"And the nose came out on the north side".... Guy Tozzoli

Guy Tozzoli: I got out of my car. Other people did. And suddenly I saw
plane number two coming from the south, over the Statue of Liberty,
going very fast. They say between 500 and 600 miles an hour. And I saw
it smash into the south wall of Number Two, an oblique angle. And I
saw this big ball of flame. And the nose came out on the north side
and then the east side. And my first reaction: "My God, those poor
people above, because they're going to wipe out all the staircases and
all the sprinkler systems." That airplane just went-- sliced right
through it. And the power of such a big plane at that speed. And for a
moment, incredible sadness for the people there. And then incredible
anger, feeling that somebody had deliberately, deliberately rammed
into those towers, and those poor innocent people that were in there.
as quoted from
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/newyork/filmmore/pt.html
==============
http://thewebfairy.com/911/missilegate/index.htm
http://thewebfairy.com/911/index.htm
http://investigate911.batcave.net/nose.html

know what he saw.
The plane nose couldn't have come out on the north side and then
the east side.

We know some objects came out the east side, but are there any other
reports of the nose coming out; or anything coming out on the north side?

An object came out the east side that was trailing what looked like a vapor trail. Is there consensus that this was an engine?
why the vapor trail? surely it was no longer getting fuel?

has the suggestion of missile involvement been throughly debunked?
some witnesses said they thought they saw or heard missiles, including firemen and policemen.

But of course he didn't realize what he was actually seeing.

A commercial jet is made out of light-weight aluminum and plastic.
There's no way that a plane like that could have completely penetrated the massive steel and concrete of the WTC South Tower ... and come out the other side with its nose intact !
It probably would not have penetrated much of the building at all, but would have been smashed into pieces on impact and basically disintegrated, with the pieces either falling down the side of the building to the street below, or the remanant hanging out the side of the entry hole.
But a MISSILE NOSE CONE would most likely come out the other side of the building, especially if it had the typical depleted uranium-hardened shielding, that most missiles have these days..

I infer that this guy actually saw a missile penetrate the Tower , but was convinced by the media (and his own lack of experience with missiles) that what he "saw" was a hijacked Boeing jet.
The repeated media broadcasts (total hoaxes with fake video), simply reinforced those misconceptions and mis-perceptions.

Now just extrapolate this guy's own misunderstanding of what he actually saw that morning, to the scores of "eyewitnesses" who are still convinced that they saw a "hijacked plane" smash into the South Tower.
See how easy it is to propagate the "hijacked plane" myth, when what people actually saw was, most likely, a military missile ?

or one of several other pieces of steel weighing thousands of pounds each?

A cruise missile has a diameter of about 24" - the warhead within is even smaller. So we are expected to believe that he saw a small piece of metal flying through the air from a great distance - Ok if you really say so.:eyes:

I infer that this guy actually saw a missile penetrate the Tower , but was convinced by the media (and his own lack of experience with missiles) that what he "saw" was a hijacked Boeing jet.

Really? You're not playing some sort of weird joke?

a plane didnt hit the WTC 2?
funny there are thousands of eyewitnesses that say otherwise. and there are no "Pods" under the plane. just part of the plane. so where did this "missile" come from?

Now commercial jets are extremely lightweight, and even the VICTIMS are 'in on it', or are at the very least, not to be taken seriously.

I always thought SAIC hired individuals who were better at critical thinking.

Is it really that strange that something emerging from a flaming fireball might still be smoking? Engines do tend to use a lot of flamable materials, which are protected in the normal operating state. This doesn't qualify as such.

http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/evidence/photos/wtcengines2.html
http://maps.yahoo.com/maps_result?addr=church+st+and+murray+st&csz=new+york%2C+ny&country=us&new=1&name=&qty=

there was some disagreement about the type

and there were also some including firemen and policemen who said
they saw and heard missiles; separate from the planes

as per the several reports of missile fired from Woolworth building

there could have been both