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: 3
7
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 





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.


No evidence....

The four videos provided in the OP are a hell of lot more valid than the tripe your spitting off.

Great research... single minded and ignores data when told to....

You must be working on a "grant". You find what they tell you....




posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by intriguedUK
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?

Believe it or not, yes these theories do exist as well. The no-planers go so far as to say that some buildings moved or weren't there before or just disappeared. To the no-planers, everything was faked. I don't know how they can make it through a day wondering if a stop sign is fake, or a child crossing the road.

"I'm sorry officer, I didn't see the stop sign. The hologram projecting the stop sign must be in need of reparing."

They don't think about the huge uproar by thousands of New Yorkers if there really was no plane and the news kept saying there was and nobody saw it because it was inserted into live tv. They don't realize how many thousands of people who would come forward and say there was no plane as the news kept showing the planes over and over.

The no-plane theories of zero evidence or proof of anything and seems to be a large disinfo campaign designed to hurt the 9/11 truth movement. That's why it's been banned at most of the professional 9/11 research organizations.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
Great research... single minded and ignores data when told to....
You must be working on a "grant". You find what they tell you....

And this is what no-planers do when everything gets debunked and they have nothing to say. They just attack. Nice of you to act your age instead of being a good adult and trying to refute my debunks of your disinfo the past several posts of mine.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

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:




You are hilarious dude!!

I just love that picture!!
The one where the planes wings have already entered the building....Yet!!...the building is still intact!!...WOW!!...Freaking amazing!!...and you believe this BS??



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


BoneZ!
I've been arguing for years with diss info agents regarding this......you and no one else can make anybody with any sort of common sense to believe the "OCT" !

I take it you haven't watched the "Taboo" video then?
When you do come back to me and we can start to debate it properly!
If you don't see any anomalies in the MSM on that day, then I suggest you work for the government or are just a poor brainwashed sheeple!!



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 09:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
September Clueless and the "no-planes at the WTC" theory is considered disinfo by the majority of the 9/11 truth movement and is banned from discussion at all professional 9/11 organizations except Pilots.

[edit on 30-1-2009 by _BoneZ_]


What??

All of them??

oh

I see ......Except "Pilots"!
Not that stupid group of people who should know better??
Not the people who fly the damn things??

BoneZ

You have a problem here.....

Because I have nothing to do with any truth movement...

and.....

the pilots know what can and can't be done by so called "pilots"......trainees and experienced ones...

They also have a little insight into the workings of one of them boeings!
Unlike yourself I must add



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 09:34 PM
link   
I actually think the no planes theory is possible since its not really one of the mainstream choices!



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by zerozero00
 


Hey Zero....

I also love how the aircraft just seems to melt into the building.... sorry I didn't word that very good... I mean the impact was "contained" in the building. I think what I mean is that it somehow bypassed the outside wall and managed to make it inside the building before it hit something and blew up.

He seems to have a script...."September Clueless and the "no-planes at the WTC" theory is considered disinfo by the majority of the 9/11 truth movement and is banned from discussion". How many times was this stated in this thread?? I counted seven... and I'm sure he'll say it another seven times in the next ten or so posts....

As to his comment...



And this is what no-planers do when everything gets debunked and they have nothing to say. They just attack. Nice of you to act your age instead of being a good adult and trying to refute my debunks of your disinfo the past several posts of mine.


I don't need to refute any of your garbage. It's all been addressed in the OPs four videos. And if thats not enough then you can use google to find more of the original footage that shows the same plane miraculously going through the wall before any damage to the shell of the building happens.

This is incredible for science and this 911 Truther who only uses evidence that he's told to use. He now has evidence of metal passing through metal... he should write to the science community. Incredible discovery...

Can't understand it... He is such a great researcher...



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 10:02 PM
link   
Some of us worked out more than 5 years ago that NPT was blatant disinfo, propagated to muddy the waters and to ridicule the '9/11 Truth Movement.' It's done a good job.

Frankly though, it's depressing after so many years that some easily-led fools can still be persuaded to accept this NPT rubbish. It's been a very successful disinformation campaign, and will ensure the continuous marginalization of the 'Truth Movement' which is now associated in the popular imagination with fools, saddos and psychotics.

Nice job guys.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 10:15 PM
link   
I live in New York. My very close friend worked right next to the WTC. He personally saw the second plane hit the building. He saw the plane coming and did not understand why. In the confussion and panic of the event, he actually thought they were coming to help somehow. Then he saw the plane hit the building.

This is complete bull. If you think the government let it happen, fine. If you think the government was involved in making it happen, thats fine too. But don't claim that planes didn't hit those buildings when thousands of New Yorkers like my friend saw it with their own eyes and not on TV.


Futhermore, my father had a dental office just two blocks north of the towers. We went two or three days after 9/11 to the office to retrieve supplies and I personally saw airplane parts on the street near my dad's office.

Unless you lived in NYC on 9/11, you can never understand what it was like here. We needed to go through 3-4 checkpoints just to get to the office. There were airplanes that hit those towers. How, why or by who are all legit questions, but NO PLANES is bull#!!!!!

[edit on 5-2-2009 by finemanm]



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 10:30 PM
link   
Can either of you please provide a link to a video or documents that might back up your statement. I understand you worked hard on proving the no plane theory was a hoax... so after five years where is the documents to show what you proved? I'd like to see a video maybe of someone breaking down the no plane theory bit by bit please.



posted on Feb, 6 2009 @ 04:52 AM
link   
reply to post by AllTiedTogether
 


They can't debunk it!

Its easy to say that the "9/11 Truth Movement" has debunked it when they haven't!!

Can you understand why Richard Gage won't touch it???....Maybe because he's an architect and not a pilot!!!
It's to easy to shout Diss Info!! Diss Info!! when you want to avoid something unexplainable, for any one to fall for that just ain't thinking for themselves!

And by the way, I think what R Gage and AE911truth are doing is marvellous and I wish them well in there search for the truth.........But thats all it is!!.... A Search for the truth!!
They don't really know what happened that day....only science has led them to question the "OCT" because it don't add up in their world of engineering and architecture!

Watch "Taboo" and you will see Graphics/Animation and Special effects Specialists picking holes with the MSM of that day...
But you don't have to be an expert in anything to see something wasn't right with the "NEWS" that fateful day!!



posted on Feb, 6 2009 @ 05:14 AM
link   
reply to post by finemanm
 


I don't really think it was what we were told it was!!

I heard witnesses say it looked like a "Missile" or a small plane with blacked out windows!

To do such a feat with "757's" would take some doing....I have being flying around the world for 20 years, I have covered 10's of thousands of air miles so I have an understanding of just how difficult it is to control a jumbo jet...It would take years of experience to perform such accurate tasks with a "757" and not some trainee who struggled flying a ceszna could pull it off!....but...Damn 3 x they pulled it off!!

If I had to guess, I'd have a dig at a dressed up cruise missile or a radio controlled military plane......But no way did I see 3 x Boeing's hit buildings!!...No way!!

The MSM footage and scripts of "fear" on that morning only created scepticism in me, I didn't fall for the "spiel" or the dodgy footage and dodgy Media CEO's wifes and dodgy neocons being witnesses!....It all smelt!!

Also, the last one in shanksville......Hmmm.....again...I have been around on this earth too long not to know when I've seen a plane crash site and if I haven't and I hadn't here!

Over 7 years on and my 1st instincts on that day have been proven correct!












[edit on 6-2-2009 by zerozero00]



posted on Feb, 6 2009 @ 01:13 PM
link   
Debunking the idea that planes never hit the towers and hundreds of thousands of people were hallucinating? The whole 9/11 truth movement has been debunked!!! There's no reason to entertain this theory most of all. Terrorist factions who have been suicide bombing targets for years before this hijacked some planes and flew them into the WTC. I don't know why people have such a hard time believing this, but it sure is funny.



posted on Feb, 6 2009 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by zerozero00
the planes wings have already entered the building....Yet!!...the building is still intact!!...WOW!!...Freaking amazing!!...and you believe this BS??

Well let's take a look at this:



A B-25 Bomber crashed into the Empire state building in 1945 and caused this damage. Even one of the wings went into the building. Freaking amazing! The B-25 Bomber is even a smaller and slower aircraft and still did that much damage. Wow!

The only BS is you not comprehending that no steel-structured building in the world can make a plane bounce off. Especially a plane that weighs 100,000+ pounds travelling at 500mph.


Originally posted by zerozero00
I see ......Except "Pilots"!

Yeah, don't get your hopes up. Pilots allows the discussion of the no-plane disinfo, but they do not support it either.


Originally posted by zerozero00
I have nothing to do with any truth movement

You're correct, and no-planes theories never will either. It's also part of your problem. You're not trying to seek the truth. You're just sucking in some disinfo from a cult leader and then spreading it like a disease everywhere.



posted on Feb, 6 2009 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
Can either of you please provide a link to a video or documents that might back up your statement. I understand you worked hard on proving the no plane theory was a hoax... so after five years where is the documents to show what you proved? I'd like to see a video maybe of someone breaking down the no plane theory bit by bit please.


You are completely insane! Like I said, I actually saw with my own two eyes airplane debris two blocks from the WTC. That photo of the engine on Murry Street, I saw it with my EYES. My dad's dental office was located on Murry and Church.

This medical office is where my father shared space with an OB/GYN named Dr. Netkin.

Pic on google maps of Murry and Church

My friend saw a plane with his EYES go into the trade center. The only reason I didn't see the plane with my EYES was that I was watching the news on TV.

This is the looniest 911 conspiracy theory. I would even be willing to accept the possibility that the plane was a cargo plane, or a remote controlled plane, but it was definately an F'in PLANE!!!



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 12:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by RFBurns

Originally posted by LwSiX
reply to post by Fitzgibbon
 


You mean like this:



I dont think that single engine cessna can do 400+ mph and have the mass and momentum of a twin jet engine passenger airliner.

If it could however, what would be left of that cessna? And would the tail be sticking out of the building? No.

But the cessna pic does show the example of the bouncing effect, for a cessna flying along at 130 or less mph.


Cheers!!!!


hah. hah. hah.
ok. lets just put it this way. have you ever thrown a pressurized egg 400 mph at a brick wall?

furthermore, since i am always a skeptic and always interested in two sides of the same coin.... debunkers, how exactly does one explain the many many effed up versions of the second plane hitting the tower? did the many different news outlets similtaniously and pointlessly recreate their own versions of the original which...ahem, "showed a plane" hitting? I must say as unbelievable as this no planes theory is, its still definately a mind fnck.

[edit on 7-2-2009 by mosey]



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:23 AM
link   
reply to post by finemanm
 


Oh... thanks so much for your expert testimony... this clears everything up. I will consider your story to be gospel and discount all the credible evidence because your father shared space with Dr Netkin. Unbelievable. Dr Netkin no less. Doesn't this beat all...

And your friend who saw it go in. YOUR Friend. YOU, the son of a father who worked in the same office as Dr Netkin no less.

And you saw it on the news at the same time as your friend... this story gets better and better... Plse do continue...

WOW!



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 06:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by finemanm
My friend saw a plane with his EYES go into the trade center.

The no-planers are just like the debunkers. They ignore all available evidence and make up evidence of their own. It doesn't matter how many thousands of people saw the planes with their own eyes, or how many videos of both planes there are, they make up their own evidence and then try to push it off as fact. It's quite sad, really.



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:03 PM
link   
_bonez_ and whoever else finds the no-plane theory absolutely ridiculous, I had asked a very simply question and was hoping you guys could please come up with some sort of answer instead of just a kicking and screaming defense.
of course, i dont want to read a single post until you've watched the references originally posted in this thread, for a rebuttal WITHOUT seeing the defense's evidence first is... well for lack of a better word, absolutely retarded.

so please can you shed some light on your argument?




top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join