Mike Lee on No Planes, Protecting the house and other 911 aspects

reply to post by Skyline666

Also why do some describe the plane as a missile, different colour one, different size, different angle approach, different entry into the building, some seeing no plane at all? If everyone seen the same thing why do all the testimonies differ in description?

Missile, different color, diffirent size, angle of approach, different entry or no plane.....

Many have never seen an aircraft flying at high speed in person so they probably thought they did see a missile. people were not looking up at the WTC "waiting on something to happen" and only got a short glimpse, thereby they think they saw a missile when they didn't. The word "missile" is very commonlly used to describe an object moving at a high rate of speed. But taken out of context often within the 911 theorys. It would not be the first time witness statements have been quoted out of the context they intended.

Many people didn't clearly see what color the planes were because they had a poor vantage point combined with the speed of the planes. I would not expect a civilian to provide a correct description of a plane moving at high speed then consider that to be a concrete fact. But the no planers do.

Different angle of approach is not an issue at all, people see what angle the planes were at because of the angle of the people looking at the planes, not vice versa. Besides tell me how to properly determine an angle for a civilian mind you, simply by seeing a plane zip by at high speed. Not possible at all.

Differnet entry points are debunked years ago and are so ignorant I won't even mention that.

No planes at all. Simple, people are either lying to make things up to further the no plane theory or, they did not see nothing in the first place because they were not in the right spot to see the planes. There many reports twisted and manipulated where people said they saw no planes....and that part was used but...left out the rest of their comment that they didn't see any planes because they were not in the right spot, had just walked outside etc etc.



[edit on 3/19/2010 by mikelee]

Originally posted by mikelee
Simple:

* No fam members asking where is my loved one at?

What does this mean?

Regardless of how they went missing...the people that where suppose to be on the planes are missing.

There family members don't have any more knowledge of what happened to them than we do.

Also, there is no substantial evidence for planes in shanksville or pentagon regardless of the evidence for planes at the WTC. You can't assume that planes were involved with all or non.

reply to post by Jezus

the people that where suppose to be on the planes are missing.

Not all of the family members buy the OS and I agree with them as I don;t buy it either.

My point is that NONE of the family members have said anything to the effect of, "my loved one was not on the planes...where are they at?"

Meaning, I do know of any 911 victim's family who has ever made the claim that the planes did not exist and their loved ones are now missing. Maybe they are but I have not found any who are saying that.

reply to post by Jezus

Also, there is no substantial evidence for planes in shanksville or pentagon regardless of the evidence for planes at the WTC. You can't assume that planes were involved with all or non.

There is no evidence for the single crater in Shanksville thats true and I have always stated such. But, that site was not the only debris site either. Unfoirutnately I cannot offer any proof of other sites at the moment...But that will change sometime in the future.

The Pentagon...I stated my opinion on that in my post.

Originally posted by mikelee
reply to post by Jezus

 

Again and respectfully, no one family member wise, has made the claim that their loved ones were supposed to be on the flights and are now missing. This cannot be dismissed or overlooked because we all KNOW that if a family member was *supposed* to have been on one of those flights they would surely be asking questions and making a lot of media noise.

This has not happened and it can't....We all know why. That alone dispells the no plane theory.

This is illogical.

If people believe family members flew on a hijacked plane and died, and if they have been fooled and the passengers were murdered by a secret military group instead, how would that make them suddenly claim their rellies were now missing rather than dead?

Do you believe these surviving relatives have ESP, or access to secret information?

Originally posted by mikelee
reply to post by Skyline666

 

As for the vid with no planes I feel very confident saying it was a forgery/fake probably by someone trying to promote the no plane theory.

Once again...

Too many people saw the planes who were in NYC to arrive at any other conclusion.

No one has ever said they were in NYC and didn't see any planes but saw the building explode. Again, more debunking of the no plane theory.

People keep claiming there were lots of witnesses to the planes, plural.

Tell me, how many witnesses were there to the first plane that struck that day?

How many witnesses to the second plane identified it as a large, commercial passenger jet and how many gave a description which could have equally well described a large, winged missile?

Originally posted by Kailassa

Originally posted by mikelee
reply to post by Jezus

 

Again and respectfully, no one family member wise, has made the claim that their loved ones were supposed to be on the flights and are now missing. This cannot be dismissed or overlooked because we all KNOW that if a family member was *supposed* to have been on one of those flights they would surely be asking questions and making a lot of media noise.

This has not happened and it can't....We all know why. That alone dispells the no plane theory.

This is illogical.

If people believe family members flew on a hijacked plane and died, and if they have been fooled and the passengers were murdered by a secret military group instead, how would that make them suddenly claim their rellies were now missing rather than dead?

Do you believe these surviving relatives have ESP, or access to secret information?

Only to illogical people...

Well which is it then? Secret military group death squad or hijacked plane and died?

Maybe a plane did hit the pentagon, but I find it very difficult to believe. IF the government would release anything more than the few frames they released it might solve that mystery. That they seized all the security camera footage from every place in the area and will not release it to this day tells me they are hiding something.

Maybe the Shanksville plane got shot down and they just do not want to admit that..

Bottom line for me though is that I think the Mossad and probably elements of our government found out the plans for the hijacking of the planes and decided to take out the 3 buildings with explosives. So the Mossad/CIA thing was layered on top of the terrorists plan to give an excuse for the military actions.

My fear now is that they have another one in the mill targeting Iran..and will do anything including take out an American city with a nuke as an excuse for both Iran, declaring martial law, and cancelling the November elections. The time between now and November is very dangerous in my opinion.

Originally posted by Kailassa

Originally posted by mikelee
reply to post by Skyline666

 

As for the vid with no planes I feel very confident saying it was a forgery/fake probably by someone trying to promote the no plane theory.

Once again...

Too many people saw the planes who were in NYC to arrive at any other conclusion.

No one has ever said they were in NYC and didn't see any planes but saw the building explode. Again, more debunking of the no plane theory.

People keep claiming there were lots of witnesses to the planes, plural.

Tell me, how many witnesses were there to the first plane that struck that day?

How many witnesses to the second plane identified it as a large, commercial passenger jet and how many gave a description which could have equally well described a large, winged missile?

I don't know the EXACT numbers but one can quickly gain a good perspective by watching all of the videos posted on the internet showing hundreds of people running for their lives. Not to forget to mention the millions who saw the live covergae along with the replays of it all.

Originally posted by mikelee
Missile, different color, diffirent size, angle of approach, different entry or no plane.....

Many have never seen an aircraft flying at high speed in person so they probably thought they did see a missile. people were not looking up at the WTC "waiting on something to happen" and only got a short glimpse, thereby they think they saw a missile when they didn't. The word missile is very commonlly used to describe an object moving at a high rate of speed. But taken out of context often within the 911 theorys. It would not be the first time witness statements have been quoted out of the context they intended.

Many people didn't clearly see what color the planes were because they had a poor vantage point combined with the speed of the planes. I would not expect a civilian to provide a correct description of a plane moving at high speed then consider that to be a concrete fact. But the no planers do.

Please excuse me rephrasing what you're said here:

"Many have never seen a missile flying at high speed in person so they probably thought they did see a plane. people were not looking up at the WTC "waiting on something to happen" and only got a short glimpse, thereby they think they saw a plane when they didn't. The word plane is very commonlly used to describe a winged object flying at a high rate of speed. But taken out of context often within the 911 theorys. It would not be the first time witness statements have been quoted out of the context they intended.

Many people didn't clearly see what color the missiles were because they had a poor vantage point combined with the speed of the missiles. I would not expect a civilian to provide a correct description of a missile moving at high speed then consider that to be a concrete fact. But the upholders of the plane theory do."

reply to post by expat2368

Maybe a plane did hit the pentagon, but I find it very difficult to believe. IF the government would release anything more than the few frames they released it might solve that mystery. That they seized all the security camera footage from every place in the area and will not release it to this day tells me they are hiding something.

I agree with you. It does amount to suspicion that the gov is hiding something by not releasing the footage, I have created threads on that very issue. But there was footage from many sources in NYC that showed the planes. Now we got all of these no plane theorys floating around like they are the gospel.

I know the government was involved OR elements of it were and there is no doubt there at all. I fear what lies ahead for us in Yemen and the issue in Pakistan.

Originally posted by mikelee

Originally posted by Kailassa

People keep claiming there were lots of witnesses to the planes, plural.

Tell me, how many witnesses were there to the first plane that struck that day?

How many witnesses to the second plane identified it as a large, commercial passenger jet and how many gave a description which could have equally well described a large, winged missile?

I don't know the EXACT numbers but . . .

So, if I tell you no-one but the Naudet brothers and their crew, who were conveniently armed with appropriate cameras in the only street-corner from which the first missile attack could be so well filmed, were the only witnesses to that attack, could you prove me wrong?

. . . one can quickly gain a good perspective by watching all of the videos posted on the internet showing hundreds of people running for their lives. Not to forget to mention the millions who saw the live covergae along with the replays of it all.

Ah yes, the videos . . .
Are you aware that all "civilian" cameras and videos were confiscated that day as evidence and returned weeks later, giving ample opportunity to tamper with them?

Those taken by the media were all beamed back to the one media processing centre, at which a CIA propaganda unit was inserted to work with the media, and where the aircraft images could have been inserted onto the films almost real time.

Originally posted by mikelee
My point is that NONE of the family members have said anything to the effect of, "my loved one was not on the planes...where are they at?"

How would they know that they were not on the planes?

Even if they were on the planes, they are missing regardless of whether the planes crashed or anything else...

Either way they are missing...

reply to post by Kailassa


Naudet brothers... I could care less about them or their crew.

There were no missiles in NYC but there were two aircraft.

I highly doubt ALL cameras were confiscated. Perhaps a few sure but not all of them.

CIA propaganda unit uh? I doubt even the Farm could edit all of the footage and have it back up on the airwaves within hours. You are giving them more credit then they are worth.

reply to post by Jezus


If you cannot comprehend what I have explained regarding this up until now then any further attempt at an explanation as to such is just going to be a moot point.

reply to post by mikelee


The problem is you are making assumptions based on your own speculation.

Regardless of what really happened to the passengers, the family members or anyone else would have no more information than we do.

The passengers are an unknown variable. Anything could have happened to them.

Not knowing one variable does not refute the rest of the evidence.

reply to post by Jezus


I'm voicing my opinion as to what happened just as those who hold opinions that may differ from mine do as well.

However the no plane theory in NYC holds about as much water as a bucket with no bottom, in my opinion of course.

The passengers are an unknown variable

Common sense reasoning indicates that the passengers died when the two planes in NYC hit the WTC Towers. Providing there is no other evidence to support any no plane stance.

I'd like to see more evidence and some form of finality to this whole thing but I doubt it will ever be the case.

Originally posted by mikelee


I don't know the EXACT numbers but one can quickly gain a good perspective by watching all of the videos posted on the internet showing hundreds of people running for their lives. Not to forget to mention the millions who saw the live covergae along with the replays of it all.

Don't remember seeing any videos of hundreds of people running for their lives, all the videos I've seen are only focused on the plane hitting the building. Did some have split screen?

I also suspect that many were running because the buildings were infact exploding.

reply to post by Kailassa

Originally posted by mikelee
reply to post by Kailassa

 

Talk about cherry picking your videos.

One guy argues against it so the NPT is debunk? Your joking right?
He made no valid case against the nose out theory either, and no matter which way you see the plane enter the building the nose out still remains. He explains it away by saying the Sept clues makers deliberately smoothed out the final frames, which is ironic considering that is exactly what they done in the video you posted to debunk the theory.

He then goes on to say the constantly changing backgrounds are due to different cameras being used at various vantage points. Which is all well and good but he doesn't (or can't) explain why buildings appear and disappear on numerous occasions.

And different cameras or not, the colour of the backgrounds on various vids are so remarkable it looks silly sometimes.