
            300,000 lbs take off weight
            Carries about 30,000 pounds of jet fuel
            Wing span of 156 feet
            Wing area 3,049 Sq feet.
            Can fly at 528 mph (.80 mach)
            So you’ve got an object, made of steel and structural aluminum, weighing 150 tons , flying at about 3/4 the speed of sound. Carrying nearly 30,000 pounds of jet fuel (High grade kerosene). Slam that into a structure that basically has only a relatively thin skin of steel, at about a 45 degree angle. That, dear Rickie, IS A BOMB. In WWII Japanese zeroes, in a last ditch effort , were used in kamikaze attack against US warships. When successful, the planes, much smaller and more fragile and slower that the 767 could penetrate the thick steel deck of an aircraft carrier. And you think that the 767 couldn’t do that much damage to the twin towers? You are 100% deluded.

          • rickie

            why are you always wrong, where do you get your info. there were trucks going in and out of the 9/11 locations overnight 3 to 6 months before 9/11 and they were supposed to be rewiring the elevator shafts. and thats where they planted the top secret military implosion devices.

          • Bob Shuttleworth

            Rickie – Have you ever been in NYC late at night? Nearly every building has trucks going in and out, and for the past hundred years or more, and horse drawn carts for centuries before that. You are fully delusional. By your theory each and every tall building in NYC is being wired for explosives. Where are you getting this absurd information from?

          • rickie

            i didn’t say that, i said the twin towers, you are delusional.

          • Bob Shuttleworth

            You said, “there were trucks going in and out of the 9/11 locations overnight 3 to 6 months before 9/11”, Most truck go into NYC at night because of the traffic during the day. This included the twin towers. Trucks going in and out, even to do upgrade work or whatever, is hardly unusual either in the twin towers or anywhere else.

          • Bob Shuttleworth

            Evder smash one cinder block into another. You get chips and dust – concrete dust – now imaging 30 stories of weigh smashing down on the concrete floors below – small pieces and a lot of concrete dust! what do you think that cloud was predominately made of?

      • kdracco

        Horrible reading comprehension. He is stating, not it a specific phrase, that what crashed was NOT a B 747.

    • 69troyjan

      Those planes you saw were hologram technology, every word Lear said was absolutely True !

      • city zen

        You werent there. I was.

        • Rich Webb

          where are the remains of the plane if they can find passports they can find engines

          • Bob Shuttleworth

            110 stories collapsed/pancaked into a 4 story pit. Even really stomp hard on a bus? how much was left? That’s what happened to the airliners, and several thousand people.

          • Scott Goldman
          • rickie

            our secret society government sure does some stupid things. how would a landing gear gear get 3 blocks away from ground zero, and wouldn’t anyone report the tremendous sound it would have made crashing between two buildings. and there is the rope wrapped around it, like someone lowering it into that space.

          • kdracco

            Absolute BS. You have no damn idea on how physics and mass & kinetic energy work. The metal from the airplane, specifically the engines, would have remained passed through the concrete like butter and bent any H or I beams it came in contact with. However, there was no report on the engines. There never has been. The engines would have remained and the turbines as well.

          • Bob Shuttleworth

            You obviously know nothing about the construction of the Twin Towers. They weren’t built with standard I Beam construction. It was a new and unique design. The outer walls held the weigh of the interior floors. No I beams. Kind of shoots you asinine theory all to s#!t doesn’t it?

          • Jason Strickland

            Neither plane could have been travelling at or around 450-500 mph at or below sea level due to the drag created at that speed. Nor could the novice pilots have descended from 30000+ ft and maintain that speed. The reason for this is the added drag that is applied based on the increased density of the air. The jet would run into a major problem with having a strong enough structure to withstand the extra force on it. R=1/2CAv2,F=ma, p=mv/t
            The impact of each plane did not severe the entire core, between 10-15 were damaged on either tower. 47 columns were built into the core, consisting each of box columns. Each column started at the bedrock and tapered from around 4 inches to ¼ in at the top. The impact of each left around 30+ columns to hold the weight of the upper portion of each tower, due to the number of intact columns the weight would have been redistributed to the other columns.
            There were 59 perimeter columns on each face of the towers, and one column on each corner bevel, making a total of 240 perimeter columns in each tower. Like the core columns, the thickness of the perimeter columns tapered from the bottom to the top of the towers. The way they were built they could sustain more than what they were rated for, much more.
            Upon impact the fuel ignited and converted the fuel’s chemical potential energy to kinetic energy, heat and sound in the form of the huge fireballs.U=Q-W Most of the fuel each plane carried was gone in a matter of seconds when the huge fireballs each shot out of the towers, any fuel leftover would have burned off in a matter of minutes and would not have contributed any energy to the fires. S=Q/T
            NIST states the fuel burned off quickly, around 10 minutes which would have left nothing but fires from office materials which will only reach a temp of approximately 700-800 degrees Fahrenheit which is far from being able to disintegrate/pulverize or weaken steel for that matter.
            The rapid onset of destruction present at collapse is a problem because of factors like the intact core and the lower portion being structurally sound and untouched by fire. Due to those factors it would be impossible for the upper portion to destroy the lower, especially when the upper disintegrated as the collapse started.
            As a result of it disintegrating, the mass was dispersed as the North Tower collapsed. Due to Newton’s 3rd law of Motion, the upper and lower portions would have been destroyed at the same rate, an equal number of floors from the upper and lower would have been destroyed and that would have been the end of the collapse. Equal forces would have acted on each. Fab=-Fba
            The constant acceleration recorded during the collapse of both was around free fall time which would occur only if gravity were the only influence on the tower, due to the intact core resistance was present as was in the lower intact portion of the towers.
            The collapse should have occurred progressively over time and not in the immediate manner it did.
            9/11 was a false flag, it was devised by the CIA to create a way to justify war. It has happened in the past with Vietnam and would have with Cuba.

          • kdracco

            May God help your stupidity. I obviously cannot compare to the knowledge you have acquired from ABC, CNN, and what ever other media source that is ran by people that report to The Council on Foreign Relations. The walls were CROSS BRACED you dimwit. The basement structure was built INTO THE BEDROCK! There is no amount of kerosene that you can spill on the steel used in the H beams that would or could ever melt it without enclosing the entire building and pumping oxygen into it. Let me clarify this one thing for you and any other deniers about the airplanes not bringing it down. The two nuclear bombs dropped in japan did not take down any high rise buildings. There was enough heat generated in those bombs to turn areas with sand into glass. How then was it possible for a FKN airplane to take down the 3 buildings with such a high amount of heat that no metal was melted, yet still managed to bring the building down. You can’t argue that fact, and if you try it only demonstrated that your ability to critically think does not exist and therefore you have no business commenting.

          • rickie


          • Bob Shuttleworth

            Oh, and one of the landuing gears was found wedged between two buildings a couple of blocks away.

        • Richard

          All four black boxes were allegedly never found! Let’s see, no plane remains found… or passenger … stuff… passports of course of highjackers FOUND! iT’S a fricken miracle!!!

          • Allen Victor Cox

            No it’s make believe, These people who imagined they saw planes that were so strong they cut through steel and concrete should stick to their Drugs! Keep watching Road Runner stop Supporting this Hoax!

          • Bob Shuttleworth

            They didn’t take their passports with them. those were found in their hotel rooms.

          • Vancouver BC

            Are you sure ? 911 was a complete sham . The day before 911 Donald Rumsfeld announced that the treasury could not account for 2.3 trillion dollars


            There is so many questions and obvious signs of demolition . Six weeks after there was still molten metal burning below ground .

            There has been an endless syphon of US dollars leaving the taxpayer on the hook .

            I think 90% of people fear the truth and cling to the bogus story we were all lead to believe .


          • Bob Shuttleworth


            Even if those funds were missing, why does that translate to the Twin Towers?

          • kdracco

            Not true, I’ll never forget when a reporter said, “they have just found a passport belonging to one of the terrorist” before anybody ever knew anything. 3 blocks away she said.

          • Bob Shuttleworth

            Neither were any desks, or water coolers, or file cabinets found. Gee I guess the emptied out the entire two buildings? The hijackers Passports were NOT found at ground zero, they were at the hijackers rooms. The planes were crushed under the falling debris. The construction of the Twin towers was unique. When they fell, they fell like houses of cards. Do a bit a research. I lived in North Jersey as the towers were being built. It was NOT the standard Girder construction.

          • rickie

            yes, it was a much better design than in the past, watch it on you tube.the only thing that could take it down were hi-tech explosives.

          • Bob Shuttleworth

            Better – Debatable. Faster? Definitely, and had they not been struck with large Aircraft nearly full of fuel that ignited the fires , heated and softened the metal and they collapsed. The Standard Girder, box construction would not have been so easily compromised.

          • rickie

            you had better read up on the temp. of jet fuel, and the melting point of steel. i repeat burning jet fuel can not get hot enough to melt steel. i can easily see you didn’t view or read the facts. oh, and where did the wings go? they should have been on the outside on the ground, being cut instantly by the much harder steel of the building. (who are you working for)

          • Bob Shuttleworth

            And I repeat again, that the metal did NOT need to be melted to be compromised. Get that through your head. It is a scientific fact that heat softens metal. Softened metal bends. The temperatures of the metal in the towers, especially when already compromised by the crashing planes, only needed to be heated which the jet fuel, combined with whatever else caught fire after being doused with that fuel, was sufficient to compromise the metal in the tower. Even the architect conceded that in the design of the towers, although he’d taken into consideration the possibility of a fire, he’d not taken into consideration the heat and duration of the fire that was caused by a crashing jetliner. Tons upon tons of weigh pressing down on a structure that had exterior walls and a center columnar construction.
            FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn’t need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength—and that required exposure to much less heat. “I have never seen melted steel in a building fire,” says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. “But I’ve seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks.”

            “Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F,” notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. “And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent.” NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

            But jet fuel wasn’t the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.

            “The jet fuel was the ignition source,” Williams tells PM. “It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down.”

          • Bob Shuttleworth

            Think about a hundred tons of skyscraper falling straight down on top of something. How much will be left. End of argument.

          • rickie

            in the history of the world ,there has NEVER been a steel skyscraper come down by fire. and this is no exception, there were implosive devices planted in those buildings ahead of time. go to you tube and watch the many articles on 9/11

      • Julie

        So where are the missing people on those planes that definitely took off that morning?

        • DelRioRoy

          The passengers of each plane were reduced to ashes from the tremendous heat

        • Bob Shuttleworth

          Ever stomp on an ant? I mean really stomp? How much of that ant was left? The Twin Towers fell like a giant version of your foot on that ant. They were pulverized by the sheer weight of the materials that fell on them. Did you see that dust cloud? Part of oit was the vaporized remains of thouisands of human beings. Those not `completely crushed were burned to a crisp from the heat.

          • kdracco

            Metal engines weighing 9000 pounds do not just pulverize. The man has seen airplanes crash and knows what happens when they do. You need to stop being a TV monkey believing what the TV want’s you to believe. People that sit on the board of directors for the media companies also hold seats in senate and congress, START THINKING!

          • rickie

            bob our government has you brainwashed. for one, jet fuel CANNOT melt steel.

          • Benjamin Donaldson

            even wood can melt steel with enough oxygen. Which any metal worker knows. Not saying the buildings falling weren’t controlled demolition, and not arguing with any theories about conspiracy, but this is just false. Yes, set a pile of combustible material (everything inside the buildings, papers, carpet, etc) alight (with jet fuel just as initial igniter–like lighter fluid), give your fire plenty of oxygen (updraft from very tall building acting like a giant chimney), and you’ll melt steel.

          • rickie

            except for the world trade center, there has never been a steel framed skyscraper brought down by fire.

        • rickie

          and where are the jets from all 3 areas that was supposed to have downed jets?

      • Cathleen Burke Zuabi

        I knew and I was at Captain John Ogonowski’s funeral, he was the captain from AA flight 11 out of Boston. Trust me, the guy behind this story is a lunatic. I knew John for over 10 years and I still know his wife and 3 children. Stories like this piss me off and it is an insult to the victims and their families. So STFU you idiot

      • Bob Shuttleworth

        You’ve been watching too much Star Trek – this didn’t happen on a Holo-deck, and we sure as hell didn’t have that king of Hologram technology i n 2001.

        • rickie

          hologram technology was invented befoe 2001. your talking like 2001 was the cave man era.

      • DelRioRoy

        B.S. Those passenger planes were real. Lear is delusional.

      • Britton George

        Took me a while to come around to Lear’s assertions as well as others that told me so online by their own research. Thats the power of the decepticon media.

    • Tom Minkler

      Thank you city zen

    • BrotherRog

      It is possible that planes hit those buildings, but not the specific commercial aircraft that are said to have been the planes to hit those towers. With this scenario, the commercial planes were perhaps flown into the ocean, and some other planes, packed with explosives, hit the towers.

      • Cathleen Burke Zuabi

        I knew and I was at Captain John Ogonowski’s funeral, he was the captain from AA flight 11 out of Boston. Trust me, the guy behind this story is a lunatic. I knew John for over 10 years and I still know his wife and 3 children. Stories like this piss me off and it is an insult to the victims and their families. So STFU!

        • BrotherRog

          Your friend is dead either way. I’m sorry about your loss. Peace.

      • Bob Shuttleworth


        • rickie

          b.s. you are either part of the secret society, or an absolute moran. like i said, watch the you tube videos, with an open mind. although i doubt that if that is possible with your mindset.

          • Bob Shuttleworth

            Rickie, You obviously don’t have a clue. Were you even alive at the time? Hundreds of people witnesses the first tower being hit, and since that was big news, tens of thousands of New Yorkers witnesses the second strike on the towers, plus every major and minor broadcast news outlet. The NBC Today show was discussing the first hit when the second plane, on live cameras, I was watching at that moment, along with millions of other Americans.hit the second tower.. Tens of thousands of living breathing witnesses as opposed to a few nut cases who weren’t anywhere near the event, claiming that they know what really happened. They all need mental care.

          • rickie

            yes i was alive, and saw it live (a hologram like I’ve seen other holograms, that look real) and by the way that avatar picture is an old one.

          • Bob Shuttleworth

            Only in the past two or three years have holographic projections be5en usable in full daylight. The technology is absurdly complicated and it only has a narrow fields to work within. No system even now exists that could come even close to throwing a projection that would fool the thousands that saw it live in NYC 16 years ago. Back then the technology to project such an image, in daylight, was barely even dreamed of. (Yes Holograms were around in 2001) but not the quality that would have been needed, and not the technology to project it.

          • rickie

            wrong i saw one in 2013, and there were others long before that.

          • Bob Shuttleworth

            Did you see it in broad daylight, and under a cloudless sky? Was it visible from thousamnds of feet away, perhaps miles away? Was it under the conditions you claim that they pulled off over 15 years ago. A fully developed, believable airliner, flying miles though the sky? Or did you see a demonstration on a stage, in a building, under very controlled circumstances? Yes I’ve seen, and been a part of that type of demonstration as well. VERY impressive, And that was in 2011. It was leading edge technology at the time and didn’t exist ten years earlier. Or are you now going to claim we had access to some Alien technology, years ahead of what was possible?

          • rickie

            i saw it in broad sunny daylight it was a house, for 2 straight days. also if these planes were real where are the airline markings on them? (there were none) they were military aircraft at best. where did the go? impossible for a whole plane to penetrate the twin towers, there were no jet parts found there or at the pentagon, there was no jet found in pennsylvania, just some very small parts thrown around by the government.

          • Bob Shuttleworth

            You saw a stationary object in a controlled situation. As I said only in the past few years have such projections been possible, and certainly not in 2001. The degree of difficulty in projecting an aircraft, flying across the sky for many miles, and making course corrections and banking as it struck the towers, and to precisely match the silhouette of some imagingined pre-placed explosive devices, while being viewed from various angles and distances is exponentially more technologically difficult, and currently impossible (but give it a few years.)

            Below are two Photos taken on 9/11, One shows a piece of fuselage on the grounds of the pentagon, the other is an aircraft engine near the Twin towers in NYC. Neither was “planted” Oh, and gee, the piece on the pentagon grounds has the marking from American airlines. -0– I know, you believe that these items were planted. Look at the other of the three images. It is of a military aircraft being test crashed, via rocket sled, at a solid steel and concrete wall, far thicker that anything at the WTYC or the Pentagon. It gives you some idea of what happens to an aircraft when it hits a solid object at high speed. Those aircraft could fly at over 500mph (#/4 the speed of sound) and you still think there would have been major pieces of the aircraft still laying around, after crashing at that speed, and then having thousands of tons of WTC towers falling on them? Use some common sense.
            IT WAS REAL!
            There arte tens of thousands of witnesses who saw the second hit live and in person.
            Believe what you will Rickie. You are being led around on a ;leash like a puppy, believing any fantastic story that comes your way. It is time for you to grow up and get a clue!

            This is my last response to you.


          • rickie

            and no one could have plated that piece there in the bottom photo there? and the engine they found 16 years later was not the kind of engine used on the 2 supposed jets that was supposed to go to the world center. where were all the tapes that were recording the pentagon. this is our government always losing or not releasing evidence on crucial material. why couldnt they stop the fires that went on for many weeks? because it was was the top secret ingredients that went into the implosion devices. and the government wouldn’t let any examiners any where near it, except their own. I’m not saying holograms were the only theory, but nothing else made any sense. and what was the cause of the implosion of bldg. 7, no planes hit that, and when they wired bldg 7 they also did the twin towers. to honestly believe anything else, is just burying your head in the sand.

    • Britton George

      Multiple witnesses saw a military jet or what appeared to be. I remember in youtube videos those walking around said it had no windows or commercial jet company markings on the side.

      Explains part of the drone theory. Transponder shut off as they fly over military bases meaning they were controlled to their targets:

    • Britton George

      About as close to the truth as you’ll get with this one:

    • kdracco

      You are completely taking out of context what he is saying. In general, it wasn’t a real B 747. Where are the Engines? Where were the wings and flaps, the freakin turbines man. Hologram or not. the point is it may have flown, but it wasn’t a 747. 3 9000 pound engines MISSING!? wtf!

    • ACozySoul

      Thank you!! Someone with a brain!

  • Tom Kwiatkowski

    I knew this was immediately BS when I saw the jailhouse lawyer postulation that “An affidavit is serious business in law. Unlike any other form of statement, an affidavit becomes “truth in law” if it is not rebutted. ” An affidavit has no chance of even such effect until it is introduced into an actual legal proceeding, and it must first conform to the rules of evidence before it is even admissible, e.g. if it is adjudged hearsay, it would not be admissible, or if it is asserting an expert opinion, it must first lay a foundation that it meets the standards of admissibility for expert testimony as to the particular subject. Affidavits on the core issues are rarely admitted in deference to the American and English rules that testimony be provided in person and subject to cross examination. Blathering this type of unfounded conspiracy crap about 9-11 is treasonous, as far as I’m concerned.

    • ifreemantoo

      I’m just curious because I’m not a legal thief, but couldn’t an “unrebutted” affidavit of truth be used to effect satisfaction and in fact avoid courts settlements or formal legal proceedings?

      Well it worked for me anyway against AT&T. AT&T said I owed. In Affidavit of Truth I said I didn’t because of XYZ facts. They didn’t respond. Tried to collect. I pointed out there was no response or challenge to my affidavit. They left me alone. Did the same thing with a credit card company, except they had some some legal thief lawyer office…the results were still the same and they left me alone.

      There are all different kinds of Affidavits (mechanics, builders…) as you should well know (being the expert legal thief yourself) that sit in a file somewhere to be later pulled out for legal proceeding, to avoid them or the paper just turns yellow. But if unrebutted after being served formal notice of affidavit will be pretty hard to overcome if challenged later.

      Now I won’t argue that the “jailhouse lawyer” overstated his position, but not anymore so than you blathered and overstated in your legal thief argument. And what if “it” does conform and not adjudged hearsay? No matter the man is saying what he says is true signed his name to it and had a notary verify his signature.

      You’re an intellectual bully. You prey upon the ignorance of people knowing that unless you’re a lawyer or like myself having used one you can tell just enough truth to cover up a big lie. Of course in your mind “I didn’t nothing illegal.”

      John Lear has some credibility as he was a professional commercial air pilot and CIA pilot. You “blathered” and over killed on the affidavit, but offer no expert opinion as to his claims made. Tom how do your flying credentials or expertise in flying offer a challenge to John Lear’s position?

      Now me I’m no expert on falling buildings. I won’t express an opinion on the Twin Towers but bldg 7 sure looks like a professional job compared to others I’ve seen. Likewise real experts like Architects & Engineers for 9/11- seem to present logical and scientific challenges to the status-quo report.

      Let’s forget about buildings and planes for a moment. Now if president GWB was pressured for over a year to form the 9/11 Commission by the Jersey Girls; after finally doing so appoints Henry Kissinger as the first head; but Henry after being confronted by the Jersey Girls resigns because Henry has a business relationship with Bin Laden; and when the 9/11 Commission attempts to get testimony from Bush and Cheney, it was not done sounder oath or separated from each other and…

      Well I bet you think that was all legal and no cause for concern or an attempted cover up of something regarding 9/11. Of course arguing the merits of oranges when were talkin’ apples or gummin’ up the truth with legalized mischief – well from your point of view is no cause for concern.

      Now actually i did see the video. So if you want to build upon one of Lear’s theories as not be consistent or logical it would be something he said about building 7 and the plane that crashed in Penn. But you’re the high priced legal thief, so I’m sure you caught it unless that is you have a closed mind or an agenda that makes you go overboard on blathering insignificant arguments about affidavits.

      • Tom Kwiatkowski

        I was going to engage in a conversation with you, even with one “legal thief” reference taken as humorous, but your repeated attacks make it clear that’s not what you’re interested in. I am no longer practicing law, and have a lot of issues where lawyers have taken this country, but I’m not going to pander to you on that, you’re not worth it. You may consider me a legal thief and intellectual bully for pointing out how conspiracists play and prey upon the public, but you have the Lilliputian attitude of “oh woe is me the victim against the big bad [fill in the blank]. You’re just not worth it talking to, beyond my having gotten this off my chest.

        • N. Gladstein

          Lilliputian – For the win! 🙂

          • Dan Sveaver

            Gotta love a Swift reference

        • Karen Glammeyer Medcoff

          in other words, you cannot refute it

          • Tom Kwiatkowski

            The burden of proof is on the one making the assertion that this happened. I do not have to prove a negative, that it didn’t happen. And I have refuted the credibility of the article. Affidavits, as explained, don’t do that. I’ll leave it to you to continue to believe in such garbage with your credulous mind.

  • Steve Walker

    Another idiot who has got some credence because of what his father did or who his father was.
    I suppose that 6m jews didnt die in the holocaust or thousands werent butchered in Rwanda in the 1990’s and man hasnt walked on the surface of the moon either and of course there is no such thing as Isis that is just USA propoganda.In fact I dont think your dad even flew a plane that is just propoganda
    GEt a life idiot and realise that the complete tosser here is YOU. Just becasue your dad did something doenst make yo an expert adn all this crap about affadavits ets is what it says CRAP

    • 69troyjan

      Wow, you’re a real fuckin idiot ! Nobody went to the moon shill.

    • Karen Glammeyer Medcoff

      I was watching the so called “live newscast” I can’t remember what station it was, but when the towers went down, the news reporter jumped the gun and said OMG the 2nd tower just fell. even though it was still standing in her “live” feed

      • ursulamargrit

        No, she was saying building 7 had come down, when it was clearly visible behind her. It came down twenty minutes later.

        • Karen Glammeyer Medcoff

          it’s been too many years ago, so my memory of it isn’t perfect. but yeah. knew something was way the hell off back then, but was also trying to help my blubbering husband who thought we had just entered world war 3

  • D Thomas

    Oh look he may be a pilot, but his material science and engineering credentials are as long as the ball-hair on a Newbury baby boy.

  • Wendy Davis

    Watch them squirm.

  • smitty888

    Until someone shows me where the planes are, and all the passengers, I will continue to treat this kind of thing as silly nonsense based on bogus pseudo info.

    • DC

      Exactly! Where are the planes and all the passengers? They sure weren’t present in the wreckage of the twin towers, Pentagon and the field in Pennsylvania!

      • smitty888

        One of my brothers worked at the Pentagon and took a few photos of the aircraft debris. Most striking to me was his photo of the undercarriage (wheels) of the aircraft.

        • Dreck

          Do they pay you by letter or by word?

        • Gene Laratonda

          Perhaps your brother can enlighten us as to where the video is from the at least 5 cameras mounted on the roof line of the Pentagon..

  • ewing2001

    No Plane hit the Towers ! Watch September Clues

    • Dave

      OMG….you are a dip-shit if you believe this. What a joke! I bet you vote for Trump, too. LOL. Fag!

      • Dreck

        Do they pay you by the letter or by word?

      • Dave

        I would suggest that most of the people commenting that “of course 767s hit the WTC – have no understanding of the subtleties of grammar – When saying that “no planes hit the WTC” means what LOOKED like planes hit the WTC NOT real planes.

      • Cindy Abel

        Lots of people vote for Trump…nothing at all to do with who or what you think is stupid.

        • Felonious Punk

          “Presidents are selected not elected.” – FDR

      • Jonathan Miller

        For a tool, you are rather cheap and useless…

      • Patrick Longworth

        I just wonder, Dave, why you feel the need to insult the person who shared the video? It doesn’t make you “more right” nor elevate the discussion. Agree to disagree rather than insulting the person.

      • Jeremy Parks

        Watch the video…..fag!

  • Robert

    John Lears expert opinion (the video) is from 2008 but unfortunately nothing happened since then. How old ist the affidavit?

    • David Heagney Jr

      About the same age.

  • Bruce Brown

    I believe it was controlled demolition, however to claim there are no planes when we all saw planes is absurd.

    • 69troyjan

      The planes were fuckin holograms, they’re were no planes and the towers were DUSTIFIED by Directed Energy Weapons !

      • Jonathan Miller

        Yeah, Space invaders did it…

      • BillBroonzy

        Hey Trojan, have I got a good deal for you. 12 tin hats and a 10 year supply of anti-psychotic meds.

  • Grace Carralero Barella

    All any one needs to know is; Marvin Bush…
    From there IT ALL FALLS APART.

  • smitty888

    This is silly to the point of being childish, appealing only to the ignorant and/or dimwitted. The surveillance cameras are not high speed enough to show detail of an object closing in at 500+ mph and there are more than ample detailed photographs of the aircraft debris and doened light poles around to debunk the nonsense. There is PLENTY of such footage. And where do you suppose ‘they’ hid all of the airplanes and all of those people? heh heh

    • AnotherLover

      The plane didn’t knock over any light poles. The people that watched,
      cowering in fear, as the plane flew directly over their heads tell you in “National
      Security Alert” exactly where the plane was — and where it was not. ALL of some dozen witnesses interviewed in the film put the plane in the exact same location, on the exact same flight path. It was
      nowhere near the light poles. The plane didn’t knock over the light poles —
      something else did.

      The plane is said to have knocked one light
      pole right into Lloyd England’s moving taxi cab! Amazing. Watch
      “National Security Alert” to get Lloyd’s take on the situation. Be sure to watch the final Lloyd England clip near the end of the film.

      highlight from “National Security Alert” is the interview with the Pentagon police officer
      who ran outside directly after the explosion — and watched the
      airplane fly away.

      The light poles tell the story. The plane was
      on the other side of a major thoroughfare — far away from the
      light poles and far away from England’s cab. You really gotta
      watch that doco — here’s a link:

      England’s final account of the day is spine-chilling (he was apparently unaware he was being recorded).

      The light poles tell the story. It was all a set-up. It had to be a set-up because someone had to make up the light pole story, someone knocked the light poles over, and someone hired Lloyd England to tell the tale. He tells it in the doco — with some unscripted ad-libbing caught candid-camera-style.

      Enjoy the show.

  • Ryan Mann

    So if two planes didn’t hit the buildings, what happened to the two planes and all those passengers, because two planes did indeed disappear, and 1 plane did indeed crash in PA.

    No one can say what the planes did when they hit the building for sure….

    Like I’ve said before, test it.

    Someone with billions of Dollars, build two new world trade centers just like the ones in 2001 in the middle of the Mohave 100’s of miles from any people, and then crash two identical planes into them and see what happens.

  • Josephine Harkay

    Osama bin Laden accepted responsibility for the attack of 9/11. He himself was surprised that the towers collapsed, but they were not built to withstand the impact of a huge aircraft. And what a coincidence that Putin’s satellite moved over New York City exactly at the time of the incident and saw the “truth!” Well, anyway, pilot John Lear got his 15 minutes of fame.

    • AnotherLover

      Osama bin Laden denied responsibility for 911. The blurry video confessions that came out later don’t even have the same actors in all of them.

      The towers actually were designed to withstand the impact of a huge aircraft. The designers were quite proud of the fact that the buildings could survive such an impact.

      The best 911 film is “National Security Alert.” These guys travelled to Arlington and interviewed many of the people that saw the plane flying towards the Pentagon that day, and they all agree on the path the plane took. And that path was nowhere near the downed light poles. That path was nowhere near Lloyd England’s cab. They interviewed him, too — Lloyd England. Watch him tell it. Especially watch the parts he’s not aware are being filmed (near the end of the film).

      Hope you’re not too happy believing the myth of 911. This documentary dispels it:
      National Security Alert

  • Julie

    Okay so where are the people on those planes and how did we think we saw 2 planes crashing into the towers?

  • BillBroonzy

    You can’t make this crap up! Is funded by George Soros? Anyone who believes this had to have to school to be this stupid!

  • craigbhill

    No planes, 5 planes, 911 planes, It’s IRRELEVANT The perps are the perps are the perps. SAVVY??? How many perps flew into your mind on 9/11—None?

  • Mark O’Brien

    But he’s not a materials engineer or metallurgical expert.

  • plato

    no black boxes were found at WTC

  • FredLaMotte

    I don’t know who is stupider: someone who believes our government, or someone who believes inane anti-government conspiracy theories.

    • Charlie Brown

      I don’t know who is stupider, a person who thinks stupider is a word, or someone who believes anti-government conspiracies

      • Gem

        Haha.. Tens of thousands of people happen to be looking up and filming the towers at that moment? Who said “I turned my television on and saw the second plane hitting the tower?” They saw it on tele it must be true…
        No way even if it was a plane, that the building would fall that way, and so completely.. I’ve seen a plane imbedded in a house, roof… With the house still standing…
        It’s a blatant lie that so many fools believe their govnt couldn’t possibly be so cruel…

  • BrotherRog

    why didn’t he speak out earlier?

  • BrotherRog

    on a related note, what was it that hit the Pentagon?


    It is also important for people to learn how the Twin Towers were built. They were not built like the Empire State Building or the other skyscrapers where beams were 100 feet or so. The floors of the Twin Towers were massive open space. There was a old special, from the 1973 time frame I believe, that went over the construction of the towers. It was the open floor space that made the WTC valuable real estate. Also, learn about blast furnaces and things about the towers will make sense as well.

  • Josephine Harkay

    “A real Boeing 767 would have been ‘telescoping’ when the nose hit etc.,” however, images show that the plane sliced through the South Tower and disappeared inside of it; it may have carried even extra explosives on board. E.g. the Titanic was supposed to be unsinkable; theory and practice are always two different things.

  • angelicvh

    If you were there watching it and saw the planes bring it down City Zen, I won’t refute, but too many people are saying there is more. Not only that but in 1945 a B-25 hit the empire State Building, though there was a lot of damage, 14 people I think were killed, the building stayed up. Not only that but some of the floors were opened for business. How did building 7 fall down? It came down like a demo….

  • Haardcase

    An appeal to authority. He may be a pilot, but if he’s not a structural engineer, his authority isn’t worth a hill of beans.

    And swearing an affidavit doesn’t put the onus on the government to respond. It just means that what he said is true *to the best of his knowledge*. That and a dollar will get you a cup of coffee.

    • Tj Mach

      i would like to know where you buy your cup of coffee, because here in Houston, it’s at least $1.29

  • Tony Harrod

    First of all,even if the planes didn’t really hit the towers,why did the third building disintegrate? nothing hit it…the building that was once home to ENRON ,and Black Water Security…? as far as the planes…has anyone heard of 3D technology?..and the Pentagon wasn’t hit by a plane..because no wreckage was found…ig it was hot enough to burn the plane,why is the building still standing ?….9/11 was an inside job and Cheney was president for an you in a digital age? What was accompliced in that time…..peace

  • Bruce_in_San_Jose

    BS! Dozens of individuals took videos of the impacts that day. Tens of thousands saw the impacts. Another twit looking for his 15 minutes of fame. Oh, the real scandal is that the Saudi family being helped out to the country by US government officials within hours of the attack, and now the data of their involvement is leaking out!

  • William Say

    How about some high school physics? Newton’s third law of physics says “for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction”, in other words the plane received as much impact force as the building. Which means every collision becomes a test of material strength. Steel and concrete beat aluminum every time!

    An object of lesser density and lesser mass can never penetrate an object of greater density and greater mass. The plane supposedly contacted the building over eight floors or about 80 feet of column height. Just that area of the columns contained more mass than the entire plane. Th eight concrete floors in that area contained at least fifty times the mass of the plane.

    The idea that the plane could pass through steel andi concrete without slowing down, without crumpling or breaking and disappear entirely into the building before exploding is ridiculous, even if you saw it with your own eyes.

    The video is fake!

    • sciencelover

      It can be easily explained by math too complicated to show here. Strength of materials is highly overrated, you have to factor in the forces involved. You start with F=ma, where f is force, m is mass and a is acceleration.

      One also must to take into consideration that the columns are not contiguous. They are composed of discrete structural elements that are bolted together. The weakest point would be at the connections, and any review of the photographic evidence shows that is where most of the failures occurred at the impact zone — either severed or bent inwards, which is consistent with ingress.

      The appeal to incredulity fails when you understand that a wooden 2×4 driven at hurricane speeds can punch a hole through a brick or concrete wall, or a potato gun can launch a potato straight through a steel plate, or a ping pong ball can penetrate a paddle if enough force is applied. Water can also be used to cut steel using sufficient force. Planes vs building is not a magical exception,

    • ranwolf76

      “An object of lesser density and lesser mass can never penetrate an object of greater density and greater mass.” never heard of E=MC2? a smaller lighter object moving at enough speed can do more damage than a slower larger object. it’s one of the reasons a bullet from a .223 rifle(2.5-6 grams) can penetrate farther than a .45 pistol(12-15 grams)

    • DelRioRoy

      Many of us throughout the country saw the second plane hit the second Tower building via live transmission – not a video tape.

  • Kylene Hobson

    And all the Phone calls to loved ones on those Planes, how do you explain that? Where are the people?

  • LadyHokage

    There were planes but they also uses explosives to bring down the towers. Also the planes had no people on them. I heard many things about where the people went, Although how do people keep secrets like this from linking out? They kill anyone they do not trust.

  • Bob Shuttleworth

    “No planes hit the towers” … Then explain the tens of thousands of Witnesses who saw the Planes hit the towers. I guess they were all under mass hypnosis at the time. I woke up in San Diego on that morning, turned on the “Today” show and saw the 1st tower burning, and within a few seconds saw the second plane hit the other tower, and watched as debris blast our of the far side.

    The twin towers were not built in the standard way using standard methods. There was a fairly solid core at the center where the Elevators were. the outside was a shell of lightweight steel, not thick columns as you seem to think.

    Couldn’t hit 540 MPH at 1000 feet? These aircraft came down, rapidly from about 30,000 feet. Ever coast downhill? – You gain speed , as they did and then leveled off.

    Telescoped? Are you an absolute idiot? When has any car, train , bus or Airplane ever telescoped when impacting a solid, or semisolid object. That force would compress them, as the wings sheared off dumping thousands of gallons of Jet Fuel into the interior of the building(s) Which when ignited by either the crash itself or the sheared electrical wiring of the Tower raising the temperature inside like a blast furnace. As unique as the construction was it was not built to withstand those temperatures. The metal casing and interior girders softened an collapsed. then gravity and momentum did the rest.

    By the way, One of the landing gear was found, a couple of blocks away, wedged between two buildings.

    Have you been to the Museum? there is a Jet engine there, or what was left of one after tons of metal and concrete collapsed on top of it.

    I don’t care what your father did, or how many hours you’ve flown, you seemingly don’t knoe spit about what your talking about.

  • DelRioRoy

    Those that say it’s a hoax are idiots.

  • Ian McGeechan

    I don’t accept the CT version of events for 9/11, but there is one area where I do see the problem with the official story and that’s building 7. Watch the film of building 7 falling and tell me that could happen as a result of a building burning to the ground. The whole building falls as one, straight into it’s own footprint. There is no gradual process which is the norm with any building fire. I sincerely believe the powers that be took the opportunity to get rid of a lot of documentation, whether the rest of it was a set up or not.

  • TL22

    Planes were involved because thousands of people witnessed them. However, is it possible that they were used as a decoy to create the illusion of a terrorist threat so that our government could propagate this as to go undetected themselves? To push their own political agenda? perhaps, but we’ll probably never know.

  • Dan Sveaver

    After the first plane hit, the news picked it up pretty fast, and everyone in my office was looking out the windows – we already had a clear view of WTC, and it was daylight and virtually a cloudless sky – and dozens of people, including myself, saw the second plane hit. I was 35 at the time, and I like to think that I knew what a plane looked like when I was that age, and I also like to think that all the people around me weren’t imagining it either. Not to mention people who saw it from other office buildings, or people who saw it from the ground, as they already had their eyes riveted to the skies after the first plane hit. Sorry, Lear. This isn’t X-Files and, while I applaud your imagination – and whatever hallucinogens you’ve been taking (they’re obviously quite powerful), you cannot tell me that I imagined that I saw a plane hitting the tower, and that I imagined the subsequent explosion…and fires…and smoke…until I saw the building collapse.

  • Josh

    The twin towers were absolutely brought down by explosive charges planted within the buildings…that is the only explanation for the complete pulverization of all the concrete and the contents of the buildings…the rubble pile was very small compared to the overall height of the buildings..
    If as the government says it “pancaked” there would be floors piled on top of each other approximately 20 stories in the air, and the floors would be intact. This did not happen…the massive vertical steel support columns were cut at 35 ft lengths, and not sticking up in the air like they would be if pancaked..the cutting of these beams indicates cutter charges placed at 35 ft intervals…notice how quickly the debris was removed, within days, and not cut on the ground, but precut. This massive crime scene was removed very quickly, which in itself is a criminal act…then of course building 7 controlled demolition a few hours later says it all….CONTROLLED DEMOLITION-INSIDE JOB.

  • Biznez

    All conspiracy theorists are absolute morons.

  • ACozySoul

    This is the most insane and stupid thing I’ve ever read! No planes? Ok, so the millions of people watching the tv and thousands of people walking the streets of NYC or looking out of their Windows were all hallucinating? Do I believe the government is behind this? Absolutely! But to say no planes flew into the WTC is ludicrous!