Rethinkng the NPT (oh no! not again!)

titorite,

Excellent post by you and you have covered most of the stuff, Thanks for letting us know you have a brain that work superb.

Skadi,

You have to start to use your brain or I will think you are on the payroll, get it?

D.Duck

NPT do not effect what actually brought the buildings down, to me, it just makes 9/11 was an inside job a much much harder sale to the general public.
Now why would you want to do that?
Anybody within the truth movement could answer this question
The answer is obvious.

You want to promote 9/11 truth focus on WTC7 it is the weak link.

Promoting NPT is suicide for the truth movement. True or not.

[edit on 15-7-2009 by Blue_Jay33]

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33


Promoting NPT is suicide for the truth movement. True or not.

In my mind ignoring the truth is suicide to the truth movement.

Some would say the pentagon is the weakest link.

Some would say the Shanksville crash is the weakest link.

What the weakest link is just a matter of opinion. The fact the media used phony footage is a fact and very easy to show people... getting them to accept what their eyes see is not so easy. It is not a pill some can swallow just like some still believe muslims with box cutters did it because they can not accept the truth that box cutter muslims had nothing to do with it.

Ignore the truth and their is no truth movement.

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
Promoting NPT is suicide for the truth movement. True or not.

That's why not a single 9/11 research organization supports NPT. Many have made public statements on their webpages or forums stating as such. Some have went further by banning the discussion of NPT altogether.

And what happens to the truth if we ban people who talk about it? Take a step back for a moment.

Not you nor I know exactly what happened. We look to the facts to find the truth.

Now, if you or I are forbidden to discuss a certain aspect of the event what happens to the truth? Can it be found when we can not talk about this or that aspect?

Did you ever look into the Hez video in super slow motion and come to a logical explanation as for why the plane melts into the building?

No debris flying anywhere from impact until the plane is completely swallowed by the building and the explosion begins...

Thoughts?

[edit on 15-7-2009 by titorite]

reply to post by titorite


Be realistic, we need to prove stuff that the general population can sink there teeth into.

To quote from Star Trek
Spock: "... logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few".

The few are the NPT people, the many are the people who still believe in the government fabricated story.

If you still don't "Get it" there is not much else I can post.

Ill forgo my usual well thought out rhetoric and leave it at this:

All no plane theories are CRAP because there is NOT enough evidence to support that there was a jetliner @ the pentagon site, and plenty of evidence that planes DID hit WTC 1 & 2. The reality of the situation is that no jetliner hit the pentagon and planes did hit the 2 towers.

There is infinite room for foul play within that scenario, and that is the scenario that was presented to me on september 11th 2001.

Originally posted by titorite
The fact the media used phony footage is a fact

That statement is flat-out disinformation. And it's also the reason why the whole NPT cult is classified as disinfo artists. You can't claim something as fact when you have no evidence to present.

When someone claims to have recorded a "real" UFO on video, producers of these UFO programs obtain the originals and have them analyzed by several video studios for fakery.

Until the NPT disinfo cult starts obtaining the original videos and having them professionally analyzed for fakery, then every single thing they say is meaningless, baseless, disinformation.


Based on NPT logic, I could start up my own disinfo cult. I could say Godzilla destroyed the WTC. I could say that the large holes found in the smaller WTC buildings were from Godzilla's feet:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/bc2934cd12d2.jpg[/atsimg]

I wouldn't need any more proof than that. I don't need images or videos of Godzilla actually destroying the WTC, nor do I need witnesses to have seen Godzilla because I can just call all the witnesses liars just like the NPT disinfo artists do. All I have to do is get a few idiots to believe that it's possible and then start spreading it around and there you have a disinfo cult just like the NPT disinfo cult.

It baffles me to no end that people entertain this BS with zero proof whatsoever except for the word of a few proven and known disinfo artists.

reply to post by Blue_Jay33


I understand what I feel is truth. It really does set me free. When I talk about this subject I will talk about the TV fakery. It is super easy for me to defend... All I have to do is take them to camera planet and show the the news footage of that day and then point out the subtle flaws....

Have you watched the September clues videos? If not I would highly recommend it... because if you can be honest with yourself then it will change your entire outlook of the event.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
Until the NPT disinfo cult starts obtaining the original videos and having them professionally analyzed for fakery, then every single thing they say is meaningless, baseless, disinformation.

It baffles me to no end that people entertain this BS with zero proof whatsoever except for the word of a few proven and known disinfo artists.

_BoneZ_ your using disinformation tactics. You know the 25 rules as well as I do I suspect.

I asked you about that Hez video.

I asked if you can give me a logical explanation as to why the debris of the impact did not start flying from the crash at the point of impact?

Why does nothing happen as the plane melts into the building until the plane is completely swallowed and the explosion begins?

If you feel their is no merit to the theory thats fine but please try to remain respectful.

You know I am not any kind of dis-info artist. Just if you could give me a few thoughts to my two questions above with out referencing your godzilla strawman...

I feel amply vindicated by seeking to exclude the NPT with video fakery from discussion in this thread.

Anyone who states as fact the assertion that all the video footage was faked has no idea of the difference between fact and assertion.

This kind of foolish, sloppy thinking favours only the disinfo agent.

There are plenty of NPT-with-video-fakery threads already. They're not convincing, I've read them, I don't want that nonsense rehashed on this thread, thanks.

reply to post by titorite


Although there are some good points raised, how do you respond to the New Yorkers who saw, heard, and yes some even felt via sound waves the plane.

They aren't lying, some of them are in the truth movement too.

Too them NPT are a ludicrous joke.

Originally posted by rich23
I feel amply vindicated by seeking to exclude the NPT with video fakery from discussion in this thread.

There are plenty of NPT-with-video-fakery threads already. They're not convincing, I've read them, I don't want that nonsense rehashed on this thread, thanks.

But you want to talk about holograms?

And I also brought up the lack of Jet fuel contamination at any crash site but you do not want to address this either?

Why start a thread about the No Plane theory if you want to exclude aspects of the No plane theory?

As I asked _BoneZ_ I shall also ask of you. In that Hezcaori (SP) video the plane melts into the building... Now I know you say you found it unconvincing and I for one believe a plane could definitely smash through anything given enough speed...

However,

At the point of impact things start to happen, flying debris starts going everywhere as two large solid objects smash at high speeds.

Windows break metal contorts things break.

But in that Hez video nothing happens till the explosion.

What logically explains that?

Or perhaps you would like to talk about the EPA it its lack of concern about the Jet Fuel contamination?



[edit on 15-7-2009 by titorite]

Originally posted by titorite
Have you watched the September clues videos? If not I would highly recommend it...

Then, once people have seen "September Clues", they can watch:

"September Clues - Busted" which exposes the deception, insidious innuendo, misdirection and lies in the “September Clues” series of videos:
video.google.com...

Debunking "September Clues" - A Point-By-Point Analysis:
truthaction.org...

The Great Nose In -- Nose out Hoax:
www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by titorite
I asked you about that Hez video.

I asked if you can give me a logical explanation as to why the debris of the impact did not start flying from the crash at the point of impact?

I don't recall seeing these questions. Please link to where you asked them so I can oblige.

Originally posted by titorite
You know I am not any kind of dis-info artist.

How come I don't know that I know that?

To perpetrate something as fact when there's no proof or evidence, is disinfo. If you watch the videos and read the paper I posted in my previous post before this one, the NPT'ers purposely falsified and manipulated video to perpetrate a certain outcome. That is disinfo. And to purposely falsify and manipulate video and then call it fact is disinfo artistry.

NPT'ers purposely falsify and manipulate video, and make things up out of thin air like "the buildings are moving and the plane is stationary". So, again, until the NPT disinfo cult aquires original videos and has them professionally analyzed for fakery, then everything they perpetrate as proof is disinfo.

As long as you continue to run with that crowd and peddle their disinfo, you will be lumped in with them.

reply to post by _BoneZ_


_BoneZ_ you are posting from the rule book of the 25 rules of disinformation.

And I mean Exactly!

You set up that Godzilla strawman and did not answer my question.

You have quoted my question and then stated that you did not see a question and asked me for a link to the question.

You have ignored my questions again and again.

Your hitting and running.

I talk about the September clues video and you create new evidence.

You invoke authority and claim others are dis-infoationalists while playing by the disinformation hand book.

For the hope that you can do this I will seek an answer for my question once again and if you can not deliver, I shall have to let it go and accept that you have no intention of answering my question.

In the Hez video, the plane melts into the building. The plane does not break apart as it enters the building and none of the building structure breaks as the plane enters the building.

Nothing happens until the explosion begins.

Do you have a logical explanation for that?

At the point of impact metal did not start to contort, Parts do not begin to fly everywhere, No glass from the windows break. The Plane simply melts into the building and then explosion with nothing breaking, bending or otherwise showing signs of a high speed impact.

Can you give me a logical explanation?



[edit on 15-7-2009 by titorite]

Skadi,

You have to start to use your brain or I will think you are on the payroll, get it?

D.Duck

I wish I was "On the Payroll". I've been on this site for 6 years, and have been called...far worse. For all that pseudo abuse, I wish I was a spook. I'd have so many damned fringe benefit..

But I have been using my brain and avoiding any parties where ample amounts of Kool-Aid have been involved. Which is why I have come to my own conclusions, and until someone displays something beyond speculation on a couple photos, I will stick with the conclusions I have reached, thank you very much.

And of course, to add to the list: internet discussion boards where claims of time travel, psychic abilities, ect are given as proof for one's claims...

Give me something solid and empirical, and then I will consider in my "white box", to quote a very favored UFO investigator.

Originally posted by rich23
I feel amply vindicated by seeking to exclude the NPT with video fakery from discussion in this thread.

Anyone who states as fact the assertion that all the video footage was faked has no idea of the difference between fact and assertion.

This kind of foolish, sloppy thinking favours only the disinfo agent.

There are plenty of NPT-with-video-fakery threads already. They're not convincing, I've read them, I don't want that nonsense rehashed on this thread, thanks.

Well, hey. It's the 9/11 forum. Critical, deductive thinking couldn't last here.

Anyway, back to our ATS think tank. We were discussing the hijackers, their CIA links, behavior, and histories.

The possibilities exist of them being:

1. Closet fundamentalists who were successfully recruited by spooks posing as revered imams
2. Fundies who thought they were simply going on a routine hijack mission, only to discover mid-flight that they were in for more
3. they were patsies recruited by the CIA
4. They were deeply entrenched CIA assets who were not even involved in the attacks, but served as sort of "stage actors" before hand, to set up a good trail.
5. Complete, nonexistent fabrications.

Now, begins the real mind maze. Which makes the most sense, and which scenarios can be fitted with No Plane Theories? Can there be a crossover, if so, what would that be?

reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf



Personally I would go with choice 5. I don't see how any other of the choice could fit the NPT. Nor do I see how any other theory completely ties together every single inconsistency of the OS.

The lack of jet fuel contamination, the planes that could fly inches off the ground and withstand G forces no other commercial air bus could withstand, the total radar disappearance even from passive radar detection, and as i said before operation mockingbird is something to consider.

Originally posted by titorite
reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

 

Personally I would go with choice 5. I don't see how any other of the choice could fit the NPT. Nor do I see how any other theory completely ties together every single inconsistency of the OS.

The lack of jet fuel contamination, the planes that could fly inches off the ground and withstand G forces no other commercial air bus could withstand, the total radar disappearance even from passive radar detection, and as i said before operation mockingbird is something to consider.

I don't see how disappearing from radar" would prove point 5. if anything, it would prove my opinion that there was a conscious stand down, or that radars were deliberately concentrating elsewhere.

By the way, it wasn't an Air Bus, it was a Boeing. And it was more likely flying feet or meters off the ground, which could be done via remote control.