9/11 CONSPIRACY: WAS FLIGHT 175 A MILITARY PLANE?

Posted on October 16th, 2009 by admin in military | 16 Comments »

When the footage of the second plane to hit the WTC is closely analyzed, there are several anomalies that are apparent. The first is an asymmetrical missile-like object on the belly of the plane that should not be on a commercial airliner. The second is the flash the emits from this “pod” a second before the impact with the building. Was this plane indeed a Commercial airliner? Was the anomaly on the underside of the plane actually a high-tech weapon? See “In plane site” for free of google video for more information.

Duration : 0:1:5


[youtube ZzbVn3o8JNE]

16 Responses

  1. macaframa12 Says:

    70forbidde..that is …
    70forbidde..that is a complete lie you took to many meth hits and made that up…a plane like that doesnt land in a field and why the would passengers get off and do that…liar

  2. RMCDisciple Says:

    Never smoke the …
    Never smoke the whole bag at once.

  3. 70forbidden Says:

    THe Lady whos farm …
    THe Lady whos farm field united 93 supposedly crashed in, saw the plane dive and went to investigate and saw flight united 93 landed and black jeeps escorting the passenger off the plan into thes black unmarked jeeps..after which the plane blew up :o

  4. 666calculator Says:

    Ahhhhh Arggg, don’t …
    Ahhhhh Arggg, don’t you know what is happening yet.

  5. spacer1951 Says:

    175 is now under a …
    175 is now under a diffrent number or in a scrapyard good luck to the normal americans not the rich

  6. iPAllianzee Says:

    One problem: Is …
    One problem: Is that military plane missing? Where is the plane of “flight 175″?

  7. vljmsl Says:

    That Makes scents!
    That Makes scents!

  8. ViennasNachos Says:

    why should i not …
    why should i not believe in dinosaurs?

    dinosaurs remains where found

  9. venuecam Says:

    great theory. It …
    great theory. It would make sense.

  10. spacer1951 Says:

    if they were not …
    if they were not the planes that were supposed to be they must have landed the other planes and killed every passenger on them

  11. EarthsGravitySucks Says:

    i’d like to …
    i’d like to dedicate my bro’s new site to the memory of lisa beamers husband, who valiantly died crashing flight 93 into a hole which was already there, may he rest in pieces, where ever they may be.

  12. EarthsGravitySucks Says:

    quote right off of …
    quote right off of NIST’s own web site.

    “As part of the NCST Act, no part of any report resulting from investigations can be admitted as evidence or used in any suit or action for damages. Additionally, NIST employees are not permitted to serve as expert witnesses.”

    signed into law on Oct. 1, 2002, by President Bush

    as in: anything NIST concludes is inadmissible in a court of law and makes it as good as hearsay. So much for NIST’s credentials.

  13. DontQuoteMeBut Says:

    “seriously”?


    “seriously”?

    buildings dont fall free fall speed because of collision or fire. I’m sure you don’t believe in dinosaurs either right?

  14. ViennasNachos Says:

    @ dontquotemebut


    @ dontquotemebut

    seriously 9 / 11 was no inside job

  15. venuecam Says:

    Or that a young …
    Or that a young impressionable Jihadist would strap explosives to their body and detonate themself in a crowded place in order to become a martyr for Allah. Now, if that were real… oh wait.

  16. rosealieposealie Says:

    well you cant …
    well you cant exactly you know, produce a field that will bounce airplanes off of the building as to not crash, and even in an earth quake, a building that big can still fall. No matter how earthquake proof it is. You know? We don’t expect a plane to hit a building or get hijacked because of the tight security systems there are, so I think, no one really thinks about making it “Plane Proof”

Leave a Comment

Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.

|