No plane theory is a Hoax!!!, page 1

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 11 times

Topic started on 19-10-2009 @ 01:51 AM by ugie1028

As a member here for a very long time, i like the people here, ive seen a lot of crazy things but...

The NPT (no plane theory) in the 9/11 forum has gone a bit too far!

why?

Because i was in jersey city, NJ across the Hudson, I saw everything from when the first plane hit to the second plane hitting.

How can they say there were no planes when i saw WITH MY OWN DAMN EYES that PLANES hit the towers?

May i also add description of the planes... since im here...

the planes were all silver, solid silver. if anything, the planes were no American airliners, but planes DID IN FACT hit the towers!

[edit on 10/19/2009 by ugie1028]

Mod Edit: All Caps – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 19 Oct 09 by Gools]

reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 02:25 AM by zaiger

Because, no matter which conspiracy theory you believe in there will always be the group of people that make you look crazy for believing in any conspiracy. like
9/11- No plane theory
UFOs - GFL
Free Masonry - Reptilian agenda

reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 02:35 AM by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

reply to post by ugie1028

They're going to flame you as some disinfo agent here to make false claims. "Anyone can say anything". They do have a point, honestly. But I'm not with them. There's got to be at least a few of them that hate me dearly. Last year I started threads (Board Business & Questions) arguing that it needs to be put in Skunk Works after ATS made a new policy that all reptilian topics must end up there. It was turned down obviously, no matter how bad its disproven. The 9/11 forum came under scrutiny over the blitzkreig tactics of the No Planers that hold to this day. What a circus it has all been.

I never read any of the Reptilian threads, but I can imagine the madness in absolutely believing in something that you have to fabricate evidence in order to 'prove' the existence of something that all odds are against. The difference between the 2 concepts is Reptilian videos are entertainment pieces while No Plane COINTELPRO disinfo destroys a truth movement. BUT I cant imagine that reptilian people 'assault' the site in orchestrated groups with all that tenacity.

Originally posted by zaiger
Free Masonry - Reptilian agenda

Exactly. Years ago Freemasonry and the global power elite were of particular interest to me. Eventually I seen a History Channel 'documentary' on Freemasonry and the "NWO". The first half actually had real and relevent information, and then all the sudden there was David Icke and they started showing drawings of reptilians and it got so bad I had to shut it off. Clear and obvious smear piece that linked to idea of a NWO with that of belief in purely speculative 'reptilian' aliens. And now we have No Planes.

[edit on 19-10-2009 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 02:41 AM by Seiko

Certainty is a hard line for me. Having said that I'm fairly sure that two jet planes hit the world trade towers. There is more evidence to support this fact then any others I have seen presented. There are too many pieces of film for me to say that this was faked, or that no planes actually hit them.

There are many unanswered questions regarding 9/11 and I have more questions then I will probably ever have answers.

There are too many eye witnesses, too much film, too much evidence that indeed two planes did hit two towers.

The pentagon no planers have a more plausible standpoint.

reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 02:42 AM by Retikx

Oh well then, lets just put it to rest then shall we?? A person on the internet saw it happen so just forget about it.

reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 03:50 AM by chiron613

While I certainly disagree with the "no plane theory", I don't believe it's a hoax. A hoax is a deliberate attempt to fool people. While there are no doubt NPT theorists who are hoaxing, I accept that most NPT people believe what they say they believe.

While I assume that 9/11 was a conspiracy by someone other than bin Laden, the evidence I've seen for every explanation has always been inadequate to convince me that *this* explanation is true. In other words, I am sure something is wrong, and equally sure that no one has yet figured out what the truth is.

reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 04:08 AM by CaptainAmerica2012

NPT theory was created by debunkers and the people who cover up 911.

Agent provocateurs they are sometimes called. The attempt to lead the opposition or smear the truth movement with ridiculous theories.

Here is one of them now.

YouTube Link

This guy speaks for the 911 movement. This guys is loved by debunkers because he a whack job who claims to be a truther and of course he is not.

reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 04:11 AM by muggl3z

NPT is dis-information.

Even if the planes were somehow holographic fakes it doesn't matter. It was still an inside job. There are plenty of things worth focusing on, this was just put out there to muddy the waters and help paint us at total bafoons.

[edit on 19-10-2009 by muggl3z]

reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 04:13 AM by CaptainAmerica2012

YouTube Link

Here is the scum again.

YouTube Link

These are the same people who started the space beams, missile pods, fueltanker and ABL theories. They are not supported by the vicitims of 911 or by any truth group. These people are allowed to post here on ATS and when they do count on the thread getting many replies from resident debunkers here.

Its quite sick. If you research this more you will see that the cover up of 911 is a dirty world.

This guy speaks for the 911 movement. This guys is loved by debunkers because he a whack job who claims to be a truther and of course he is not.

[edit on 19-10-2009 by CaptainAmerica2012]

reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 04:15 AM by muggl3z

reply to post by CaptainAmerica2012

Pretty much says it all.

reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 04:17 AM by ATH911

Originally posted by ugie1028
Because i was in jersey city, NJ across the Hudson, I saw everything from when the first plane hit to the second plane hitting.

You've been registered since 7-23-2008 and this is the first time you're sharing this info?

How can they say there were no planes when i saw WITH MY OWN DAMN EYES that PLANES hit the towers?

Then the no plane at the Pentagon theory must be a hoax too?

May i also add description of the planes... since im here...
the planes were all silver, solid silver. if anything, the planes were no American airliners

So what is that United Airlines plane I'm seeing in the second impact videos?

reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 04:39 AM by Seiko

reply to post by ATH911

I don't see how the twin tower npt is the same s the pentagon npt. In a simplistic way of stating it, I have seen footage of planes hitting the twin towers, and no footage of a plane hitting the pentagon.

From all the research I as an amateur can do I can only conclude that a blur hit the pentagon.

These are two separate points.

reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 04:44 AM by ATH911

reply to post by Seiko

He wants us to believe planes really hit the WTC because he "saw it." Well lots of people claimed to have seen a plane hit the Pentagon, so by his logic, the Pentagon no-plane theory must be a hoax too.

Can you explain why he also says they were both silver planes when the second planes was not silver in the videos that you are relying on?

reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 04:53 AM by Seiko

Originally posted by ATH911
reply to post by Seiko

He wants us to believe planes really hit the WTC because he "saw it." Well lots of people claimed to have seen a plane hit the Pentagon, so by his logic, the Pentagon no-plane theory must be a hoax too.

Can you explain why he also says they were both silver planes when the second planes was not silver in the videos that you are relying on?

Well of course I can't explain his witness. I have no way to factually dispute perception. I can see videos on planes hitting the world trade center. These videos appear to me clear, and quite realistic. I can see no videos of a plane hitting the pentagon. I see only a "blur". I just want to point out that one does not equal the other.

Is there a thread here with a video expert offering evidence that the myriad of wtc films are all indeed false? Is there a site online that can show evidence that they are indeed fake, and not just a hypothetical alternative? If such a thing exists, please point me to it, and I will consider it.

If we can't even agree on a starting point we have little hope of reaching a conclusion.

reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 05:03 AM by nwodeath

My little sister saw the twin towers on 9-11. She was standing right there before the first plane strike. She claims no planes hit the towers, and she claims she never saw anything but explosions.

Now how do you explain that?

Her friend works around the corner from the twin towers and was having coffee that morning across the street but she was on the opposite side. She claims she saw nothing either, but heard explosions. So there! What do you have to say to that?

[edit on 19-10-2009 by nwodeath]

reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 05:05 AM by ATH911

reply to post by Seiko

I'm just saying based on the OP's testimony and logic, second crash videos were faked because they show a United plane instead of his reported silver plane and a plane must have hit the Pentagon too because people there claimed to see one hit as the OP claimed to see planes hit the WTC.

reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 05:14 AM by Seiko

reply to post by ATH911

I understand your point on the two towers, and the op's relating to the silver plane when the videos show a multi-hued plane. I can't myself state with certainty that it was specifically ua flight 175. But it was a plane.

Stating that this theory relates to the pentagon theory of no plane, is where I don't follow.

reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 05:29 AM by THE_PROFESSIONAL

YouTube Link

Check this out....this pretty much summarizes ATS 9/11 board.

reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 05:40 AM by jimbo2167

reply to post by ugie1028

What if the planes you saw were missiles designed to look like planes, would
that also be a hoax?

reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 06:10 AM by Mark_Amy

Originally posted by ugie1028

Because i was in jersey city, NJ across the Hudson, I saw everything from when the first plane hit to the second plane hitting.

How can they say there were no planes when i saw WITH MY OWN DAMN EYES that PLANES hit the towers?

I believe objects hit the towers, but I'm curious as to why you happened to be looking at the twin towers on that morning when you saw the first plane hit? What made you look at the towers? Did you hear the plane approaching?

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >> ^^TOP^^