It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The 9/11-no-plane-theory was never debunked

page: 3
1
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 03:33 PM
link   
Stationed at Andrews AFB performing Presidential Security Duties during 911. Picked up plane wreckage at the Pentagon. Landing gear sat on Donald Rumsfeld's coffee table until the day he left. Can't believe you folks are drinking this sweet green Antifreeze...
a reply to: DD2029




posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 03:42 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

a reply to: AgarthaSeed

There's nothing "now" about it. Go diving through the Hoax forum index and you'll find threads that haven't been active since 2012 talking about no planes. It's been policy for years.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 03:45 PM
link   
a reply to: DD2029

There are no fresh opinions. Hence your use of very old you-tube video.

Plane parts, as augustus pointed out, all over that part of Manhatten, pretty much put paid to the idiocy that is holographic airplanes...



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 03:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: seagull
a
Plane parts, as augustus pointed out, all over that part of Manhatten, pretty much put paid to the idiocy that is holographic airplanes...


But what if the holograms were filled with aircraft parts?

Dun-dun-dunnnnnnnnnnn.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Umm...

You got me there, dude.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 03:51 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull


Logic. You need some.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 05:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: DD2029

originally posted by: BelowLowAnnouncement
a reply to: DD2029


I looked into it... trust me. No need to reevaluate all the evidence.


Gonna have to be a no from me, stranger on the internet. Show your work.



This was part of the reason I retired form 9/11 truth movement.

Who's gonna believe no planes were used?

But why is it so hard to believe that the videos were edited and CGI was in fact used.

I'm sorry... but the case of the CGI/Holographic 9/11 still stands strong today... 100%.

at the very least, I'm a firm believer the airplanes or missiles used were not Boeing 757s.


Well, it's 100% as valid as it always has been, which is to say 0% valid. What's to prove you're real? It's just as likely all of your baby pictures were faked.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 05:24 PM
link   
a reply to: DD2029

you know john is ats arch nemesis, right?
and that no one takes him seriously



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 05:26 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Apparently...

Wal-Mart may have a special on it... BRB!



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 07:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

a reply to: AgarthaSeed

There's nothing "now" about it. Go diving through the Hoax forum index and you'll find threads that haven't been active since 2012 talking about no planes. It's been policy for years.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



Well. Here's a few. Apparently it's ok to make a thread trying to debunk no planes:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Or to ridicule it

www.abovetopsecret.com...

But in 2009, it was allowed to be discussed without being ditched in the hoax bin

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 07:22 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

So what do you suppose the quote "Fuel for the plane" means?
The UN made some money off the project, did the Masons profit?
There were rumors that someone showed up out in the desert with a huge roll of cash in 1968 and that changed everything..
edit on 22-2-2018 by Cauliflower because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 08:46 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

a reply to: AgarthaSeed

As anyone that has been here awhile has seen, policies change. All three of those threads are from before the policy changed, so are still in the 9/11 forum. The policy for several years now has been that no plane threads go to Hoax. It's not a recent change as the threads I did a fast search for were from 2012

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 10:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: DD2029

originally posted by: InhaleExhale

originally posted by: DD2029

originally posted by: BelowLowAnnouncement
a reply to: DD2029


I looked into it... trust me. No need to reevaluate all the evidence.


Gonna have to be a no from me, stranger on the internet. Show your work.



This was part of the reason I retired form 9/11 truth movement.

Who's gonna believe no planes were used?

But why is it so hard to believe that the videos were edited and CGI was in fact used.

I'm sorry... but the case of the CGI/Holographic 9/11 still stands strong today... 100%.

at the very least, I'm a firm believer the airplanes or missiles used were not Boeing 757s.




So no planes were used but they used planes or a missile.


what was holographic again then?



I'm just saying Boeings weren't used. 100% convinced too.

but still on the fence about what was used instead of the big Boeing airliners.


yep.....the truck that dumped the wrong turbofan off on the street and claimed it fell there that was a good one.....had the wrong diffuser holes big time between the high pressure and combustion stage.....right there on film even



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 11:46 PM
link   
Well, we have a serious problem within the 9/11-truth-community.

None of us can agree on anything.

So what do we agree on?

We all agree that a huge Boeing Airliner (757 I believe), did NOT hit the Pentagon right?

We all agree that a huge Boeing did NOT crash in Shankesville.


but when it comes to the WTC... nobody can agree on a damn thing.



So they faked the Pentagon and Pennsylvania attack but not the WTC? Is that what I'm reading from ATS?

2 Boeing airliners crashed.... and 2 didn't?

is that the general agreement amongst ATS posters?



posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 12:02 AM
link   
a reply to: DD2029

I doubt there's any consensus among the posters.

A significant number are convinced all 4 attacks involved real planes, real people and real casualties, which the real evidence supports as well.
edit on 23/2/2018 by Pilgrum because: spelling



posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 01:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Pilgrum
a reply to: DD2029

I doubt there's any consensus among the posters.

A significant number are convinced all 4 attacks involved real planes, real people and real casualties, which the real evidence supports as well.



Most of the 9/11 truthers I have spoken with, seem to all agree a Boeing didn't crash into the Pentagon.



posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 04:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: DD2029

Look I had threads that obliterated the CGI, the "micronukes", the "melted" cars, and all that, I mean there was just no where left to run for the paid COINTELPRO professionals that wrecked havoc on this site to the degree of about shutting the rest of the 911 forum down with their concerted methods.



Well I'm just a regular dude.

and my vote is that the live shot... the one from the moving helicopter... is some next level live CGI.

the nose out shot... that went to black at the exact moment of impact.

something looked off with that.

That's my vote... I'm sticking with it for now.


my application to ATS that CGI was used.


edit on 23-2-2018 by DD2029 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 04:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Protricity2k
Wow, you guys are incredible. Holograms???

CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI. CGI.

They used the same god damn shaky cam effect in every action movie since 9/11 and you bozos are still 100% convinced the shots were LIVE AND UNEDITED???????????????

Let me try this again:

THE PLANES ARE CGI, ADDED IN LATER. THE SHOTS ARE STILL SHOTS WITH WIDE ANGLE CAMERAS.

STOP BEING INCREDIBLE DUMB#S ABOUT THIS. ITS 2018


This.

end of true story.

2018, it's time we face the facts.

CGI, CGI, CGI

they had trillions of dollars for this black op. Probably a 2.3 Trillion Dollar price tag to pull it off successfully. (mostly USA Tax Dollars for the past however many years paid for it all, mixed in with advance technology.)

2018, time wake up and smell the coffee. CGI.




posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 05:01 AM
link   
a reply to: DD2029

Yeah, except for all the witnesses that day.

Oh, they’re all in on it.


Suuure.

This is 2018, most of us aren’t that stupid.



posted on Feb, 23 2018 @ 05:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed

But in 2009, it was allowed to be discussed without being ditched in the hoax bin

www.abovetopsecret.com...



F*ck yea, good find... let me read through this.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join