Chunk of 9/11 plane found in New York

2013-04-27 07:20

New York - New York police said Friday that they have found a fragment of one of two airplanes that slammed into the World Trade Centre on 11 September 2001.

The huge chunk of aircraft was found wedged between two office buildings in lower Manhattan.

The buildings, at 51 Park Place and 50 Murray Street, are located just two blocks from the site of the attacks known as Ground Zero.

Only a very narrow space exists between the buildings, which could explain how the part eluded investigators for nearly 12 years.

Police said the plane fragment appeared to be "part of a landing gear, apparently from one of the commercial airliners destroyed on 11 September 2001."

And the part bears a "clearly visible" Boeing identification number, according to police spokesperson Paul Browne. Although police would not confirm the size of the piece, NBC television reported it was about 1.5m long.

Human remains

Authorities said it will not be removed until the area has been thoroughly examined, including for possible human remains.

"The NYPD is securing the location as it would a crime scene, documenting it photographically and restricting access until the office of the chief medical examiner completes its health and safety evaluation protocol, after which a decision will be made concerning sifting the soil for possible human remains," Browne said in a statement.

The aircraft was one of two hijacked 12 years ago by al-Qaeda suicide attackers and flown into the Twin Towers, destroying two of the nation's most iconic buildings.

Authorities were alerted to the chunk of wreckage on Wednesday after surveyors found what they believed was damaged machinery at the rear of 51 Park Place.

The attacks killed 2 753 people at Ground Zero. In co-ordinated attacks, another plane smashed into the Pentagon while a fourth crashed in Pennsylvania.

No remains of 1 122 of the victims in New York have ever been found, according to the office of the chief medical examiner.

Since 2006, authorities have selected 6 134 bone fragments and 1 845 other remains for advanced DNA testing, which has led to the identification of 34 victims.

  • Adrian Hill - 2013-04-27 08:20

    I forgot to mention, they also found the tooth fairy and arrested her for the death of JFK, oh sorry, I forgot, they already convicted a scapegoat for that one...No, they found Osama's left rear lower molar....on no, I forgot, they conveniently dumped that body int the sea!

  • Sechaba Virgil Ndlovu - 2013-04-27 08:38

    This shows that incompetence in America is beyong imagination, how can they fail to find this thing all these years.

      Barney Dino - 2013-04-27 08:46

      The same way the anc has failed this country for 20 years.

      Billy Bunter - 2013-04-27 08:52

      Maybe because they weren't looking for it, moron?? Re-read the article (or have someone read it to you). When last did you find a brain cell?

      Stephan Smuts - 2013-04-27 09:22

      They were looking for Osama! How would a chunk of plane have resolved anything. Must they give the piece of wreckage the death penalty?

  • Robin Harriram - 2013-04-27 09:17

    @Khetha. You can bet that right home here in S.A.

  • Waseem Carrim - 2013-04-27 09:27

    I still can't believe all these conspiracy theories! So you bomb and kill your own citizens and almost destroy your own economy in the the aftermath? Every stupid theory has been disqualified by professionals. Stop reading any drivel you read on the Internet, living in denial and think for yourself! And the oil price is higher than its ever been? How the hell has this benefitted the US?

      Nigel Vos - 2013-04-27 09:42

      Spot on Waseem

      Adrian Hill - 2013-04-27 10:11

      So Waseem, I take it that there are special rules of physics in Amerca then, you know, buildings collapse into their own footprint at free fall speed, building No 7 falls down for no reason, there are no airoplane parts found, steel columns are melted, oh and before I forget, an aircraft flies at near ground level straight into the side of the Pentagon and makes a tiny little hole that is not even big enough for one engine to get through, and again, no wings, seats, wheels, motors, nothing. Have you seen what an air crash site looks like for real, there are always bits and pieces left. Ag no man, learn a bit of science, chemistry and do a bit of reading, you will see that the American government is not the second coming!

      Kobie Nel - 2013-04-27 10:16

      Must admit it was a bit radical, but fast and effective. But the same effect on a short term small scale as putting the ANC in power. The ANC just have a more effective and lasting effect.

      Waseem Carrim - 2013-04-27 10:50

      Media media media! That's the whole irony of what you say isn't it? You accuse me of being influenced by the media but all your conspiracies and theories come from exactly the same place (please don't feed us the crap that you thought all this up by yourself). I am no fan of the USA - but you can't live your life in denial.

      Prince Veron - 2013-04-27 11:10

      No child, conspiracies and theories come from people who analyse situations and provide us with their research through various means such as books, internet websites, videos, etc. On the other hand, the perpetrators of crime against humanity control the media to make people like you to think and have a mind set in a direction they want you to.

      Waseem Carrim - 2013-04-27 11:12

      Kobie wtf does this have to do with the ANC? Piss off and go comment on the South Africa page

      Waseem Carrim - 2013-04-27 11:21

      Haha @ research - if you can show me one university or scientific reviewed published journal that backs up your theories then by all means do.

      Tony Stark - 2013-04-28 00:31

      @Waseem.Your modernism and secularism will come back to haunt you one day...

      Waseem Carrim - 2013-04-28 00:52

      You see Tony - that's the problem isn't it. If I don't see it the way others see it then I'm modern & westernized aren't I? Great free thinker aren't you?

      Tony Stark - 2013-04-28 09:19

      Eish i'm not going to waste my time with ignorant fools!!!

      Brian Enslin - 2013-04-28 09:55

      @ Adrian, you sir are on a role! Collapsed into own footprint - fail! Collapse at free fall speed - fail Steel columns melting - Fail!!! No aircraft pieces at the Pentagon? - FAIL!!! Look at this website - It scientifically and physically disproves everything you just said. YOU need to learn science!!! You demonstrate a complete misunderstanding of science. Come back to me after you have read Bazant et al study on the collapse of the buildings, before you speak of your charlatan nonsense again!

  • Prince Veron - 2013-04-27 10:05

    Was this the same incident where they took weeks to find human remains but a few days to find the hijackers passports in perfect condition even though there was a massive explosion and fire gutted the entire plane?

      Brian Enslin - 2013-04-28 09:58

      In 2003 when the Columbia space ship broke up on re-entry into the atmosphere they found a intact, playable CD in the debris field. Yes a CD had survived a more catastrophic break up and fire event than the plane impact of the world trade centre. Are you qualified to make expert opinions on the mechanics of aircraft crashes and what can survive? No, then read what qualified experts have to say.

  • Prince Veron - 2013-04-27 10:15

    Do you people also recall that a plane apparently flew into into the pentagon? Do you know why they don't mention that whenever the 911 story is brought up? Its because they know they messed it up.

      Waseem Carrim - 2013-04-27 12:51

      But they do! They always refer to the 4 planes! But two of them caused less damage than intended so therefore they get less focus.

      Prince Veron - 2013-04-27 13:29

      Show us one picture where you see the remains of an aircraft at the pentagon site.

      Sean Mitchell - 2013-04-27 15:16

      Prince Vernon when planes crash at high speed, into pretty solid, structures, when full of fuel, what do you expect to see.

      Brian Enslin - 2013-04-28 10:02

      @ Prince, you have failed! Took me about 15 seconds to find this,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.45645796,d.d2k&biw=1366&bih=667&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=H9d8UcL2JIKmhAeB6YHIBA There is alot of photographs showing debris at the pentagon. If you really want I can show you pictures of burnt human bodies still strapped to their seats at the Pentagon. You failed

      Mike Bundy - 2013-04-28 12:32

      Brian you are far too gullible. Do you really believe that 19 people managed to hold up four aircraft with boxcutters? Take over planes from trained ex-military pilots with BOXCUTTERS? The chances of this happening once is beyond belief, to do it successfully four times at once is absurd. Of those 19 "terrorists" that were bizarrely identified within only two days of the incident, at least 7 of them are still alive and well yet they remain on the FBI list of perpetrators. There are just far too many unanswered questions to make the official story even remotely believable. Why is there no airport video footage of these "terrorists" boarding the aircraft? How did they pilot these enormous and complicated aircraft so accurately without any real pilot training? How did the FBI specifially identify them as the perpetrators and not any of the other passengers? cont...

      Mike Bundy - 2013-04-28 12:32

      Why did George W. Bush twice mention to audiences that he saw the first crash live on t.v. when there was no known film footage of it until two days later? How could he have seen it? When he was told of the second crash by his Secret Service chief you would have expected a big reaction, or at least some questions or instructions, but he just nodded and looked thoughtful. Why, he should have been amazed and panicked that the US was under attack? Or because he just got confirmation of what they all already knew? Why did the Secret Service not rush him away to a place of safety immediately? Perhaps because they all knew that he was in no danger? Why were the air force not immediately scrambled to investigate and follow the hijacked aircraft? They should have been there within minutes. There are dozens of cameras around the Pentagon but not a single piece of film released apart from 5 very vague and dodgy-looking frames that were "leaked". Why not? They must have plenty of footage of the actual approaching aircraft and resulting crash. They could easily resolve lots of queries by showing the footage, what's the big secret? Of more that 150 "witnesses" to the Pentagon crash they cannot seem to find even three with the same story, how is that possible? The three bizarre and perfectly round holes in the inside wall were made by what? An aircraft that completely melted away? Yet they we must believe that they found body parts and distinct DNA from 39 people? cont...

      Mike Bundy - 2013-04-28 12:33

      The stories of people managing to defy science and make cellphone calls from aircraft at 30 000 feet are pure fantasy and most have now been recognised as such by the FBI. So the stories of passenger heroics are also just hollywood fantasy. Why were these stories even entertained or acknowledged by investigators from the beginning? There are no cellphone records of these calls ever having been made. Why are there practically no remains at all of any of the aircraft? Looking at photos of real aircraft crashes there are always enormous amounts of debris, parts and scattered litter. In all of these incidents there was practically nothing. Why is there no clear and believable data from any of the eight indestructable "black boxes"? Why did the BBC report that WTC Building 7 had collapsed, 26 MINUTES before it collapsed? Not "allegedly" or "we have heard" but they stated it as fact even though the building only collapsed nearly half an hour later. Why has their footage of that part of the broadcast completely disappeared? No film, no video, no backups, where has it gone? If Al Queda had anything to do with these attacks then why were they not shouting it from the rooftops? Why not gloat and boast about their great victory? Why did they deny it and deny it and deny it? Space prevents me but I have many, many more questions, for most of which I cannot get truly believable answers. These are not conspiracy theories, these are facts that cannot be denied and covered up.

      Brian Enslin - 2013-04-28 14:57

      Mike. All of what you have said is based on the mainstream conspiracy theories circa 2005. Alot of what you have said is completely non-factual. Where did Bush say he saw the first plane imapact before it was released? Evidence? I have seen photographs of the hijackers going through security at the airports. Why haven't you? The one thing all witness of the Pentagon have in common? The plane hit the building. Alot of what you are saying is the result of a "broken telephone" of altered theories, lies and misinformation recycled over the past 12 years. I can go on. I have been doing this with Americans (some of the original theorists who developed the stuff you are repeating)for about 10 years. The whole conspiracy movement has died down in the USA because after 12 years there is still not a single coherent agreeable, viable, proven theory to counter the official theory. In fact feel free to send me a message, with all your queries, I will address them all, to illustrate to you how reading conspiracy theories has made you ignore common logic, science and reason.

      Mike Bundy - 2013-04-28 20:12

      Bush first said it here and then again here: (these are official White House transcripts). Most witnesses at the Pentagon report that SOMETHING seemed to hit the building. Only a few stated that it was anything like a 767, others stated that it flew over the building, still others claim it was a missile, most claim it was far, far smaller than a jetliner. Why no film from the Pentagon itself to show the airliner? They must have dozens of cameras around the premises and could easily put all doubts to rest. Two of the flights had no video footage taken of passengers at the airport. Many of my other queries are perfectly valid and cannot be clearly and truthfully answered with anything but other hypotheses. Do you also believe that the Americans were justified in declaring war based on "evidence" of weapons of mass destruction?

      Brian Enslin - 2013-04-28 22:59

      Mike this can bounce back and forward. Bush was reported as saying that was one bad pilot when he saw the smoke coming out of the building. Bush is well known for muddling up his words. So when he spoke about the first building, he may have mixed up what he actually meant to say. This site gives a nice summary of what witnesses saw at the pentagon. To summarise - 104 directly saw the plane hit the Pentagon. 6 were nearly hit by the plane in front of the Pentagon. Several others were within 100-200 feet of the impact. 26 mentioned that it was an American Airlines jet. 39 others mentioned that it was a large jet/commercial airliner. Are you saying that no passengers boarded the planes? Why did you not say this first, instead of saying no hijackers at all? Slight misinformation there. Ask the questions you seek answers for - mail me - I did not support the 2nd Gulf War bassed on the claim of weapons of mass destruction. I wrote letters, that were published by New York Times, Washington Post, Time Magazine and the Economist saying that the war was not warranted. I also emailed Donald Rumselfd urging him not to go to war.

      Brian Enslin - 2013-04-28 23:04

      Mike - Here is a question for you - The USA was able to fake the whole complicated conspiracy, killing hundreds of passengers, disposing of their bodies, paying off thousands of agents, wiring 4 buildings for demolition(2 of which were one of the tallest in the world) without one single person finding out or coming forward with it all. I mean how did tens of thousands of workers in WTC 1 and 2 go to work each day knowing that secret agents were laying detonation cord all over their office space, from each column and beam? Didn't they get worried? Strange how the survivors (especially people who lost loved ones) never mentioned this... Yet, they were unable to plant WMD's in Iraq to prove they were justified? Really thats so damned easy considering how well they pulled off the conspiracy - fake planes and so on? If the US was always about conspiracies, surely they could have loaded up a C-5 with enough WMD's to wipe out Russia and quitely dropped them off at Bagram. But no they didn't instead they told the world you know what we found nothing. Doesn't that at least make you think?

  • Elijah Tishbite - 2013-04-27 12:33

    Will the blind people out there please explain how building 7 collapsed? Nothing like it has ever happened before without the use of explosives. I counsel you to buy salve to put on your eyes (Revelation 3:18) before the lamb-like beast (Revelation 13:11) deceives you to death and he surely will do it if you continue down your blind path!

      Brian Enslin - 2013-04-28 10:07

      @ Vox, A B-25 Mitchell flying at low speed in fog, is a very different impact to a boeing 767, flying, fully laden with jet fuel at a high speed into the WTC. Have you analysed the different structural designs for the WTC and the Empire state? Have you determined the different column, beam and floor layouts and understood for yourself anything? Did not think so.

  • Chris Buchner - 2013-04-27 13:02

    We all saw the videos of the twin tower I just love how these people who watch the sh*t think they know better than anyone else... Please grow up...

      Elijah Tishbite - 2013-04-27 13:45

      Yes but you didn't watch tower no 7 did you?

      Adrian Hill - 2013-04-27 14:23

      ...and your point was it Osama or was it O'bushy

  • Adrian Hill - 2013-04-27 14:21

    9/11 & terrorists flying airliners....what an absolute joke. Anybody who believes that it wasn't an inside job is as DUMB AS A PLANK. Seems we can do a lot of carpentry today on News24!

      Sean Mitchell - 2013-04-27 15:23

      So Adrian who the hell do you think crashed these planes?

      Sean Mitchell - 2013-04-27 15:46

      Okay lets look at which scenario is more plausible. 1 Conspiracy by US government, involving many people, including suicidal air crew, decide to murder thousands of their compatriots. None of these people leaks a word on this abominable plot. Eight experienced air crew decide to sacrifice their lives so homicidal criminals can make loads of money. Scenario 2: An organization with a declared hatred of the US and a history of massive suicide attacks against US targets( US East Africa Embassy Bombings, USS Cole) managed, with careful planning and taking advantage of the availability of flight training in the US, to pull this off. The leaders of this organization claim responsibility, and are a bit hacked off that conspiracy loons are stealing their limelight. Now try thinking for a change. Which is the least convoluted, totally unlikely scenario?

      Sean Mitchell - 2013-04-27 16:02

      Further to the above conspiracy scenario. Teams of expert demolition experts manage to place explosives in three sky-scrapers, without security or the occupants noticing. On the same day the US military fire a missile at their own HQ, deliberately and a third air liner crashes into a field just to make things add up. On top of this, the entire worlds media buy in and decide to lie to us all. Your conspiracy theories are rather thin on plausibility to any one with a rational mind are complete hogwash.

      Waseem Carrim - 2013-04-27 17:22

      Sean, you can't argue with idiots. They are too lazy to think and prefer to believe the nutcases who chase any conspiracy. These are the same people who believe Justin Bieber is Hitlers great grandson and Jay-Z is the leading the world.

      Adrian Hill - 2013-04-27 22:08

      Crashed which planes exactly? Oh, you must mean the ones that conveniently dissipeared into the buldings. Ok, lets assume that there were planes, havn't you heard of autopilots, radio control and drones. What the American government proves over and over and over again is that the general public is very very very stupid. The people that question their version of events have died and are still dying like flies.

      Waseem Carrim - 2013-04-27 22:47

      Well Adrian, you should sure as hell be careful then. The American government probably has you in their sights. Maybe they planning a biggie for you - like say the presidents assassin. Oh wait, I forget they don't have time for douchebags.

      Ahava Shapiro - 2013-04-28 01:31

      Quote: "Commissioner Ray Kelly told reporters the gear had a rope wrapped around it and may / could have been lowered into the 18-inch gap"

      Brian Enslin - 2013-04-28 10:16

      @ Adrian ... dumb as a plank, interesting choice of words. Have you read any of the peer reviewed journals, written by engineers on the mechanics of the collapse of the buildings? Do you know that after almost 12 years not one single peer reviewed study has been published that describes a collapse not involving the aircraft? Have you ever sat to consider, how on earth the secret agents accessed the WTC, drilled into the structure, laid detonation charges with the thousands of kilometres of wiring necessary, without anyone noticing? Why did no one (especially people who lost friends and co-workers) not say, gee Mr Policeman, you know for the past 4 months these guys in suits have been coming in and drilling into the concrete liftshaft core, placing explosives, laying detonation cords everywhere, that I kept on tripping over them. Cutting into the ceiling and placing more charges on the truss beam supports and opening up the cladding on the perimeter steel columns and placed more explosives there. Well you see we did nothing because, yes its normal to see 1000 odd guys do this to a building occupied on every floor by thousands of people everyday. Really? You never stopped to think, how did they rig the two buildings with explosives now did you? Who is stupid now?

      Brian Enslin - 2013-04-28 10:23

      @ Vox - Loose change? Really is that the best you have? Dylan Avery (the director of Loose change) has edited his movie so many times and changed so many claims one cannot track it all. I know you won't do this but read through the links on this page - There is a factual point by point analysis of loose change. Using verifiable science, engineering and logic it destroys the video. But like any typical conspiracy theorist, no amount of evidence can convince you. You are suffering from cognitive dissonance and therefore you are a lost cause.

  • FreeMinded - 2013-04-27 16:06

    "9/11 Plane Debris found in New York" lol these stupid Americans think the rest of the world is as dumb as their citizens??? After 12 years of thourough searching for debris and human remains they all of a sudden find debris at a time when majority of the world don't believe their hollywood story of the boston bombings! Look at how these criminals are timing their release of this story to remind the people of what can happen to them if they don't follow their government into war. Amazing!

      Sean Mitchell - 2013-04-27 16:28


  • FreeMinded - 2013-04-27 16:06

    lies , lies and more lies , Obama style! change u can believe in (change for the worse)

      Sean Mitchell - 2013-04-27 16:28


  • Elijah Tishbite - 2013-04-27 16:55

    For those who believe the American Presidents are a bunch of Saints Google "BOHEMIAN GROVE" and check out all the sites. If that doesn't make you think, then nothing will.

      Waseem Carrim - 2013-04-27 17:23

      Dude anyone can post crap on the net. None of that evidence has ever been verified not have the writers been near the crash site.

  • Shaheen Khan - 2013-04-27 17:35

    Although it received little media attention at the time, the third-worst structural building failure in modern history occurred on September 11, 2001. World Trade Center (WTC) Building 7 was a 47-story, steel-framed, fire-protected, high-rise office building located about a football field’s length from the WTC North Tower. Unlike its two taller cousins, WTC 7 was never hit by an aircraft, yet it fell to the ground suddenly, displaying the classic signatures of explosive controlled demolition.

      Brian Enslin - 2013-04-28 10:26

      @ you two Please do some research. look at the intensity of the fires that rages on building 7. Then do a study on the structural design of the building and understand for yourselves how it worked and how a fire could affect it. Thank you and good bye

      Chris Du Preez - 2013-04-28 13:01

      @Brian. ok a huge fire that was so hot it melted all the support beams in the trade towers. even so hot it is blamed for the collapse of wt7..... now explain to me why this huge chunk of airplane made an appearance 12 years later. not melted and miraculplesely having the airplanes id number on.... your comment sounds good but still leaves a lot of unanswered questions.

      Chris Du Preez - 2013-04-28 13:08

      @Brian. ok a huge fire that was so hot it melted all the support beams in the trade towers. even so hot it is blamed for the collapse of wt7..... now explain to me why this huge chunk of airplane made an appearance 12 years later. not melted and miraculplesely having the airplanes id number on.... your comment sounds good but still leaves a lot of unanswered questions.

      Brian Enslin - 2013-04-28 14:10

      Chris, no steel was melted by the fires. This is very well documented. If you read the countless engineering studies done on the collapse you will see that the fore did not melt anything. Additionally National Geographic has conducted tests that verify these studies that the fires did not melt, only weakened the steel. The fires in WTC 1 and 2 have never been used to describe the collapse of WTC 7. WTC 7 was damaged by debris from the collapse. There was a fire in WTC 7 which contributed to the collapse. If you study the videos of the plane crash, you will see debris being ejected out the opposite side of the building. Aircraft parts where found outside of the building, which support this observation. This landing gear ejected out the opposite side of the building. Hence, it was not contained inside of the building and exposed to the high temperatures and forces experienced by a building collapse. All of this information is available -

  • FreeMinded - 2013-04-27 18:12

    "Huge Chunk", seriously? so this huge CHUNK happened to go invisible for 12 years and now when the world doubts their Hollywood version of the boston bombings , this HUGE CHUNK mysteriously appears to remind the people of the boogeyman? please STOP insulting our intelligence!

      Sean Mitchell - 2013-04-27 21:35

      You are not free minded. According to your facebook page, you are an anti-Semite lunatic, who is too much of a coward to post under his real name. Try thinking

  • Adrian Hill - 2013-04-27 22:13

    Oh well, human stupidity is boundless, they believe that a terrorist organization was behind 9/11 and they also believe that God created the earth in 7 days. Come on, you lot should also believe in the tooth fairy and in the flying spaghetti monster,, you already believe in the biggest fairy tales of them all.

      Jacques - 2013-04-28 00:01

      Calm the hell down, ffs you're soooo far up these conspiracy whacko's back ends you can't even formulate the same old tired-arse view even a little differently.

      Adrian Hill - 2013-04-28 01:56

      So Jacques, pleasemexplain to us what happened to the aircraft parts, you know, like the one that went into the pentagon. Then you should also explain to us how the twin tower support colums sheared off at 45 degrees at their base and were molten (just like what happens when metal is cut using thermite) then you can also please explain all the explosions that occured before the collape of each floor which incidentally occured at free fall speed. Oh and before I forget, please explain to us howcome building no 7 also fell into its own footprint although it was hit by nothing. Then you can also explain how jet fuel at the top of two steel stuctures to collapse in exactly the same manner as controlled demolisions does....we should also not forget that those terries had 3 hours of trainging flying a little Cessna and then managed to fly an airliner at near groung level into the Pentagon...and then vanish....Dude, you're joking right...Go read some science, a bit of physics, chemistry, a bit about airliners and of course politics and economics, then come back and chat some more.

      Brian Enslin - 2013-04-28 10:28

      Adrian, Adrian Adrian, I think you need to come and have a little chat. Everything you have mentioned has been refuted a good 10 odd years ago. Even the hardcore conspiracy theorists in the USA have given up on your theories. Better luck next time.

  • trevor.bush.9655 - 2013-04-28 07:36

    And people STILL believe it was terrorists...sad...

  • Bongani Nsele - 2013-04-28 10:16

    a chunk of the bomber's passport that survived the inferno when the twin towers exploded and crumbled down has been found stuck at a shop window next to the pentagon....eish

  • Angela van Greunen - 2013-04-28 11:31

    Now why would that make news??? So they found a piece of the plane, hows that going to change anything??? Who gives a damn about a piece of the plane? Such drama queens!!!!!

  • pages:
  • 1