Sept Clues Busted

Originally posted by CB_Brooklyn
For me, and many others, everything else falls into place; which is why I do not believe any type of real airplane hit the towers.

Care to explain this debris:

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
In the video of interest the cameraman was on W. Broadway, which was right in line with where the the plane debris was ejected from the opposite side of WTC2. At around time 7:00 the impact occurs. You can hear pandemonium and loud noises as if large things are crashing down around him. Then, as he turns back, you can see plane debris that had apparently landed and killed a pedestrian.
911blogger.com...


www.lib.utexas.edu...
As we've all been covering inother recent threads, other large bits of plane debris were found including a 'still smoking' engine that landed on a street corner not too far from our above cameraman.


While I haven't done an advanced analysis on the raw source video presented above, it does seem to debunk the "MIB Flashy Thing" Theory for how they placed the plane debris on the streets, once and for all.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

More:
s24.photobucket.com...

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I find it amazing it landed standing up and find it pretty suspicious that it landed under a construction canopy.

It does look like it's smoking, however this one is pretty poor quality. Is there anyone photo of this that shows it smoking?

This is extremely odd. Which plane did they allegedly come from?

How do we know this didn't come from another UA plane?

I simple item to plant.

Ditto.

Where is this from?

Oh come on!!!

This doesn't prove a plane crashed anywhere.

Why is one projectile have white smoke trailing it and the other black smoke?

Originally posted by CB_Brooklyn

Originally posted by Nola213
Because this No Plane stuff has REALLY got to stop

The videos violate Newton's Laws of Motion. This has been shown and has not been refuted.

What really needs to stop is the silly real-plane stuff. Those who believe planes hit the towers are really really amazing. Scientific laws have been presented proving the videos were fake, and yet people still don't understand. Yes, the laws of physics have been presented, and they have not been refuted. If anyone wishes to challenge me on Newton's Laws, I am here. I will prove to the challenger and every reader that the 9/11 "plane" videos are fake.

I will prove that any who think those videos are of a real event don't know what they're talking about.

Feel free
I would most definitely like to see the math that goes into this.
First, I would like to know how all the photos, videos and eye witness accounts were faked. Please don't dredge up the hologram theory as this level of technology is not currently possible-there is a specific reason why it is not possible

We have tried to determine exactly who Anthony Lawson is, but like many of the posters on this thread, it's difficult to find out a lot of details about him, though he has corresponded with us a few times and told us he has had many years working in Video.

I corresponded with him quite a few times, but then he started talking about how good he thought Eric Salter's analysis of Ace Baker's choper 5 study was.

I then asked him if he thought it was fair for Salter to describe Ace Baker as exhibiting a "pathological level of intellectual dishonesty" - a remark which has no place in an evidence-based rebuttal.

Things deteriorated from there and so I was disappointed that I couldn't really take what Lawson said very seriously - he had been initial friendly and a potentially good guy to have to do video voice-overs.

Andrew Johnson

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Why on Earth would they take 2 dummy boeings... paint them up.... coat them in super-duper camo technology...
fly them TOWARDS the towers... then cloak them.. fly them away, and use explosives on precise timing relays to make it APPEAR as if an impact occured..

when you could simply take 2 of 1000's of dead and dying boeings from a graveyard, paint them up and fly them in like its nothing else?

Wouldnt it be so much simply to use fake planes and make them impact, than use fake plans, camo them and fly them away ensuring demo made it APPEAR like a explosion?

Planes hit... I beleive terrorists hijacked 3 planes as was reported.
IT was something they had planned for a long time, it was so easy to do, so effective...

We stood by and let them, knowing full well what they were doing.
AS for the pensylvania plane and pentagon 'incident'
thats the 2 altered versions from that day.

The USA didn't "let it happen". There were no hijackings on 9/11, and no plane crashed. The government refuses to release information on verified plane parts, obviously because there are none. The damage at all four sites is inconsistent with what one would expect when a large airliner crashes.

Flights 11 and 77 didn't even exist, or were at least cancelled, as this government official at the Bureau of Transportation explains:
www.shure.proboards19.com...


I doubt a 767 projection in Manhattan would be perfect. They needed to use a real plane (and veer off) so many people would have seen and heard a real plane. (Especially in the case of the first "strike", since that "plane" came from the north over Manhattan.)

I believe the cartoon-cutouts in the towers to have been made by directed energy weapons, not explosives.

Cartoon airplanes are the simplest method because real airplanes mean real airplane parts. Real planes would crash into the towers, not glide into them lot a hot knife through butter, as seen on 9/11. Also, they needed a reason for the towers to "collapse", and planes crushing against the buildings and falling down wasn't going to cut it!

Originally posted by talisman
reply to post by CB_Brooklyn

 

That is not going to account for the people who saw the planes fly into the buildings. There is numerous testimony to this.

Also if this were the case....

CHINA, Russia, countries that are no friend to the STATES would speak openly about their being 'NO PLANES' or "projections". China and Russia I am sure also had foreign correspondents that day in NEW YORK.

Also we should see surfacing on the NET these projected planes flying about, or we should see other news agencies posting this.

Or do you think the whole world was in on this conspiracy?

You know it just wasn't the UNITED STATES MEDIA, Amateur's and others with camera's. There were other MEDIA as well.
[edit on 5-11-2007 by talisman]

What you said makes no sense, and you didn't explain yourself. Why would projections not account for people who say they saw planes fly into the buildings?

I don't know about Russia or China, but the Iranian President did say he doesn't believe planes crashed into the towers. (Or, at least, the media reports that he had said that.)

The Global Elite have plants in virtually every single country, including Russia and China. This is why they're "global".

The media control EVERYTHING.

Why hasn't the media made one mention of Morgan Reynolds' no plane LAW SUIT filed in the US District Court, Southern New York, with attorney Jerry Leaphart?

Originally posted by talisman
Just to go along with the theme.

Anyone who is interested view these Amateur video tapes.

The NO PLANES camp will just sit back and cry 'Actors'. As if Actors all over New York were set up and there wasn't anyone with a Film of what happened!

These are two clips that catalog the human emotion.

When you factor in that certain ATS board members saw the planes, that there were so many people watching, that video like this is out there.

You are left with one conclusion...

Video-1

Video-2

And the PLANEHUGGER camp do not understand that in a Court of Law, the Laws of Physics win over eyewitness testimony every single time.

Besides, if they saw a projection and heard "something", they weren't necessarily lying.

I notice one of those clips is from the Camera Planet archive. Are you aware that the owner of Camera Planet is a magician? Sound like the perfect guy to pull off a magic trick!!

The Camera Planet owner admits himself he is a magician. A link to this proof is somewhere in this post: www.checktheevidence.co.uk...

reply to post by CB_Brooklyn



*IF* it was a projection, then explain why they had to fake the tv feeds. After doing that explain how different news agencies who might have their own archived footage of the event were 'IN ON THIS'.


Next you don't think Russia would not see a "PROJECTION" being used??
Or do you think that the Russian's have absolutely *NO INTEL* in a place like NEW YORK CITY??



[edit on 5-11-2007 by talisman]

reply to post by antsi


Some of those plane parts could have easily been moved. Also, are you suggesting that they went ahead and did CGI of large JET PLANES, but decided to use *REAL PLANE PARTS* and take pictures???


Next, why isn't their CGI of the Pentagon strike?

How did they get the CGI to work with the unpredictable flight path of the helicopters trying to cover the event?

Or do you think every singe Helicopter man, every single camera man, the citizens of NEW YORK were diabolically in on this as well??

I challenge YOU AND CB and anyone from the NO PLANE' camp.


*Prove 9/11 was a real event using your logic.*

YOU HAVE ELIMINATED THE MEDIA
YOU HAVE ELIMINATED EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY (from professionals and the average Joe)


So according to your logic explain to me how 9/11 happened and was a tragedy and not just a demolition?

And after you figure out how to explain this, then give me a Standard for your evidence.

Something I asked killtown before on.

Give me evidence for your standard of evidence.




[edit on 5-11-2007 by talisman]

Want to know how the tin foil loons explain this

Looks like piece of aircraft seat embedded in back of car!




What really want to know is how poor sucker explained it to his insurance
company!

Hello Geico, want to report a claim. Seems my car just got hit by jet
airplane....

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by CB_Brooklyn

Originally posted by Nola213
Because this No Plane stuff has REALLY got to stop

The videos violate Newton's Laws of Motion. This has been shown and has not been refuted.

What really needs to stop is the silly real-plane stuff. Those who believe planes hit the towers are really really amazing. Scientific laws have been presented proving the videos were fake, and yet people still don't understand. Yes, the laws of physics have been presented, and they have not been refuted. If anyone wishes to challenge me on Newton's Laws, I am here. I will prove to the challenger and every reader that the 9/11 "plane" videos are fake.

I will prove that any who think those videos are of a real event don't know what they're talking about.

Feel free

I would most definitely like to see the math that goes into this.
First, I would like to know how all the photos, videos and eye witness accounts were faked. Please don't dredge up the hologram theory as this level of technology is not currently possible-there is a specific reason why it is not possible

I'm reposting because obviously you missed my challenge. There were planes that hit the towers. Prove me wrong. Keep in mind that you need to explain what eyewitnesses saw, what cameras saw and what video footage proves. Don't bring up the hologram idea because it's not possible at our current level of technology-once again, there is a BIG reason why it's not possible.

Thanks for responding

Originally posted by antsi
Oh come on!!!

Denial can be an ugly thing. Theres more in those links I provided, and you apparently missed the first link which is a video were you practically watch somebody get killed by debris in real time.

"No Planes" = 'Nothing to see here stop wasting your time and our movement'.

Originally posted by thedman
Want to know how the tin foil loons explain this
Looks like piece of aircraft seat embedded in back of car!

That must have been planted!!! OMG!!!

Surely there can be no way some foam cushions and cloth can possibly crush the entire back of a car, this would defy the laws of physics! Newton's Laws!!!

There must be an explanation of this that doesn't allow for a real plane crash to have occurred :

The van in the background, that's the one that contained the "small" amount of wreckage that was planted about on the streets of New York, and it must have just made it's round before this picture was taken, while all the people in the shot had their backs turned. I mean look at it, it has dark tinted windows so noone can see all the fake plane parts inside. And even though it's cropped on the top, if i squint with my left eye while hopping side to side on one leg I'm pretty sure I see the crane on top that would be used for unloading a jet engine too! Also, I just know that on the side of the van you can't see there must be a hydraulic ram for shoving that seat into the back of the car.

And if that's not it, then maybe :

The seat is just a hologram, the car was clearly hit with a Directed Energy Weapon which set off the Thermite planted in the trunk and remote detonated shape charges that blew the whole thing inwards. The van in the background is clearly the hologram projector vehicle that went around projecting the planes and the fake parts while the Feds took pictures, hopped in and went to the next spot to continue their fakery.

Well, if not :

It could be CGI.

It could be the passenger seat of a Buick that made a quick hit and run.

It was a prop from the Apollo hoax which was then loaded into a missle so people would see the wreckage and conclude it must have been a plane.

I don't see any license plate on the ground, which must be expected given the damage seen. This was removed because the car actually belongs to Dick Cheney, and the Feds didn't want any evidence placing him at the scene.

There are no official reports about this alleged seat, so it must be fake.

How do we know this is New York? And how do we know this is from 9/11?

How did this alleged "seat" manage to curve around the lightpole in the background and come around and land in the back of the car? This is impossible, so it must be fake!

Lastly, and most likely :

It could be a giant baked potato that just happens to look like a airplane seat.

Come, come. Surely the car in the "external image" was rear ended by a motorized wheelchair.

Well, planes, planes, planes.... Now, inside the planes were passengers in conrol of communications. And outside communication is usually the first facility an agressor takes away from its victim. But these terrorists were the "casper the friendly terrorists," and as far as I know, they did not confiscate all the cellphones or disable any airphones. Oh no, their mission was not foiled anyway, and I doubt could it have been foiled. But they didn't take away cellphones.

Originally posted by talisman
video.google.com...



While it could go into a lot more detail, it does the job and has rattled many in the NP camp, which has some just resorting to attacks There are definite points of deception seen, the editing of one of the witnesses proves beyond all shadow of a doubt that whomever really is behind this video was doing it to deceive.

No other issue has divided the movement as much as this.

Please note, that with the NO PLANES message forums are usually spammed and or attacked if certain members are banned. Then they run to their own hideouts and proclaim censorship and cry that there is a widespread conspiracy going on.


This is also a good example of human behavior and what it might imply. In the case of this theory, I believe the people who hold to this truly have a very low view and mistrust of people to begin with. Because in order for this theory to be true, it would be a conspiracy of unbelievable proportions.


It would include people as agents posting on the net. It would include that every single witness that was on the news and or took a home video or picture would be in on it. It would include that every single camera man, helicopter pilot and emergency personal would be in on it, or a good portion of them. That every single anchor person who reported it.

Sure conspiracy's happen, but this is to large and would involve way to many people. It also fails to address one startling fact.

THE ONE THING that truly refutes NO PLANES is this.......


THE PEOPLE OF NEW YORK.

If what happened that day was very different then what happened on the news, then you would have seen a riot. Plain and simple. There would have been hundreds of thousands of people looking at the event. With that many eyes you could not do this operation using a ....fly by....
a....missile...
just bombs...

New York is filled with street smart people who are no nonsense. They refute NO PLANES by their response.


Now of course you will see certain objections by certain individuals.

"how do you know so many people would have seen this live" etc.

Easy, by virtue of New York being such a huge populace, and given the attack of the NORTH TOWER and tragedy unfolding it is only logical to assume people would be looking, just watch what happens at an accident scene!

Does anyone else find it odd, that with the level of paranoia needed for NO PLANES that oddly enough that this PARANOIA is not often direct toward the people posting this stuff on YOUTUBE, and or using other footage like the Naudet bros>>??

It is taken of face value that the footage isn't doctored! Is that not striking to anyone?

In other words the NO Plane camps trust no-one, except themselves of course.

Lastly, if truly there were NO PLANES, then one would have no reason to conclude 9/11 happened. Perhaps the Towers were demolished and no one was in it? Every single witness is just lying. The news can't be trusted. YOU AND I can't be trusted. Therefore we see the end of the theory.

It refutes itself.

What a load of cobblers, see september clues and then you'll see what was really faked to decive people.

Whats to see? Grainy youtube (2008 grade) clips that have been re-encoded 10 times over? We'll use those shoddy pieces of media to defy all evidence and logic as "truth"???

This has been beaten so badly to death on thsi site I dont know why I'm even responding to this

Originally posted by 4hero

Originally posted by talisman
video.google.com...



While it could go into a lot more detail, it does the job and has rattled many in the NP camp, which has some just resorting to attacks There are definite points of deception seen, the editing of one of the witnesses proves beyond all shadow of a doubt that whomever really is behind this video was doing it to deceive.

No other issue has divided the movement as much as this.

Please note, that with the NO PLANES message forums are usually spammed and or attacked if certain members are banned. Then they run to their own hideouts and proclaim censorship and cry that there is a widespread conspiracy going on.


This is also a good example of human behavior and what it might imply. In the case of this theory, I believe the people who hold to this truly have a very low view and mistrust of people to begin with. Because in order for this theory to be true, it would be a conspiracy of unbelievable proportions.


It would include people as agents posting on the net. It would include that every single witness that was on the news and or took a home video or picture would be in on it. It would include that every single camera man, helicopter pilot and emergency personal would be in on it, or a good portion of them. That every single anchor person who reported it.

Sure conspiracy's happen, but this is to large and would involve way to many people. It also fails to address one startling fact.

THE ONE THING that truly refutes NO PLANES is this.......


THE PEOPLE OF NEW YORK.

If what happened that day was very different then what happened on the news, then you would have seen a riot. Plain and simple. There would have been hundreds of thousands of people looking at the event. With that many eyes you could not do this operation using a ....fly by....
a....missile...
just bombs...

New York is filled with street smart people who are no nonsense. They refute NO PLANES by their response.


Now of course you will see certain objections by certain individuals.

"how do you know so many people would have seen this live" etc.

Easy, by virtue of New York being such a huge populace, and given the attack of the NORTH TOWER and tragedy unfolding it is only logical to assume people would be looking, just watch what happens at an accident scene!

Does anyone else find it odd, that with the level of paranoia needed for NO PLANES that oddly enough that this PARANOIA is not often direct toward the people posting this stuff on YOUTUBE, and or using other footage like the Naudet bros>>??

It is taken of face value that the footage isn't doctored! Is that not striking to anyone?

In other words the NO Plane camps trust no-one, except themselves of course.

Lastly, if truly there were NO PLANES, then one would have no reason to conclude 9/11 happened. Perhaps the Towers were demolished and no one was in it? Every single witness is just lying. The news can't be trusted. YOU AND I can't be trusted. Therefore we see the end of the theory.

It refutes itself.

What a load of cobblers, see september clues and then you'll see what was really faked to decive people.

Do you know that you responded to a post from 5 years ago?

Originally posted by talisman
Just to go along with the theme.

Anyone who is interested view these Amateur video tapes.

The NO PLANES camp will just sit back and cry 'Actors'. As if Actors all over New York were set up and there wasn't anyone with a Film of what happened!

These are two clips that catalog the human emotion.

When you factor in that certain ATS board members saw the planes, that there were so many people watching, that video like this is out there.

You are left with one conclusion...

Video-1

Video-2

You forgot the alternative:

www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

Like they say in breast surgery...it is far easier to add material, than to remove it.

I guess these are actors, hmm?
My guess is these 'actors' are fearing for their lives.

Seems like a lot of people on ATS are scared of the septrember clues video, claims of a hoax and claims that it's been debunked etc, but no evidence to prove septemebr clues is a hoax, or no evidence debunk it. Only personal opinion without a detailed explaination as to how it's supposedly debubnked.

Simonshack is is not making a profit from 9/11, he does not charge for videos like some, and aside from september clues itself the cluesforum provides futher evidence that has been well researched and clearly explained, and as it stands has not been debunked.

The planehugger shills just have a 'religious' belief in the official story, nothing more, nothing less.. No evidence to disprove the no planes theory, and yet there is a large amount of evidence to prove there was no planes.

I personally believe this thread was created deliberately to discredit september clues.

Until you provide a step by step analysis of each september clues video, complete with your debunking efforts then no one will take you seriously. Can you please provide this before making wild claims.