No Plane Hit The World Trade Center On 9/11

Originally posted by FDNY343
reply to post by kybertech

 

I want the 5 minutes of my life that I just wasted back.

Haters gonna hate


I want the 3 hours I wasted back then in front of the screen back too

reply to post by kybertech



Yes...that IS a waste of time. Instead, just read through the description of the video, first, to see how utterly delusional that YouTube person is.

Weaseling out of each "loaded" so-called "question".

Lying all the way. He cites ONE! Count 'em ONE "eyewitness" who missed seeing the airplane!! This, in answer to the "tens of thousands" of eyewitnesses question. BECAUSE THERE WERE!!!! ONE guy looking the wrong way, or in the wrong position is NOT something to hang your ridiculous "No Planes" theory on.

This is a load of garbage "theory", always has been. Countless pieces of evidence were recovered, of airplane wreckage and debris....and DNA from passengers and crew. Many body parts and fragments were isdentified, and families given some closure....

Finally, in those stupid "soft ball" questions, in the description, is the often-used (by imbeciles and delusional people like seen on YouTube) the TVNews live shots. Inane claims that it "wasn't" live, are BS.

In any case, there are dozens and dozens of home camcorder recordings....and, there was the other eyewitness who was recorded, on the phone in an interview with (I think) the "Today Show"....discussing the first impact. And she SAW United 175 hit! While on the phone!

This thread starts sounding like a stuck LP.

reply to post by weedwhacker


You know the arguments of the other side of the discussion already and know how they will respond. It's an infinite cycle of know-it-all rantings and dead beat arguments on both sides. You say there are 9000 witnesses to one thing and they say there are over 9000 people lying, everyone gets mad and no progress is made by the end.
I refuse to participate in this kind of discussion.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by kybertech

 

Yes...that IS a waste of time. Instead, just read through the description of the video, first, to see how utterly delusional that YouTube person is.
Weaseling out of each "loaded" so-called "question".

Yeah, I suppose its far easier to make claims than it is to actually prove them. Something you seem to do quite often here.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Lying all the way. He cites ONE! Count 'em ONE "eyewitness" who missed seeing the airplane!! This, in answer to the "tens of thousands" of eyewitnesses question. BECAUSE THERE WERE!!!!

Yet you have no proof whatsoever other than another baseless claim. And once many of the alleged witnesses are examined, most end up either being nothing more than victims of the psyops and hardly credible or questionable connections to the media and government. So where's a detailed and scrutinized list showing tens of thousands witnesses, let alone having been independently verified examined? Of course none exist and your claim is nothing more than hand-waving speculation at best.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Countless pieces of evidence were recovered, of airplane wreckage and debris....and DNA from passengers and crew. Many body parts and fragments were isdentified, and families given some closure....

and each of those claims has been debunked in-depth ad-naseum.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Finally, in those stupid "soft ball" questions, in the description, is the often-used (by imbeciles and delusional people like seen on YouTube) the TVNews live shots. Inane claims that it "wasn't" live, are BS.

yet facts and evidence exist that proves otherwise.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
In any case, there are dozens and dozens of home camcorder recordings....and, there was the other eyewitness who was recorded, on the phone in an interview with (I think) the "Today Show"....discussing the first impact. And she SAW United 175 hit! While on the phone!

yet when each of those claims are examined, there's evidence either to the contrary, or evidence that discredits and exposes these witnesses putting their stories into question.

I know I love a good conspiracy but honestly, anyone thinking that 9/11 was all a fake and that planes never hit, terrorists didn't do it just seem to be totally crazy in my view and willing to hold onto any insane thought to help them cope with such a massive tragedy.

Originally posted by weedwhacker Lying all the way. He cites ONE! Count 'em ONE "eyewitness" who missed seeing the airplane!! This, in answer to the "tens of thousands" of eyewitnesses question. BECAUSE THERE WERE!!!! ONE guy looking the wrong way, or in the wrong position is NOT something to hang your ridiculous "No Planes" theory on.

There was a Pentagon witness that stated that they did not see what hit the Pentagon and they were told later it was a 757.

That leads to the question of who told him it was a 757 and how many othere witnesses were told what they saw ?

This is a load of garbage "theory", always has been. Countless pieces of evidence were recovered, of airplane wreckage and debris....

Problem is that no wreckage has been matched to any of the 9/11 planes.

In any case, there are dozens and dozens of home camcorder recordings....and, there was the other eyewitness who was recorded, on the phone in an interview with (I think) the "Today Show"....discussing the first impact. And she SAW United 175 hit! While on the phone!

Well they saw a plant hit, they would not have known what flight it was or what type of plane it was.

Originally posted by curious7
I know I love a good conspiracy but honestly, anyone thinking that 9/11 was all a fake and that planes never hit, terrorists didn't do it just seem to be totally crazy in my view and willing to hold onto any insane thought to help them cope with such a massive tragedy.

You're parroting the same opinion most do that haven't done any real research on the no real planes theory and just your claim alone you think the theory is about "everything" being fake or "planes" never hit, is proof you haven't bothered to inform yourself on even the most basic facts that the theory comprises. But I suppose ignorance is bliss when a persons confronted with uncomfortable truths that challenge one to consider new/more advanced theories, open their mind or do real research.

Rather than present any argument showing how what you claim is "insane" and crazy, its easier to post opinions that serve no purpose (even in a forum designed to analyze evidence and offer intelligent discourse), other than to obfuscate and perpetuate more of the status quo that keeps most ignorant of the evidence; Exactly what the Perps counted on.

This mindset only validates the age old saying:

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."
—
Arthur Schopenhauer, German philosopher (1788 – 1860)

Originally posted by truthseekr1111You're parroting the same opinion most do that haven't done any real research on the no real planes theory

And you are parroting disinformation from others and not doing any real research.

I have been waiting for months for the no-planners to answer questions on another forum and they have yet to give a real answer.

1. What caused the entry holes in the buildings?

2. What actuel evidence do you have that videos were faked or tampered with?

reply to post by weedwhacker

This is a load of garbage "theory", always has been. Countless pieces of evidence were recovered, of airplane wreckage and debris....and DNA from passengers and crew. Many body parts and fragments were isdentified, and families given some closure....

1. Fact: there was no identifiable airplane debris found to match the alleged planes.
2. Fact: there is no evidence to the DNA match up and all the alleged hijackers were using stolen identities. (What were they matching DNA to?)
3. Fact: Most families are not satisfied with the OS they are still demanding answers.

In any case, there are dozens and dozens of home camcorder recordings....and, there was the other eyewitness who was recorded, on the phone in an interview with (I think) the "Today Show"....discussing the first impact. And she SAW United 175 hit! While on the phone!

What? How does this woman know it was United 175? Hmmm, she must have seen it fly by in slow motion for her to check out the airplane identifying number to match this alleged plane. I would like to know how she knew it was United 175 when the identity to the airplane had not yet been release, some witness.

Don’t you see how ridiculous this sounds?

I agree she saw an airplane but what kind of plane did she see? Out of all the home camcorder recordings and media videos isn’t it odd that not a single person could capture the alleged airplane identifying numbers, colors of the planes or a single video showing if these alleged planes had windows.

If you want to believe your government never lies and has told you the truth then consider the OS your truth, because most of us critical, thinking people are not buying into the fairytales that you dearly defend. Many parts of the OS have been proven a lie, so I have to ask you, why you do not question the rest of the OS and ask your government to provide you with some real evidence to back up their hogwash. Apparently if the government had done a proper investigation instead of covering up everything we wouldn’t be here having this discussion.

Just because the government is the authority of the OS it does not mean they are telling the truth, in fact plenty of evidence verifies they have lied and are still lying about 911 today.

Originally posted by ULTIMA2

Originally posted by truthseekr1111You're parroting the same opinion most do that haven't done any real research on the no real planes theory

And you are parroting disinformation from others and not doing any real research.

I have been waiting for months for the no-planners to answer questions on another forum and they have yet to give a real answer.

Oh right, you're the same ULTIMA sock thats apparently disrupting the DI forum and you've banned from nearly every 9/11 forum including ATS for spamming, trolling and other massive disruptions, I think I'll pass on debating with you.

forum.ebaumsworld.com...
frustratingfraud.blogspot.com...

Yikes

Originally posted by truthseekr1111
I think I'll pass on debating with you.

Then debate with me. Please provide this "overwhelming evidence" that you proclaim you have in the other thread and that you never posted when requested to.

We'll be standing by waiting for you to post this "overwhelming evidence".

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by truthseekr1111
I think I'll pass on debating with you.

Then debate with me. Please provide this "overwhelming evidence" that you proclaim you have in the other thread and that you never posted when requested to.

We'll be standing by waiting for you to post this "overwhelming evidence"

...as soon as you adequately respond to my post in the "other thread" YOU were requested to.

Titorite was inadequately prepared for your ambush and engaged a battle that was rigged against him by the very nature of the pysops no plane hoax as it was designed to do... and only those who fully understand the dynamics, can effectively debate it. There are some here like Impressme, matrix911, evilincarnate, sphinxmontreal, warisover, ATH911, kybertech, orion7911, and D.Duck among the few with the knowledge, ability and guts to come forward to debate real planers and expose the lie for what it is. They've proven there's real evidence and anyone with an open mind who's done a detailed investigation and examines their postings, threads and arguments can see nrpt has credible evidence to support is and continues to grow. The only ones who deny that either haven't done any real research, are veiled, or fear and can't handle the profound implications.

Originally posted by truthseekr1111
Titorite was inadequately prepared for your ambush and engaged a battle that was rigged against him

Titorite challenged me to the debate and lost, plain and simple. If you think you are "better prepared", by all means, set up the debate. I'll debate any no-planer, any time.......... and win every single time.

What is there to debate?

1. The video of the magical sliding Verrazano Narrows Bridge in the background?

2. The several atrocious quality mainstream media videos which show different background colors (grey, green, pale blue, etc.) on a beautiful clear blue sky day ?

3. The mainstream media video which shows a cartoonish looking airplane silhouette playing Skip-To-My-Lou as it approaches the tower?

4. The fake CNN video which shows a large commercial aircraft disappearing into one of the towers like a hot knife melting its way through butter?

5. The NBC video which shows a ball shaped object approaching the towers and descending?

6. The fake videos with the disappearing wings or...green screen glitches, if you will?

7. The media talking schmucks discounting actual eyewitnesses and purporting to know what happened because they saw it on a TV monitor?

8. The fake witnesses on the phone who called in the networks, alleging to have witnessed the second airplane striking the tower and sounded as if they were reading from a bad script ("another plane just hit, flew right into the middle of it, explosion...[pauses to read script]...yes that definitely looked like it was on purpose)? Who the hell talks like that? Why does she think it was on purpose? What was her viewpoint? Who is this person? What is her background?

www.youtube.com...

9. The Fox Video which shows no airplane on the wide panoramic view, but when it zooms in the plane magically appears a short time later in the frame, as if going at warp speed?

10. The lousy third class Official Story pimps/actors/witnesses who had all the answers within hours after the attack?

11. The fact that no video or photo evidence has been released of the alleged passengers, crew and hijackers going through security/check-in at the respective airports.

12. The fact that nobody has bothered to properly interview and secure testimony from the security personnel at the airport.

13. The fact that no relatives or family friends showed up at LAX or San Francisco International, the alleged destinations for the four airplanes?

14. The claim that commercial airliners cannot be properly controlled or flown at such high speeds at such low altitudes due to air density?

15. The claim that the infamous Top Gun Turbans couldn't keep a Cessna in the air, but were able to perform maneuvers that even experienced pilots would have trouble performing?

16. The fact that all major media networks, despite being based locally in NYC, did not bother to send a reporter to the scene with a live video feed?

17. The fact that there is absolutely no credible video or photographic evidence, of airplane seats, cabinets, luggage, engines, mechanical parts, personal effects, etc.?

18. The claim that a landing gear fragment with wheel in tact was able to fly through both sides of the Tower, drop 800 feet and be able to land on the street near a scaffolding with no sign of damage to the surrounding street or area?

19. The fact that many on scene witnesses reported a missile or a small plane hitting the first tower, until they were brainwashed into believing the rubbish on TV?

20. The fact that the insurers of the Towers preferred to pay out billions of dollars instead of investigating the Official Fairy Tale?

You know...I can understand the shameless and soulless debunkers who do what they have to do because of the obvious agenda they have to uphold. This is why the only thing debunkers can bring to the table is some ridiculous irrelevant story of some guy tripping over a banana peel while handing out bottles of water.

However, I cannot understand these alleged self-proclaimed truthers who take it personally and attack the no-plane theories with such viciousness. What's the deal with that insane train of thought? This was a perfect psyops operation because of the numerous idiots like this who unwittingly push the agenda of the perps. They're just too stupid to figure this out.

There were many levels to the 9/11 operation. If you're going to get caught up on just a few aspects of the attacks (example: planes or no planes, demo collapse or no demo), you're just going to end up going around in circles. One has to take a step back and see the wider picture to really try and understand who and what was behind these incidents.

You see...when you start any investigation, a professional investigator starts with a clean slate and DOES NOT DISCOUNT ANYTHING off the bat. He accumulates his evidence (physical evidence, witness statements, video, audio, whatever) analyzes it and then forms a working theory as to what happened.

A lot of you seem to have this investigation business backwards. You do not go into an investigation by already having drawn a conclusion and trying to prove or disprove the conclusion. Again, you start with a clean slate and when your investigation is complete, you let the chips fall where they may. And I don't care how many stupid low quality CGI green screen videos or fake photos of aircraft parts you show me!

An investigator is not paid to make dimwit knee jerk off the cuff assumptions - he is paid to conduct a thorough and unbiased investigation.

If, on the other hand, you prefer to take the easy and lazy way out by swallowing everything that is fed to you in the media through the idiot box, the radio and the internet by a bunch of disreputable agenda driven individuals, then enjoy, because in the end, you are what you eat.

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
4. The fake CNN video which shows a large commercial aircraft disappearing into one of the towers like a hot knife melting its way through butter?

Can you please provide the professional video analysis that shows how any CNN video has been faked? If you can't provide a professional, provable analysis that shows video fakery, then there is no fakery and you should add the words (in my opinion) because without verifiable proof, it is only your opinion.

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
8. The fake witnesses on the phone who called in the networks, alleging to have witnessed the second airplane striking the tower

Can you please show verifiable proof that any of the witnesses were "fake"? If you cannot, then you should add the words (in my opinion) because without verifiable proof, it is only your opinion.

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
17. The fact that there is absolutely no credible video or photographic evidence, of airplane seats, cabinets, luggage, engines, mechanical parts, personal effects, etc.?

Here's an aircraft seat that fell through the air into the back of a car:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0b31c22b7891.jpg[/atsimg]


Here's an aircraft engine that fell through the air and crumpled up on the ground:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0dd99e287f0d.jpg[/atsimg]


Here's an aircraft wheel after falling through the air:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8602cd1ae868.jpg[/atsimg]


Over on the very right-hand side, you can see all of the aircraft and other debris that has smashed through the building and coming out of the other side:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/37ed35119fa9.gif[/atsimg]


The above are just a few of the many aircraft parts recorded in NYC. A simple Google search will turn up many more images.

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
18. The claim that a landing gear fragment with wheel in tact was able to fly through both sides of the Tower, drop 800 feet and be able to land on the street near a scaffolding with no sign of damage to the surrounding street or area?

Looking at the image of the landing gear above, I see a downed light pole laying in front of the wheel. That light pole must've got tired of standing and fell on its own. Or maybe the light pole got startled from the landing gear falling there and the light pole just fainted?

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
19. The fact that many on scene witnesses reported a missile or a small plane hitting the first tower, until they were brainwashed into believing the rubbish on TV?

Can you show an instance where a particular witness said they thought they saw a missile, then changed their story?

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
However, I cannot understand these alleged self-proclaimed truthers who take it personally and attack the no-plane theories with such viciousness.

Maybe because there's no truth to the no-plane "theories'? Maybe because we don't want those disinformation "theories" associated with us?

Oh, and it's not "self-proclaimed truthers", it's the whole 9/11 truth movement. Not one single research organization in the 9/11 truth movement supports the no-plane disinfo. Most of the research organizations have even banned the discussion of the no-plane disinformation. In my thread here I give a few examples of 9/11 research organizations' statements regarding the no-plane and DEW disinformation.

The research organizations have made it abundantly clear that they do not support, nor want any association with those "theories", period.

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
He accumulates his evidence (physical evidence, witness statements, video, audio, whatever) analyzes it and then forms a working theory as to what happened.

Correct, except there's been no "video analyzing" in the no-plane crowd. All there has been is deliberate disinformation spread around with poor-quality, low-res internet videos on YouTube.

If you want any credibility what-so-ever with the video fakery/CGI garbage, you have to obtain copies of the originals and have them professionally analyzed for fakery. If you cannot do this, you have zero verifiable, provable evidence, period.

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
You do not go into an investigation by already having drawn a conclusion and trying to prove or disprove the conclusion.

The no-plane disinformation was thoroughly looked at by myself and many others in the 9/11 truth movement several years ago, with a clean slate. It was quickly found that there is zero evidence for the claims. Been that way ever since.

Nice try at the cop-out thought. Pull the "but you never even looked at the evidence" card. It was looked at, very thoroughly. It's still disinformation.

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
And I don't care how many stupid low quality CGI green screen videos or fake photos of aircraft parts you show me!

I'll remind you and every single other no-planer to recognize this point when showing YouTube videos and calling fakery, CGI, or any other such nonsense. You have to obtain copies of the originals and have them professionally analyzed, or you're wasting your time and everyone elses. Plain and simple.



As I've said over and over: if you or any other no-planer think you've got enough evidence to debate in a moderated forum, then set up the debate. Otherwise, there is no debate and the no-planer side automatically loses, and thus proves you really don't have any verifiable evidence.

Originally posted by ULTIMA2
1. What caused the entry holes in the buildings?

I don't know.
It might has been one of these:

• Explosives mounted on the facade of the wtc
  
• Missle with a shaped charge
  
• Explosives inside with the facade weakened on key points
  
• The facade was manually deconstructed plus real or virtual pyrotechnic effects
  
• Video layering from a real or virtual model
  
• The building we saw on TV were 3D renderings
  

Originally posted by ULTIMA2
2. What actuel evidence do you have that videos were faked or tampered with?

None
I consider something as evidence that has been forensically proven using Mathematics.

These are the things I find suspicious:

• Weird Faces in explosions and dust clouds
  
• The Planes become partly transparent
  
• The famous "nose out"
  
• The orb
  
• The missing orb
  
• No continuous videos showing the actual event
  
• All videos showing the Buildings from the ground seem to be from a stationary point
  
• Clipping errors on trees, traffic lights, people, smoke and buildings
  
• Weird shadows and lightning
  
• Low detail on buildings and trees
  
• Audio tracks not matching
  
• possible use of studio production tools in audio (sidechain compression using voices, original research
  )
  

reply to post by _BoneZ_


If are interested in a reply you should attempt to debunk theories about why these particular pictures are fake or not what they are claimed to be. These are some very common pictures and each of them has been subject of intense study, along with thorough explanations on what is wrong with these pictures.

I will not write them down for you though, so many people have already done that, read it... you know all the hangouts.
If that is too much too ask your bad

reply to post by kybertech


Clap. Clap.

By all means, keep bringing it on...it's hilarious to watch the various "truther" fringes argue about completely inane ideas.....

....oh, and you should invite ShadowHerder...a staunch "the Gubmint did it" type....BUT, has often accused the people who advocate "no planers" as being Government shills and plants, inserted in order to discredit the so-called "Truth Movement"!!

Oh, it's is so richly amusing.....

....Feel free to search the threads, you will find at least one (perhaps two, don't recall atm) by that member (remember, "ShadowHerder")...take a stroll thru the ATS Search archives.

Oh, this is so delicious.....

"nose out" LOL!

"walking bridges"! LOL!

And on.....so far, you're doing a darn fine job, keep it up!!

reply to post by weedwhacker

Damn you sarcasm
If it weren't for the crackdown on individual rights because 9/11 I would very much like to laugh with you...