What is the flash before the plane hits the building?

Originally posted by septic

Originally posted by Varemia
What makes you the judge of what the witnesses really saw?

Fake planes on TV means anyone who claims they're real is lying. Simple.

Hundreds of people saw the plane and stand witness to that,

You don't know that. You are simply repeating what you have been told by the most likely suspects.

and you are saying that because YOU think so, they must ALL be lying?

I don't know why people say some things. Why do some people say they see aliens? Perhaps it's power of suggestion, or perhaps they're lying. But if anyone claims to have seen something that is physically impossible, it cannot be true, whether they're lying or not.

Really, if you won't believe the testimony of people who were physically there, then no evidence will ever please you.

Really, if you are so eager to believe the testimony of people you can't verify were physically there, then no evidence will ever sway you.

You will always believe that it was all fake

Again with the all or nothing.

How much was fake and how much was not? That is the question we can't even ask.

I'd like to see a list of 500 people who "seen planes" with their own eyes. Does any such resource or list exist? As is stands right now just how many people are recorded as saying they "seen planes"? Anybody got a number on that? A link?

The various videos seem to sync up, if it's solely video fakery why would the wings appear to disappear? Why would a shiny and blue airplane look all black in open sunshine? Why would these anomalies exist if the goal was to fake something successfully? Why would anyone put in, or leave in, the frames with the missing wing?


Cheers

reply to post by septic


Oh brother

Originally posted by NWOwned
Why would a shiny and blue airplane look all black in open sunshine?

Cheers

It wasn't in open sunshine... it was in the shadow of the smoke and came out of the shadow about 1 sec before impact. Of course the government could easily predict exactly the chaotic nature of smoke, wind, and lapse rate to know exactly when and where, it would come out of the shadow weeks ahead of time, when they made the fake videos.

reply to post by NWOwned

The various videos seem to sync up, if it's solely video fakery why would the wings appear to disappear? Why would a shiny and blue airplane look all black in open sunshine? Why would these anomalies exist if the goal was to fake something successfully? Why would anyone put in, or leave in, the frames with the missing wing?

They made many mistakes, as anyone would trying to fake such a thing.

Why would Luc Courchesne's "amateur" footage be included on the Naudet footage? There's no "fakery" involved, but it does prove the Naudet's had access to Courchesne's footage in 2002, years before it was released publicly.

This suggests the propagandists shared their footage and weren't beyond making mistakes. I'm sure they were confident their counterparts in the media and Internet would be able to prevent exposure of and explain away the large number of mistakes that have been unearthed since.

reply to post by septic


This forum doesn't seem to be holding anyone back, does it? I would suspect that the innate intelligence of the readers on this thread is what prevents more people from espousing the multiple JASSM theory.

Originally posted by PhotonEffect
reply to post by septic

 

Oh brother

Aww...you mean you're used to people accepting your wild-eyed claims without proof? Sorry...prove it.

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by septic

 

This forum doesn't seem to be holding anyone back, does it? I would suspect that the innate intelligence of the readers on this thread is what prevents more people from espousing the multiple JASSM theory.

So kind of you to care so deeply for the welfare of the reader. It is such a selfless act to sort out the topics you deem unworthy of their intellect.

You guys get in our faces for daring to think differently, delete threads, or threaten us with bans and shouts of "hoax', and then you have the gall to mock us for not being able to make our cases. It's pretty obvious the whole purpose of this forum is to prevent a critical discussion of 911.

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by septic

 

This forum doesn't seem to be holding anyone back, does it? I would suspect that the innate intelligence of the readers on this thread is what prevents more people from espousing the multiple JASSM theory.

If this forum doesn't hold anyone back, debate me. It is my position the videos of the planes slicing the towers are fraudulent. I challenge you to a debate, one on one, in whatever forum you feel most comfortable. You can even have BoneZ and Shadow as your seconds.

Surely you can take 'lil ol' me. Come...set it up. You look like you have some pull around here...or is that just your persona?

Originally posted by septic

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by septic

 

This forum doesn't seem to be holding anyone back, does it? I would suspect that the innate intelligence of the readers on this thread is what prevents more people from espousing the multiple JASSM theory.

So kind of you to care so deeply for the welfare of the reader. It is such a selfless act to sort out the topics you deem unworthy of their intellect.

You guys get in our faces for daring to think differently, delete threads, or threaten us with bans and shouts of "hoax', and then you have the gall to mock us for not being able to make our cases. It's pretty obvious the whole purpose of this forum is to prevent a critical discussion of 911.

What I said was that the readers are too intelligent to buy this theory. I never deleted any of your threads and cannot ban you. You have attempted to make your case but can't; it has no substance and you are looking for excuses to explain why it has not gained support on ATS.
All the evidence is for planes; there is no evidence for JASSM's or anything else. Your theory is bankrupt.

reply to post by pteridine

What I said was that the readers are too intelligent to buy this theory.

How is this not claiming the right to speak for others? You're so full of yourself you think you know what's best for others. What you are actually saying is you're afraid they'll see the truth if they're exposed to it. This is why you work so hard to keep people focused on planes...'cause they'll never find the truth as long as they stay focused there.

I never deleted any of your threads and cannot ban you. You have attempted to make your case but can't; it has no substance and you are looking for excuses to explain why it has not gained support on ATS.
All the evidence is for planes; there is no evidence for JASSM's or anything else. Your theory is bankrupt.

I'm not saying you deleted any of my threads. I assumed you were a site representative like BoneZ and Shadow and I have seen plenty of good threads deleted in favor of the approved topics...the ones that have kept the world in limbo for ten years.

You seem to be threatened by this JASSM theory by the way. What's up with that?

Wait, I thought there was no plane and it was a projection?

Wait, I thought there was no projection and it was a missle?

Wait, I thought .. ..

Originally posted by princessgrey
Wait, I thought there was no plane and it was a projection?

Wait, I thought there was no projection and it was a missle?

Wait, I thought .. ..

My view of 911 has evolved through the years, as new information would influence my understanding. This is commonly called "learning".

Originally posted by septic
reply to post by pteridine

 

What I said was that the readers are too intelligent to buy this theory.

How is this not claiming the right to speak for others? You're so full of yourself you think you know what's best for others. What you are actually saying is you're afraid they'll see the truth if they're exposed to it. This is why you work so hard to keep people focused on planes...'cause they'll never find the truth as long as they stay focused there.

I never deleted any of your threads and cannot ban you. You have attempted to make your case but can't; it has no substance and you are looking for excuses to explain why it has not gained support on ATS.
All the evidence is for planes; there is no evidence for JASSM's or anything else. Your theory is bankrupt.

I'm not saying you deleted any of my threads. I assumed you were a site representative like BoneZ and Shadow and I have seen plenty of good threads deleted in favor of the approved topics...the ones that have kept the world in limbo for ten years.

You seem to be threatened by this JASSM theory by the way. What's up with that?

I did not speak for others. I expressed an opinion that they were too intelligent to buy the JASSM theory which is why ths theory has no traction. I am also not threatened by the JASSM theory. There is absolutely no evidence for it. The JASSM flight envelope does not permit the rapid maneuvers and time on target impacts with the precision claimed for your theory. The 1000 pound HE warheads would have made bigger, round holes and no such holes or explosions were witnessed or recorded. No missiles were seen on the many independent video recordings. No missiles.
You seem to be threatened by all the arguments against your JASSM theory, by the way.

reply to post by septic


Why thank you for clarifying that, septic.

reply to post by septic


I take it you have seen Yankee451's missile BS then

When something is harder to do than what you saw WHY even think it.

THERE is no evidence of missiles on any videos or pictures from the day I mean Yankee451 even believed in the concrete core story until he was proved wrong and to be fair to him he did say he was wrong on that!

reply to post by wmd_2008

Also to his credit.

He did also admit the punch out hole at the Pentagon involved no steel reinforced concrete, But only two layers of brick and a plaster wall. It took a long beating to get it in his head, but it finally got through.

I miss Yankee 451. He was so much smarter and nicer than septic. I wish he was still here.


sigh...good times.

reply to post by pteridine

I did not speak for others. I expressed an opinion that they were too intelligent to buy the JASSM theory which is why ths theory has no traction. I am also not threatened by the JASSM theory. There is absolutely no evidence for it. The JASSM flight envelope does not permit the rapid maneuvers and time on target impacts with the precision claimed for your theory. The 1000 pound HE warheads would have made bigger, round holes and no such holes or explosions were witnessed or recorded. No missiles were seen on the many independent video recordings. No missiles.
You seem to be threatened by all the arguments against your JASSM theory, by the way.

I say you're wrong, and I challenge you to a debate.

Originally posted by septic

I say you're wrong, and I challenge you to a debate.

When are you going to explain to us how a JASSM missile works without contradicting yourself. If you cant do that whats the point of anyone debating you ? If the planes aren't real.... then..... JASSM missiles aren't real.

Silly Truther, You cant have separate laws of physics for the JASSM.

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by septic

 

I take it you have seen Yankee451's missile BS then

When something is harder to do than what you saw WHY even think it.

THERE is no evidence of missiles on any videos or pictures from the day I mean Yankee451 even believed in the concrete core story until he was proved wrong and to be fair to him he did say he was wrong on that!

Yeah, as soon as I mentioned missiles waypastvne told me not to go there. Since I suspect you guys lie about everything, I do the opposite of what you say, but I was already a fan. It's a solid theory and the evidence supports it better than a jet. If not standard JASSMs, then some sort of anti-tank hybrid. Very plausible, especially for the US military. The videos were faked because jets would have been shredded.

reply to post by septic


Forget it septic. I abstain. Proving me wrong is the least of your problems it seems.

Fact is there were hundreds of thousands of people in the downtown area that day. So you'll still need to prove that there were witnesses who didn't see planes. And then prove that their testimony is true.

Prove it chief, prove it.