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.

 

Never watch the news EVER again. The 9/11 taboo/NoPlanes video

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 08:07 PM
link   
Similar thing happened couple years back when plane flown by Yankee
pitcher Corey Lidle smashed into building. Plane disintergrated on impact
(was composed of fiber glass) and resulting fire took 2 hours to
extinguish injuring number of people and killing Lidle and friend in
plane.

[

The 1945 B25 crash into Empire State building had one of the plane's
motors punch all way through building and land on roof of nearby
building.



The crash tore a hole about 18 ft (5.5 m) wide by 20 ft (6 m) tall in the 34th Street exterior of the Empire State Building. While the 78th and 79th floors bore the brunt of the damage, one of the B-25's engines fell down an elevator shaft and set off a major fire in the basement. The other engine hurtled across the building and tore through seven walls before emerging from the 33rd Street side of the tower. The debris crashed through the roof of a thirteen-story building across the street where another fire erupted. Other heavy wreckage, including the landing gear, also caused damage to the Empire State and nearby buildings while Stan Lomax reportedly saw part of a wing catapulting towards Madison Avenue.


Much of the debris from the airliners which hit WTC punched through the
building and emerge out other side - interior of buildings are mostly
empty space and unless hits something like a structural column or
elevator machinery will have sufficent energy to punch through.

Debris in street

Jet engine Murray Street



Landing gear wheel



landing gear embedded in exterior wall panel of WTC



Aircraft debris in parked car








posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 09:19 PM
link   
I saw the videos where they said no one on the ground saw the plane hit the building but that isnt true. I saw a video on youtube where one woman did, and described it as having no windows and was a cargo plane. I believe it was definitely an inside job though. Some people wont believe it unless someone official comes on tv and says so.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 11:05 PM
link   
reply to post by cosmicman
 


Very well put together videos. Enough to make anyone with half a mind of their own to see 911 was a false flag. But then their are those with none left...

S&F for the Attention
Rgds



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 12:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
The planes were doing between 400-500mph.


Actually NIST said 546 mph and FEMA said 590 mph. Who to believe? I choose no one because the planes were obviously fake as shown.


the planes did not come out the other side of either building. The planes also didn't slice through steel and concrete.


Have you saw the "live" helicopter shot from FOX? Watch again. Look the nose of that plane just came out the other side of that building, OMG!


Also look at some good pictures of the north tower after attack. See the straight cuts? Obviously those were made by the use of explosives, but we're led to believe a 767 wing cut through that.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 01:57 AM
link   
Generally speaking, jumbo jets flying at 500+ MPH generate a considerable amount of wind turbulence. Watch the 'impact' closely with this idea in mind.

When the 2nd tower explodes, the fireball and smoke are not influenced by any such wind pressure. As a matter of fact, part of the fireball actually comes back out of the hole from the same direction that the alleged plane has just entered.

Further, the resulting thick smoke wafts up the sides of the building and shows no signs of a wind disturbance. OOPS!

While the idea of no planes on 9/11 isn't very appealing from a public relations standpoint, the laws of physics are not patriotic.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
Much of the debris from the airliners which hit WTC punched through the
building and emerge out other side

You are probably the most unresearched person I've ever seen in my years of researching. Much of the debris from the airliners did not punch through the WTC's except for engines and landing gear and maybe a few pieces of fusealage that stuck to the engines or landing gear.

Here's the opposite side of the south tower. Nope, no big holes here that a plane could've came out of besides an engine, landing gear or small pieces of fusealage:



If "much" of the debris from the airliners punched through and emerged out the other side, we'd see some kind of holes, but there are none.


Originally posted by thedman
interior of buildings are mostly empty space and unless hits something like a structural column or elevator machinery will have sufficent energy to punch through

The only empty space was between the perimeter columns and the core. The cores were virtually indestructable and that's what stopped the planes from coming out the other sides of both towers. If you can't even get the interior of the WTC towers correct, why even bother typing? Do you not realize what you make yourself look like when typing things like this?

Google is free! Most other search engines are free also. All of this information is freely available. The pictures, some of the prints to the WTC, all available to you freely. Come on, at least show an effort.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Niobis
Have you saw the "live" helicopter shot from FOX? Watch again. Look the nose of that plane just came out the other side of that building, OMG!

OMG there's no hole for the nose to come out of:



OMG where's the hole!!!!????

Lets take a closer look at the "nose-out" from September Clueless:









We can now see from a simple researched examination that there was no hole in the south tower for the nose to come out.


Originally posted by Niobis
Also look at some good pictures of the north tower after attack. See the straight cuts?

In the next image, if you look really closely at where the right wing-tip hit, you'll see the steel colums are actually intact and only the aluminum siding on the columns are cut. The rest of the columns that broke from the strongest part of the wings where the engines were, broke at the connectors.



Now, in the next image, same thing with the left wing. Columns are intact and only the siding is damaged except for where the strongest part of the wings were near the engines:





Originally posted by Niobis
Obviously those were made by the use of explosives...

Obviously, you're incorrect. Take a look at the above picture inside the area I have enclosed in the yellow box. Look at the top of the hole. There are massive chunks of building pushed in due to the impact of the plane. If the damage had been done from explosives, the damage would have been pushed out, or the explosives would have been on the outside of the building for all to see.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 04:33 PM
link   
No planes hit them towers!

The "fake" MSM on the day proves it!

This is a star and flag thread for sure!!

We are talking about an aluminium air craft hitting a steel and concrete building that was built to withstand such events!
For the planes to slice through a building like they(MSM) showed us they did the planes must of been made of titanium!.....So...Its an Impossibility...anyone who thinks they saw it live are delusional for sure as it never happened!!

If you've never seen anything crash into concrete or steel here is a clip!


www.youtube.com...



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 04:38 PM
link   
No one else sees the irony in a guy who thinks 9/11 was an inside job lecturing someone else about what has and hasn't been debunked?



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by zerozero00
No planes hit them towers!

You can keep screaming it all you want, but I've just shown in the post directly above yours that the claims from September Clueless are false.


Originally posted by zerozero00
We are talking about an aluminium air craft hitting a steel and concrete building that was built to withstand such events!

The only concrete in those buildings was the 4 inches of a light concrete mix used on top of the floor trusses, which could easily be broken up with a simple sledge hammer, let alone a 100,000+ pound jetliner travelling at 500mph.

And it wouldn't matter if it was a 100,000+ pound jetliner, or a 100,000+ pound pillow. The damage (minus the smoke and fire from a pillow) would still be the same. There isn't a single steel-structured building on this planet that would make a large jetliner travelling at 500mph just bounce off.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 05:13 PM
link   

. There isn't a single steel-structured building on this planet that would make a large jetliner travelling at 500mph just bounce off.


It would crumple/break on impact....Not slice through a building like butter!!
There is just no way!!

The video the OP has pointed you to clearly shows dubious footage dubious witnesses infact the only witnesses to the planes where TV anchormen!!.

..hmmm whatever!


There is a lot of dis info agents out there for sure and I'm sure ATS has its resident agents.......

I'm not being told by your "truther" movements or the "OCT" believers what I can and can't believe myself....I'll let my own mind come to a conclusion with the info its been fed....chuck it about a bit...use some critical thinking and some common sense...throw a little science in there and you would be surprised what the human brain can do...

anyway, its the common sense thing that will win on the day....

You can fool all of the people some of the time, you can fool some of the people all of the time but you can't fool all the people all the time!!
something like that anyway....



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by zerozero00
the only witnesses to the planes where TV anchormen!!.

You forgot to mention the thousands of New Yorkers standing outside watching as the second plane hit the south tower. You also forgot to mention the videos of private citizens who also have the plane(s) on tape. But I suppose the government found a magical way to make home videos fake also?


Originally posted by zerozero00
There is a lot of dis info agents out there for sure and I'm sure ATS has its resident agents.......

It makes me wonder if you're talking about yourself when saying this as the no-plane theory (NPT) has been banned throughout the 9/11 truth movement because it has been deemed disinfo. Not one single professional 9/11 research organization accepts the NPT. 'Nuff said.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


"You forgot to mention the thousands of New Yorkers standing outside watching as the second plane hit the south tower. You also forgot to mention the videos of private citizens who also have the plane(s) on tape. But I suppose the government found a magical way to make home videos fake also?"

You care to show me any?
Not one credible witness at all saw Boeing 757's! none!....There is no independent footage of "planes" impacting the towers....they don't exist!

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

You can tell me all you want who has debunked what....It don't mean chit!

I ain't a stupid person, not easily fooled....I know what my eyes saw that day....and it was poor special effects too....hence the "taboo" video the OP points to you!

So you are trying to tell me that the footage from the MSM that days is genuine??



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by zerozero00
 


I ain't one who needs to be associated with the "truther" movement, I don't trust anyone who tells me how to think and what/what not to believe!
I know that the OCT is drivel to manipulate the masses and boy did they do well..!!

I can't believe the amount of people on this site who think that 14 hijackers armed with box cutters could infiltrate and attack the all mighty US of A....again...not possible!

A bit of common sense can quite easily get you to the right conclusion!

I'm very aware of "operation Northwoods"..and the term "False flag"
I'm very aware of the "ENRON" scandal...Evidence kept in WTC7
I'm very aware of who benefited out of 9/11...Delt through Deutshce Bank
I'm very aware of the lies of "WMD" to gain public support to an unjust and unfair war!
I'm very aware of the USA's problem with Israeli/American duel nationalities in power!
I'm very aware of a hell of a lot more regarding this sorry saga!
I could go on and on but surely its getting boring by now....



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 07:07 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


United 175 struck South (WTC 2) at angle striking South East corner of building . Most of aircraft missed the core with only the left side of the
aircraft impacting the central core. Debris emerged out the east and north
sides

UAL 175 strike on WTC 2



Notice debris emerging out of building

Jet engine on Murrary Street



Debris covering roof on nearby building - doesn't look like jet engine?



Burned seat cushions









So explain how all this small light pieces wound up on streets and roofs

Did the airplane fairy drop them?



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by zerozero00
You care to show me any?
Not one credible witness at all saw Boeing 757's! none!....There is no independent footage of "planes" impacting the towers....they don't exist

How incorrect you are again. By your logic, whoever saw a plane is not credible? That's some amazing logic there.

guardian.150m.com...

The first two videos are independent. There are many videos of the second plane.


Originally posted by zerozero00
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

In the first link, the first two people being interviewed talk about the explosions that initiated the collapse of the towers. The last two people were working in their offices when the planes hit. Hardly in a position to see the planes unless they knew the planes were coming, and could see through walls and floors.

The second video was about someone that heard the explosion, but couldn't see the plane. He even asked the reporter "who told you it was a plane?". If you weren't in a position to see the plane and you hadn't had a chance to watch the news, the only thing you would know for sure is that there was an explosion.

This is the type of disinfo that the no-planers try to deceive people with. Let's move on....


Originally posted by zerozero00
I ain't a stupid person, not easily fooled

I lol'd. You are very easily fooled, sorry to break it to ya.


Originally posted by zerozero00
So you are trying to tell me that the footage from the MSM that days is genuine??

Every single piece of it.



Originally posted by zerozero00
I don't trust anyone who tells me how to think and what/what not to believe!

Obviously you do if you continue to believe the disinfo that is the no-planes theory.


Originally posted by zerozero00
I can't believe the amount of people on this site who think that 14 hijackers armed with box cutters

It was 19, not 14. You don't even know what happened on 9/11, let alone trying to say no planes hit the towers. You probably shouldn't type anymore.


Originally posted by zerozero00
A bit of common sense can quite easily get you to the right conclusion!

A great piece of advice that you should tell yourself every day when thinking the no-plane disinfo is real.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 07:22 PM
link   


It makes me wonder if you're talking about yourself when saying this as the no-plane theory (NPT) has been banned throughout the 9/11 truth movement because it has been deemed disinfo. Not one single professional 9/11 research organization accepts the NPT. '


If this is how the 911 truth movement works then they are as bad as everyone else.

Not one shred of evidence should be BANNED as this supposed truther tells it. To BANN information whether you deem it incorrect or not is ludicrous. Try looking at the information and then maybe deciding on its validity. If it turns out to be suspected as disinfo, THEN don't use it.

Sounds to me like the truther here is trying to herd the truthers into a corner and tell them what to believe. This sounds like the media again trying to make you see what they want you to see.

Maybe this truther can provide a link to someone saying that the 911 truth movement "BANNS the thoughts of a "NO PLANE" scenario". Then those that follow 911 can then decide whether to use data from someone who is trying to manipulate the thought process.

Banning information does not help in investigating, unless you have decided what is the truth already. In that case your on the right track... but watch out, the media is on the same track...

Rgds



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
Notice debris emerging out of building

That debris would be papers and pieces of building.


Originally posted by thedman
Debris covering roof on nearby building - doesn't look like jet engine?

Actually, that round part is from a jet engine. The rest of the debris is paper and parts of the building.


Originally posted by thedman
Burned seat cushions

You mean cushion with no "s"? You have no way of knowing if it's from a plane or from the thousands of seats, chairs and couches inside the WTC.

Here's the picture you should have shown, had you not tried to be deceitful. The impact was contained inside the building:




posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
To BANN information whether you deem it incorrect or not is ludicrous. Try looking at the information and then maybe deciding on its validity. If it turns out to be suspected as disinfo, THEN don't use it.

Um, it was looked at, it was considered disinfo, that's why it was banned. I'm not sure why that's so hard to understand. And no it's not ludicrous to ban incorrect info as this is the TRUTH movement. We don't deal with incorrect info or disinfo.


Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
Sounds to me like the truther here is trying to herd the truthers into a corner and tell them what to believe.

I'm simply letting those that either don't have an opinion, or that are undecided know that the 9/11 truth movement doesn't support these theories. And therefore, these theories shouldn't be associated with the 9/11 truth movement.


Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
Maybe this truther can provide a link to someone saying that the 911 truth movement "BANNS the thoughts of a "NO PLANE" scenario".

No plane disinfo is banned at 9/11 Blogger. It wasn't accepted at Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth when their forums were up. If you are a member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, you would know that it's not accepted there as well. Loose Change has it right in the forum rules that no-plane disinfo is banned. Firefighters for 9/11 Truth doesn't accept it, although the forums don't publicly state it, it will soon.

Those are the majority of the professional research organizations that don't accept the no-plane disinfo. There may be more, but that's the majority.



Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
Banning information does not help in investigating, unless you have decided what is the truth already.

Many, including myself, have looked into the no-plane disinfo. There's no evidence. Not one single shred of physical, forensic or scientific evidence that no planes hit the towers. So it's the banning of disinformation, that's more correct.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 07:52 PM
link   
Has there been a theory yet that actually no buildings were involved and the whole thing was staged through holographic imagery and mind control by the FBI making people actually think they saw all this happen by implanting visions and secretly transfering videos etc onto peoples video cameras etc through electro magnetic waves which they could do with their thoughts? Actually the twin towers never actually really existed. It's true, I have proof my cat used to hang out with Tony Blair's cats and they told her it was she's going to get me pictures.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join