New Video - No real planes hit World Trade Center (Continuous Pieces)

reply to post by GenRadek


Agree, that's exactly what i was pointing out. It doesn't have to break through the steel, it just has to break the bolts and the section is gone. The bolts weren't meant to withstand such enormous horizontal forces.


[edit on 4-4-2009 by hackbart]

Originally posted by GenRadek
Once those go, the plane has clearance to enter the wide open interior and drywall and office supplies are not going to stop the aircraft.

That's correct and that's exactly what happened. The only thing that did stop those planes was the nearly indestructable cores of the towers.

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by matrixNIN11

Originally posted by esdad71
I saw a plane hit on TV. I saw planes in the videos that were released later.

no, you saw what the MSM and PERPS wanted you to see.

IRREFUTABLE evidence has already been proven beyond a doubt to exist that shows FAKERY and IMPOSSIBLE imagery of 175 hitting the towers.

you can ignore and deny that evidence, but it won't change that its there for anyone with real common sense to see plain as day.

What are you talking out of?

Some of us saw it live and in person plain as day

My wife and I drove up to Jersey early that morning from Maryland and right as we were arriving we heard about the first plane hitting the tower on the radio so we drove down to watch the fire from the Jersey side, We with about maybe 50 other people were all jammed against the steel railing near a bench and we saw the second one come right in and slam into to the other tower so please get some real facts!

Stop reading garbage on the web and youtube. This only makes you look foolish to those who were actually there that day.

It's sad really we have people die and some yahoo online denies it ever happened. Well I have always avoided these threads because I know what I saw I cant speak for what happened in DC or what slammed into the field but I know what I saw that morning from Jersey.


[edit on 24-3-2009 by SLAYER69]

where has any NPTr ever denied people died?

and its rather odd you classify information on the net or youtube as garbage. You're making a generalization without showing what exactly you think is garbage. You offer ZERO evidence or facts to support that assertion.

Now I've seen only ONE post where you talk about your experience and what you saw... all you've described is that you were by a BENCH and railing.

thats it?? really?

I think many would be interested in much more detail as such detail has been important in understanding witnesses points of view/vantage points etc.

Do you have more details to present? Am i missing another post where you expanded on what you saw?

Due to the many contradictions and different accounts from so-called eye witnesses who are as SURE as you are but claim to have either seen no plane or anything but a commerical boeing, you can understand the confusion and why the NPT even exists.

So of course you're welcome to your opinion, but if you enter threads here to offer your opinion, you're expected to also support it with hard facts, and evidence, otherwise whats the point of being here?

for you to enter this thread and reply with a general statement claiming we should just blindly believe you saw what you saw without giving any details other than you drove to some unknown location by a railing in jersey and saw a plane hit, and expect no challenge to what you claim, is a bit silly don't you think?

Originally posted by matrixNIN11
if you enter threads here to offer your opinion, you're expected to also support it with hard facts, and evidence, otherwise whats the point of being here?

The only problem is, if he showed a video or a picture supporting his claim, you'd call it fake, so it doesn't really matter if he shows any evidence now does it? You're just typing to type and don't really care about facts or evidence, otherwise NPT wouldn't exist.

Originally posted by matrixNIN11
and its rather odd you classify information on the net or youtube as garbage.

Because it is utter garbage.

Please direct me to one online video that is presented in high resolution, that uses original source DV or tape footage (not digital footage acquired online), that shows evidence of the "No Plane Theory."

All I ask is for one video of high quality. Just one.

Originally posted by matrixNIN11

for you to enter this thread and reply with a general statement claiming we should just blindly believe you saw what you saw without giving any details other than you drove to some unknown location by a railing in jersey and saw a plane hit, and expect no challenge to what you claim, is a bit silly don't you think?

Well first off welcome.

I'm glad you have decided to join us here at ATS and welcome to the threads.


I never said you or anybody else for that matter had to believe me nor do I care if you do.

"IF" I knew that was going to happen that day and 'IF" I had even the remotest idea that we would be sitting here years later talking about it being a giant Hoax. I would have had my camera all set up and focused on the situation.

I was in shock and thought war was being declared.

I completely understand why there are so many conflicting reports from that day. Ask any cop if he ever gets the same story from witnesses after a severe car accident.

Now I've seen only ONE post where you talk about your experience and what you saw... all you've described is that you were by a BENCH and railing.

This was my first and only trip to Jersey. So forgive me for not being familiar with the area. My X wife's father had passed away if you want to know why we were going there in the first place. So we were not exactly in the best of moods that morning. And I don't know too many people who take pictures at funerals. We don't.

As I told you via U2U I'm done discussing the issue and you are welcome to your opinion.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by matrixNIN11
if you enter threads here to offer your opinion, you're expected to also support it with hard facts, and evidence, otherwise whats the point of being here?

The only problem is, if he showed a video or a picture supporting his claim, you'd call it fake, so it doesn't really matter if he shows any evidence now does it? You're just typing to type and don't really care about facts or evidence, otherwise NPT wouldn't exist.

No, the problem is most of YOU government oct supporters most often never present real facts, evidence, intelligent arguments or back anything you say/claim up with anythng more than opinions.

and i suspect will be the case once again

Originally posted by matrixNIN11
most of YOU government oct supporters most often never present real facts, evidence, intelligent arguments or back anything you say/claim up with anythng more than opinions.

Are you looking in a mirror when you type this stuff? I've backed up everything I've ever debunked of the NPT disinfo with links, sources, pictures, videos.

Until you obtain the original videos, and there's at least 43 sources to obtain, you have NOTHING to present as real facts, evidence, intelligent argument and can ONLY offer your opinions, PERIOD.

To put it in more plain english:

GET THE ORIGINAL VIDEOS, OR THERE IS NO NPT.

It really doesn't get much more clearer than that.

Originally posted by matrixNIN11
No, the problem is most of YOU government oct supporters most often never present real facts, evidence, intelligent arguments or back anything you say/claim up with anythng more than opinions.

To settle this once and for all, why not simply show us at least one high quality video that has been composed from high quality source video?

Please. Shows us the video. We beg you.

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by matrixNIN11

for you to enter this thread and reply with a general statement claiming we should just blindly believe you saw what you saw without giving any details other than you drove to some unknown location by a railing in jersey and saw a plane hit, and expect no challenge to what you claim, is a bit silly don't you think?

Well first off welcome.

I'm glad you have decided to join us here at ATS and welcome to the threads.


I never said you or anybody else for that matter had to believe me nor do I care if you do.

"IF" I knew that was going to happen that day and 'IF" I had even the remotest idea that we would be sitting here years later talking about it being a giant Hoax. I would have had my camera all set up and focused on the situation.

I was in shock and thought war was being declared.

I completely understand why there are so many conflicting reports from that day. Ask any cop if he ever gets the same story from witnesses after a severe car accident.

Now I've seen only ONE post where you talk about your experience and what you saw... all you've described is that you were by a BENCH and railing.

This was my first and only trip to Jersey. So forgive me for not being familiar with the area. My X wife's father had passed away if you want to know why we were going there in the first place. So we were not exactly in the best of moods that morning. And I don't know too many people who take pictures at funerals. We don't.

As I told you via U2U I'm done discussing the issue and you are welcome to your opinion.

yes, that of course IS your choice if you don't want to give any more details as to what you allegedly saw. In fact your account is possibly one of the most obscure and general in existence since the only details you'll give are that you saw "a plane" "hit" at some unknown location.

I understand you feel you don't have to prove anything and you know what you saw... but the problem i have is that you decided to enter a thread at a site created to engage in intelligent debate and assert that the evidence of there being NO PLANE etc is ludicrous while at the same time offering no evidence whatsoever to support your claim or disprove the evidence in favor of NPT.

The point is, you can state your OPINION here all you want and i suppose give no evidence to support that opinion... but the minute you assert what you don't believe is LUDICROUS, you're not merely stating an opinion which opens you up for your attack/ad hom to be challenged.

you can't state opinions or make baseless claims in a forum such as this unless you're willing to and able to back it up.

So why are you here? To state OPINIONS? Or engage in intelligent discourse to find out the truth of 911 which is the primary purpose of this forum?



[edit on 10-4-2009 by matrixNIN11]

Originally posted by matrixNIN11
you can't state opinions or make baseless claims in a forum such as this unless you're willing to and able to back it up.

I respectfully, and strongly suggest you do the same by providing to us a video that does not fall into utter ridiculousness with a cursory bit of minor scrutiny.

You've just demanded this fellow to back up his claim. Well, sir, his claim is supported by far more substantial evidence that the claim you appear to be defending. He is not making the fantastic claim, you are. You are the party in this debate tasked with the burden of proof.

One video. Just one. Clean and high-resolution. Composed of original or high-quality copies of the first generation source videos.

Please. If this is theory is so damning, such a video should be easy to produce.

That is all I ask.

Originally posted by Insolubrious

Google Video Link

Basic high school physics dictates the plane could not punch through the facades of the twin towers leaving cartoon like plane shaped holes in the steel framework - and without any deflection, crumpling or deceleration!

Planes cannot even travel at 500mph below 7000 feet or sea level - which the so called 'planes' that hit the towers were supposed to be travelling.

[edit on 22-3-2009 by Insolubrious]

Um ... I'm open to any theory or idea but the idea of a plane hitting a building and pushing or punching through the right spot is not completely unbelievable. A plane at the right speed is just a giant hollow point bullet. Have you never seen a video showing a 2x4 punch through a cement wall during a tornado or hurricane? With the right speed and strike anything is possible.

The other issue i have is with your statement about the speed of the plane. Why exactly could it not be flying at 500 miles per hour? I mean once the plane is up to speed what does altitude have to do with it. Infact if the plane is decending it would be able to pick up speed as long as they didn't throttle back.

The number one rule of physics is that anything is possible. I mean the guy in the video said he has heard of planes hitting the ground doing mach 1. The speed of sound is a bit faster than 500 miles per hour.

Now if you just said that the US governement was aware or even participated in the "attack" in order to have a reason to go to war i'd buy that. But the no plane theory is a hard pill to swallow.

[edit on 10-4-2009 by Shunsu]

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by matrixNIN11
most of YOU government oct supporters most often never present real facts, evidence, intelligent arguments or back anything you say/claim up with anythng more than opinions.

Are you looking in a mirror when you type this stuff? I've backed up everything I've ever debunked of the NPT disinfo with links, sources, pictures, videos.

Until you obtain the original videos, and there's at least 43 sources to obtain, you have NOTHING to present as real facts, evidence, intelligent argument and can ONLY offer your opinions, PERIOD.

To put it in more plain english:

GET THE ORIGINAL VIDEOS, OR THERE IS NO NPT.

It really doesn't get much more clearer than that.

first of all, i used the word MOST...so chill out... even though you might say its my opinion that your so-called evidence etc is often lacking to say the least, you can disagree all you want, but no matter what I or any Nptr says obviously won't change your mind. You say our minds are closed, we say yours is. You say we haven't proven anything, we say you haven't. You say you've backed up everything, I/we say you haven't.... and it goes on forever ad naseum. So i could care less about your opinion, what you think and what you call proof and evidence since again, I'm saying you've proven or disproven nothing. I say the evidence against what you claim has been backed up, is beyond lacking. And i say there's thousands of posts and threads in this forum to choose from to back that claim up.

Either way, The truth will prevail in the end.

In the case of NPT, I say its been validated and will continue to be validated.

you disagree. so what? and what now?

And lastly, you CLAIM and its your OPINION or your entire logic is based upon the fallacy and false premise that NPT is BS because of the issue about ORIGINAL VIDEOS etc. What you suggest is that the fakery exposed did not occur or is unprovable because there's no way to verify that the vids and docs showing fakery, are not using the original footage or have ADDED their own fakery.

Talk about convoluted logic not to mention quagmire you've created for yourself that i guarantee will cointinue to backfire and back you into a corner so deep you'll never be able to get out of in the end.

Whether NPT means there were no planes, or the "planes" were missles/drones that looked like planes, *NONE* of the 4 flights claimed in the OCT crashed on 911.

you're welcome to believe whatever oct fairy tale you want... i could care less.








[edit on 10-4-2009 by matrixNIN11]

Originally posted by mister.old.school
matrix911 wrote:"you can't state opinions or make baseless claims in a forum such as this unless you're willing to and able to back it up. "

You've just demanded this fellow to back up his claim. Well, sir, his claim is supported by far more substantial evidence that the claim you appear to be defending. He is not making the fantastic claim, you are. You are the party in this debate tasked with the burden of proof.

i clearly explained the problem with slayers CLAIM... and NO, his CLAIM is not supported by far more substantial evidence. In fact, his claim has no evidence at all whatsoever so support it. CLAIMING he "saw" a plane hit and not presenting any sort of intelligent argument etc to support it, is NOT EVIDENCE.

Originally posted by mister.old.school
One video. Just one. Clean and high-resolution. Composed of original or high-quality copies of the first generation source videos.
Please. If this is theory is so damning, such a video should be easy to produce.
That is all I ask.

see my response to bonez

[edit on 10-4-2009 by matrixNIN11]

Originally posted by GenRadek
I do believe there is a picture of the column tree section that was actually impacted by the nose of the plane.

Source and proof for this hearsay, please?

Its in more or less one piece and it does show how it was punched out by the impact with its end bolts sheared.

Wow. An obscure item like a hijacker's passport can be found. An obscure item like a column-tree-section-punched-by-nose-cone can be found, particularly being spotted amongst all of the other broken and damaged column-tree-sections-not-punched-by-nose-cones.

Yet, a FDR can't be found? Why bother looking for something so important when the punched-out-column-tree can be found!

Hey, did the column-tree-section-punched-by-nose-cone happen to make an impression against any serial number inside the alleged plane?

I recently watched an episode of NCIS where a car smashed into a garden and drove off. Abby was able to identify the car after she arranged the smashed pieces of a helloween pumpkin that the car hit. She could read the impression of the car's license plate spread across the pumpkin. Maybe we need some mainstream TV science to help locate ONE freaking serial number from any of the alleged planes used that day?

Originally posted by matrixNIN11
i say there's thousands of posts and threads in this forum to choose from to back that claim up.

You must be talking about posts just like the one you posted that are all full of words, but no real evidence. There's nothing in those posts but rhetoric, opinions, and blatant untruthfulness. There's a couple videos, but they've already been debunked for some time. Shall I post the debunk again?

arabesque911.blogspot.com...

Give us some forensics. Give us some actual witness names, like CIT does, of people that have purposely altered 9/11 videos. Just because you say it's all true, doesn't make it so. You need hardcore, solid, tangible evidence. Not some voices disecting a video with their OPINIONS of what's going on.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
i say there's thousands of posts and threads in this forum to choose from to back that claim up.
--------------------------

You must be talking about posts just like the one you posted that are all full of words, but no real evidence. There's nothing in those posts but rhetoric, opinions, and blatant untruthfulness. There's a couple videos, but they've already been debunked for some time. Shall I post the debunk again?

arabesque911.blogspot.com...

oh yeah, i remember that... I demolished that so-called poor excuse of a "debunking" back in January.

Continous Pieces also gave Anthony Lawson an embarrassing spanking as well.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
Give us some forensics. Give us some actual witness names, like CIT does, of people that have purposely altered 9/11 videos. Just because you say it's all true, doesn't make it so. You need hardcore, solid, tangible evidence. Not some voices disecting a video with their OPINIONS of what's going on.

Except It doesn't take much more than common sense to see the OBVIOUS FAKERY thats pointed out and going on.

But each of the incidents/events/circumstances are different and the methods of discovering truth don't necessarily have to be the same. You're suggesting forensical evidence or NAMES are necessary to prove video fakery etc... please tell me you're not that stupid because There is no way you can be a reasonable person and actually claim the same tactics/methods used by CIT at the Pentagon, should be used at the WTC or elsewhere in the same way to expose the obvious FAKERY.

Are you serious?


[edit on 10-4-2009 by matrixNIN11]

Okay, I'm no expert on planes, however I do know that jet fuel that flash burns at 1300*+ cannot even weaken steel thet does not begin to melt until held at 2800*+ for 8 hours. I've used thermite det cord to cut steel beams when the building was still standing after being gutted by fires caused by HEP rounds. Building fires, JP4, JP54, and JPA1 do not melt steel structural beams. Been there, done that and got the tee shirt.


[edit on 4/10/2009 by SGTChas]


Mod Edit: Review This Link: ABOUT ATS: General ATS discussion etiquette: Posting In All Bold

[edit on 4/13/2009 by semperfortis]

Originally posted by matrixNIN11
see my response to bonez

There are no links to any videos in your responses. Could you help out by simply posting the link?

Except It doesn't take much more than common sense to see the OBVIOUS FAKERY thats pointed out and going on.

Please demonstrate that common sense by giving us a link to a high-quality video that utilizes high quality source material.

Thank you.

[edit on 10-4-2009 by mister.old.school]

Originally posted by matrixNIN11
Except It doesn't take much more than common sense to see the OBVIOUS FAKERY thats pointed out and going on.

Yeah, except that the people with the REAL common sense, you know, the entire 9/11 truth movement and the rest of the whole world, don't agree or subscribe to the NPT disinfo. Only the few NPT cult followers. Kinda makes one wonder where NPT common sense comes from....

[edit on 10-4-2009 by _BoneZ_]