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

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by atlasastro
How do those sceptical of the OP's video's explain this?

As I've stated several times, the perimeter columns failed at the connectors only. That whole wall isn't going to cave in because of an airplane strike. Only the steel columns that are directly affected by the plane are failing at the connectors.

I understand your point of view Bonez. But I am not talking about the Whole wall, am I. I clearly asked you to explain why certain sections seem to be intact, even though the plane has passed through it. What I find amazing is that, even though the connectors failed, in the photo, a photo you linkedpost by _BoneZ_, there is no consequences of physics. For every action there is an equal and/or opposite reaction. In the photo you supplied, where you say the connectors fail, there is still WTC wall. Look between the main fuselage and the engine on the left wing, there is no failure at the wall and the wing had dissapeared. Now. A: if the wall has not failed then the wing remnants should be visible as they would be now reacting to the wall and moving away in opposition as per the laws, and so producing visible debris field protruding from the wall. Or maybe it is, B only the connectors fail making way for the wing with a such precise hole it is indistinguishable from the original wall. The precision of the hole accepting all debris without any resistance from the WTC wall at all. Resulting in all of the plane moving into the building with no debris acting with equal or opposite force against any part of the wall at any time and resulting in no forming of any visible debris against the wall. I find that very hard to believe given the hole in the wall you link here.

As I've stated several times, the perimeter columns failed at the connectors only. That whole wall isn't going to cave in because of an airplane strike. Only the steel columns that are directly affected by the plane are failing at the connectors.

Thank You. This is what I am confused about. Your photo shows no reaction from the plane to the wall, no debris accumulating against the wall where is has not failed. Follow the entire outline of the plane Bonez, in your photo. There is no visible reaction from the plane, in some sections the wall is entirely intatct, whilst sections of the plane have dissappeared. ?????. You state that not all the wall failed. Yet not one section of the plane has failed as an equal and opposite reaction to those bits of the wall that remain. There should be visible debris. You yourself have stated that not all the wall failed. Why does this picture not support that claim by showing visible debris reacting to those sections of wall that have not failed.

Look at the top of the hole in the yellow boxed area. See the huge chunks of building pushed IN? You would have to have a massive explosive device(s) on the outside of the building to cause this without a plane. Explosives on the inside of the building don't suck in, they explode out. If the holes were done by explosives as some no-planers suggest, then they would be plainly visible on the outside of the building for all to see.

Your picture that you link to your reply does not answer the questions relating to the original photo you link. While it shows damage, it is post incident. Can you answer the questions and stop moving the goal posts please. I appreciate your response and am greatful for your reply, but you seem to be shifting the goal posts by injecting the no-planer ideas that the explosion was internal.

This is simple logic and it ain't rocket science. A little bit of research with a little bit of logic will help you go a long way.

Thats the thing, your assuming that I lack logic by asking the simplist of questions. Your photo defies logic. The plane is acting in an illogical manner. You offer the logic that the points of the plane , that I point out between the fuselage and the engines, do not show damage because not all the wall failed. Logically then we can conclude that the parts of the plane in these points should then follow the laws of physics and act with equal and opposite force which would have these parts visible as debris accumulating against the WTC wall. Why does you photo not show this Bonez? Its shows the wall intact, with no damge, and no visible debris.

Edit to add - Don't say that there was no plane just because you can sit there and look at a blurry picture and think that the building is not becoming damaged. The picture I posted clearly shows something large impacted from the outside causing the building to be pushed IN, not out if it was an explosion from the inside. Think about it.

Once again Bonez, you make assumptions and accusations. Firstly, I have never said that there is no plane. I am asking why this plane is not reacting in a logical manner.
As for the blurry picture. It is your photo, that you posted. This is what you said about this photo when you linked it.

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

If its blurry enough to support your claims, why can't I ask questions about it. I find it highly decietful that you would question my opinions based on this photo while your opinion and beliefs from its use seem perfectly reasonable and logical.

just because you can sit there and look at a blurry picture

Why can I not apply this, your own logic, to your arguement?

[edit on 9-2-2009 by atlasastro]

Originally posted by cropmuncher
I watched the event live on tv well before the second plane hit. I watched it hit live - it was definately a plane!

No, you didn't see it live, you saw what the media and government wanted you to see and you believe it was "live" because they told you it was.

and thats the basis for the entire conspiracy, confusion and deception.

It was all planned and staged which most who have done no research and analysis just blindly accept the OS.

A type of "plane" or aircraft may have hit the towers... but it wasn't flight 175 and 11.

Originally posted by cropmuncher
I think its an inside job & believe a missle hit the pentagon but i did see LIVE - the second plane hit the towers.

No, you saw the MSM LIVE FOOTAGE and their claims it was LIVE....

which most have blindly accepted and are easily manipulated.

but its an undeniable irrefutable FACT, the "LIVE" media footage was TAMPERED with, manipulated and contains FAKERY.

Once you do a full investigation on all the evidence, only then can one begin to see the LIE and deception and things were not what they seemed.

great posts zero.

nice to see this type of sharpness and someone with real common sense which isn't very common here.

Originally posted by zerozero00
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!!

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
reply to post by mosey

 

I'm not gonna sit here and rebut these videos line-by-line,

Because doing so would make your comments and opinion look silly and
lacking.

The only way one can reasonably, logically and factually debunk or make the claim there's no conspiracy and the OCT is TRUTH, one must be able to offer the same LINE BY LINE argument and evidence that truthers have.

TO THIS DATE, NONE EXIST.

why?

because it can't be done.

911 was an inside job.

Originally posted by zerozero00

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

]

Do you care to explain this picture please??

This is what confuses me about the debunking of the " no plane theory", who can debunk this image??....NO ONE!!

EXACTLY.

gee, i wonder y