VIDEO: Large Airliners Did NOT Hit the Twin Towers on 9/11!

page: 4
74
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 03:53 PM
link   
So.. CGI planes i currently the most popular theory by some lunatics? Very interesting. Unfortunatelly my IQ is not low enought to accept this BS..

But i would like to know much more about Pentagon. AFAIK US gov. still claims that also Pentagon was hit by the plane. But i never saw any wreckage or plane remains on any Pentagon photo, nor video. How has this issue evolved durring time? Do somebody know?

edit on 18-9-2010 by 6205LH because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by astrogolf
 


Well i have to agree with you...i too believe planes DID hit the towers....I DO NOT believe planes brought the towers down. I will use your logic....due to my experience as a structural Engineer.

Also I do not believe a bunch of box cutting wielding arabs brought flew these planes into the towers...i have been working hard on another thread treating this as a crime scene.

I am more and more convinced this has been a false flag operation...and have been doing indepth research that i have been presenting. There are just to many things that dont make sense...and yet if you look at it from a coverup operation and follow the money trail it is all making perfect sense.

Anyways....nice to see people arguing the outcome rather than focussing on the lead up.

IT just helps in keeping people focused on the wrong issues.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 03:58 PM
link   
Great info you have presented, glad you remain undaunted by those who are ready to argue with you without even viewing what you have presented, I am sure cartoons will be on soon and they can go back to that.

edit on 18-9-2010 by Lysergic because: must not flame.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 04:17 PM
link   
Maybe the planes eye-witnesses describe, could have been holograms? Who knows how far they have developed that technology. I am still convinced that airplanes did hit the building, though these threads make you wonder..



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by 6205LH
 



But i would like to know much more about Pentagon. AFAIK US gov. still claims that also Pentagon was hit by the plane. But i never saw any wreckage or plane remains on any Pentagon photo, nor video. How has this issue evolved durring time? Do somebody know?


Maybe didn't look hard enough or need eyes checked?









Debris on Penatgon lawn - in American Airline colors

More debris at hole punched in wall





Compilation of debris at Pentagon, inside and outside of building




posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by PookztA
 


honestly, why is this kind of garbage allowed to exist on a website that screams "Deny Ignorance!!!"???


Im all for open mindedness....but people like the OP here, and those who have crafted the propaganda in the videos contained in his/her thread, exist to take advantage of the desires of the few who actually seek out the truth, instead of hateful anti-government bull crap.



edit on 18-9-2010 by Snarf because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 04:27 PM
link   
So to the OP; you are saying that thousands of witnesses; including my 2nd cousin were either paid off or staged? This post is ridiculous; sure you could argue inside job, sure you can argue the bombs, but really a plane did not hit? That's outrageous and diminishes the credibility of the so called truth movement.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by drock905
If you believe the government was involved with 9/11 fine, that can be debated. To deny that planes hit the towers is INSANE. Its absurd. I am not a truther but when I read this dribble the first thing I think is that these posts are being created by people for the sole purpose of discrediting that movement.


No, the nitwits involved in "that movement" really are that stupid. There is no need for anyone to attempt to discredit them. They do a fine enough job themselves!



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by 6205LH
So.. CGI planes i currently the most popular theory by some lunatics? Very interesting. Unfortunatelly my IQ is not low enought to accept this BS..

But i would like to know much more about Pentagon. AFAIK US gov. still claims that also Pentagon was hit by the plane. But i never saw any wreckage or plane remains on any Pentagon photo, nor video. How has this issue evolved durring time? Do somebody know?

edit on 18-9-2010 by 6205LH because: (no reason given)



For the Pentagon - see CIT's excellent evidence in their video: National Security Alert.
www.youtube.com...



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 04:31 PM
link   
Seriously? I remember watching live coverage and seeing for myself the second plane hit.
there's just way too many home videos shooting the towers after the first got hit that clearly capture from many different angles the second airliner hitting the tower.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 04:49 PM
link   
This stinks of disinfo/deflection.

[X] Tons of youtube clips.
[X] Thread posted when good threads with real hard evidence are ruling the board.
[_] Legitimate source material.
[X] Highly debatable topic with huge theories



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 04:52 PM
link   
WHO CARES WHAT HIT THE WORLD TRADE CENTERS!

The fact is they fell.

We should be asking who and what caused them to fall?
Why they wanted them to fall?
And who had the most to gain?



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 04:55 PM
link   


P.S. - An avid AE911Truth-supporting ATS member claims that 'no planers' are part of a 'disinformation' campaign.


I am an avid AE911truther, and I also think this is erroneous piece of disinformation to make truthers appear nutty. The flight speeds of the jets at sea level is very questionable, as well as the way they bank, but it's as clear as day, they are commercial jets.

reply to post by tooo many pills
 


Exactly. Whether they are commercial jets or planes made to look like them is

1) not provable
2) a moot point because it maters not the least in the bigger issue of how the buildings fell.

edit on 18-9-2010 by Ciphor because: #@()$*()@#



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 05:00 PM
link   
I see no wings here...
No disturbence on the building either, yet the object seems to be solid .. I may be way off here, but..




Hope it isnt too big..(It was, had to Crop )

edit on 18/9/2010 by ChemBreather because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Snarf
reply to post by PookztA
 
I'm all for open mindedness....but people like the OP here, and those who have crafted the propaganda in the videos contained in his/her thread, exist to take advantage of the desires of the few who actually seek out the truth, instead of hateful anti-government bull crap.

Yep, as I said in my previous posting in another thread, almost everything posted on this subject and others are based upon LIES. Once one portion of the lie is debunked, they rewrite the conspiracy theories to fit the narrative. Instead of allowing the pieces to fall through, they grab at small minute anomalies to make their case.

9/11 conspiracy theories are becoming a tool for an anti-government movement, which will eventually push all governments into shutting down the internet.

*shrugs*

Sociopaths? Perhaps. What I do know is that the propaganda on page one (post 1) is similar to all the other ones they use against religion, political movements, and governments in general.

*shrugs*

Check this comment out::

Originally posted by PookztA
You can review the 'live' 9/11 footage here, which clearly shows the faked impact footage of the second plane. One 'live' shot shows the plane rapidly descending from well above the impact zone, where as another 'live' shot from a side angle shows the 2nd plane flying perfectly horizontal before it strikes the second tower:

Technically, he or she wants us to believe a YouTube video file cannot be altered, and that whatever you are seeing in the video 'HAS' to be true.

I love this one:

Originally posted by PookztAI cannot believe people still even debate this issue... It literally blows my mind that some people still have not yet realized the obvious media fakery involved in the 9/11 deception. Most likely because there is an enormous amount of disinformation in this forum...Wake up folks, large airliners did not hit the buildings. Please consider the following information before you disagree:

Did you happen to notice that he bashes all the other 9/11 conspiracy theories, but he is using the same method (Edited YouTube Propaganda) to make his case?

I do agree with one thing. If the conspiracy it too large and complex, the narrative theorists are building are FAT LIES.

edit on 18-9-2010 by Section31 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 05:06 PM
link   
This thread and others like it have succeeded in only one thing, showing that they seek only to 'ridicule by association' and are nothing more than trolling exercises. This thread is merely an excuse for those that choose to promulgate the official lie a chance to jump on board the crazy train and try to damage the real investigative efforts of truth seekers like the almost 3000 architects and engineers, first responders etc...

Fake threads should be marked as hoax. If posting some video is an excuse to invent a theory then I will also start to do this. A little editing can make anything in to anything. As I have said before, I await the "towers were never actually there to begin with!" theory. Common sense and decency must prevail.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pentothal
Fake threads should be marked as hoax. If posting some video is an excuse to invent a theory then I will also start to do this. A little editing can make anything in to anything. As I have said before, I await the "towers were never actually there to begin with!" theory. Common sense and decency must prevail.

Even though I agree with the official 9/11 story (stuff I saw and heard on the tv and news), I also agree with some of the 'other insights' you are presenting.

Imagine if there was such a theory.


edit on 18-9-2010 by Section31 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 05:14 PM
link   
My reply about the credibility of witnesses is this. There are many factors to account for when looking at intel gathered from eyewitnesses. 1. All people have tunnel vision. We all see and experience things differently through our own unique nervous system. we all see and perceive things apart due to the language we use to describe our reality and what we were told and taught by parents,elders,etc. Look up General Semantics to learn more about this. 2. In stressful situations people can be prone to not seeing what is ACTUALLY going on. Our mind will replace the event with something our mind can understand or relate too as a self defense mechanism .3.Group think is a perpetrator of misinformation. People like to be part of the whole. If someone says "Plane", the rest will wanna say plane so they don't feel alone. I AM NOT SAYING THAT PLANES DID OR DID NOT HIT THE TWIN TOWERS! I am only offering other information that can be used to debate and understand more clearly. I do suggest that people read the Works of Robert Anton Wilson as far as Tunnel Vision goes. REALity is what you beLIEve.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   
I would like to look more into the Dancing Israeli Van mural though that was talked about on the first or second page of this thread. Remote controlled plane would seem somewhat plausible being that many a pilot has remarked on the near impossibility of the flight path. I don't think we will EVER get the 100 percent real picture from anyone though at least for another 40 years.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   
oh but the wings are just SO strong on airliners that they would slice into concrete and thick steel girders like butter.they would not rip off and fall to the ground.
just simple physics and common sense.

NOT.





new topics
top topics
 
74
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join