It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


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

page: 9
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 05:43 AM
I think the investigation in this video is quite possible. What do u guys think?

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 05:59 AM

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Why would the government risk such a scenario, fake projected images and all that....

.. when taking a empty plane from the vast plane graveyards in the US is so easy.

Why use empty planes when there are so many planes flying around every minute of the day?

This thread has been a great success for all those that wish to discredit and ridicule the efforts of real investigators. It is also a failure of moderation in my opinion. I say this because it still has not been clearly marked as the hoax that it so clearly is.

We can all question and put forward theories. We should not treat fairy tale fiction as worthy of examination.

I am not calling for censorship, this I am TOTALLY against. I am calling for common sense.

Thousands died on that day. The events were was used to herd like sheep the idiot public into support for a war that was to benefit exclusively a select group of large multinationals and power elites. In this war many hundreds of thousands (or millions... who knows) of people died. All because of the expedient use of the events of 911 (Google: never let a crisis go to waste).

There was no intelligence failure. They knew where the oil was.

There is no intelligence failure in afghanistan.

So let us put Photoshop away and treat the subject with respect.

edit on 19-9-2010 by Pentothal because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 06:07 AM
I think you are right! I never heard of 9/11 until I came to ATS and its become pretty obvious to me that those planes are just pixels, I know because I've seen a lot of pixels. Why is there not more being done about these pixels that make buildings blow up? That's what I want to know...

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 06:18 AM
this thread is ridiculous.

ofcourse planes hit the presented a couple of accounts where people didnt see the plane hit and didnt hear the plane but there are THOUSANDS of people who saw the planes with their own eyes and got it on camera.

just because you can recreate it on a computer doesnt prove it didnt happen.

when i was young i was hit by a car...i can now create the same event using just adobe after effects....does that mean it was faked?

theres nothing you can present that can prove there were no planes because there quite blatantly and obviously was.

its the original terrorism story thats fake.

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 06:22 AM
reply to post by spikey

If your talking about the WTC1 North Tower

this clip my guess a firefighter demonstration Video that caught the sound and the hit

hows the Sound ?

This interesting
as I said Before Could it be a a Rocket Pod ? With Explosive Tips , Termite & Napalm Mixture
or was already been planted by Unknowns Passing as Maintenance, Construction Workers doing Repairs ?
reinforcements ? in a City that Never Sleeps
here is a a Little Clue !

Napalm has a devastating effect on buildings and living creatures. Water boils at 100 degrees Celsius, while napalm generates temperatures of 800 to 1,200 degrees Celsius. But there's something more powerful than napalm, and today we'll learn how to build an incendiary device using this chemical. It's called thermite and it's used in modern incendiary bombs. Obtaining this chemical is not only simple, but it's also legal. Yes, it's not illegal to own or use thermite, unless you use it in intentional attacks against property and people. A thermite reaction is a type of aluminothermic reaction in which aluminium metal is oxidized by the oxide of another metal, most commonly iron oxide. The name thermite is also used to refer to a mixture of two such chemicals.

What an Iron Worker Knows !

The explosion itself is not as spectacular as those of cars in the movies, but the effects are devastating. The explosion of a container filled with thermite and placed on a � inch thick steel plate will burn its way to the ground, and in the right amounts, it can even melt a safe deposit box. Contrary to popular belief, thermite is not illegal to own or use. Many construction companies throughout the world still use it to weld iron. But it is very hot (4000 F or 2204 C) so be extremely careful, and most of all, don't use it in any aggressive actions, just use it for the fun, or when you really need a fast way to drill a hole in a solid piece of metal.

How to Build an Incendiary Bomb More Powerful Than Napalm

I Would look at the History of WTC 1,2,7 Maintenance Repairs & Inspection before 911 for 2 years back
I would Question All the Security Guards that let people in at Night & During the Day with in the last 2 years into those building if Any Survived also i would Question the Luggage Handlers & Ground Crew at the Airports on that day that those planes were at those Airports Ohh why so little was there so little Pieces of Flight 93

From what I know From a Few of Iron Workers that Helped Built Those Towers
I Can not see A 500+MPH Airliner & Kerosene Fire 500F+ Degree Would bring the Towers Down
Especially The Towers were Designed for an 707 Airliner to Crash Through the Towers

Yes a Poor Explanation Concrete instead of Steel beams and a Plane 1/3 size of a 767
but a Visual experience of plane going 500 mph hitting a Wall..

Heres something I haven't seen or i have missed on ATS

Plane Crash Test (Airliner) 720

With Jagged Barriers to Shear off the Wings WTC Steel Beams would of done the same ?
Remote Control , Fuel Full to Capacity

707 Crash test NASA

An Old Vid of a DC7 Crash Test

911 WTC 1 North Tower Simulation by Purdue University & National Geographic

Something is telling me that the Fires & Beams Would not of done the Damage as claimed
From Seeing the NASA Airliner Test ! with Jagged Barriers Shredding A Wing and Engine
From Seeing that a Simple design Barrier Compared to a Column rows of ][ Beams at 500+ MPH
Wouldn't those ][ Beams do a Better Job ! with tremendous weight that those inner Core Beams that are Holding the Top Layers above and don't Forget each Floor level there is at least 2+ inches Concrete on the Flooring

To look at the Damage from a Truck bomb at the World Trade Center in 1993
and Little Security and Safety at the Time .in 93 . We need to look at this Clip

Dont forget the Oklahoma Bombing

The Security Chief of Morgan Stanly Dean Witter
The man who saw it coming. Rick Rescorla

A Must watch is what Fred Mcbee Says one of Rick Rescorlas Consultant when he was asked how a next attack would of Happen!! the Possibility of a Air attack at the 7:16 Mark important piece to listen too ..
also he helped a with Better Safety Control & Drills

that it for me

edit on 19-9-2010 by Wolfenz because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 06:28 AM
Ok, wait.

Can someone explain to me in the first video presented, how/why the nose of the plane breaks off on the other side?

How are we seeing the nose of the plane, intact, break off through the other side of one of the worlds tallest skyscrapers after hitting it how fast? Enough to take the entire structure down? Confusing.

Everything else is up for debate, but I still can't wrap my head around that one. On a live shot too? Makes no sense...

edit on 19-9-2010 by DrEyebrows because: spelling ^^

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 07:05 AM
Great post ,excellent, bravo ,u deserve a standing ovation.. just one thing ..where did all the people go that was on the so called missing plane including 2 local students in dc who one an art contest as well as a teacher, oh, and was a very good friend with my daughter as she came home crying telling me that was the friend who beat her other friend out in an art contest.

1. My daughter knew 3 of the people that was on the plane that hit one of the towers.
2. as well as the 500 other kids that attended the vigil.
3. U can fake a video but u cant fake missing people.
4. U can fake missing people But not over 700 in one day on 3 planes.
5. U can fake missing planes on TV but u cant fake the point that people actually got on a plane.
3 things in this whole 911 conspiracy thing really stand out and really needs to be focused on.

1. The last plane that was blandly shot down.
2. Building 7
3. How in the hell did that lady pedestrian on the ground find that wallet that supposedly fell out of the burning plane , come to find out that it was one of the high jackers, what are the odds?
4. What are the odds of that lady finding that wallet 15 minutes after it happened?
What are the odds ?

“ Hey look at me ,Out of 30 million people in new York ,I was the lucky one that found, out of a burning plane, over a 100 stories high, ..(the magic wallet ) that found itself out the burning plan, out the burning building ,on the ground into my hand ,so I can show 15 minutes into the first plane crashing ,the terrorist wallet. How lucky is that?

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 07:44 AM
reply to post by PookztA

This might add to the thread.

Two airliners impacted two skyscrapers and there was very minimal falling debris at the points of impact. Huge explosions and nothing blew out the back. The tails of the planes should have blown out the back after the fuel exploded. That indicates that there was no fuel and no planes. A military weapon and a holographic image or something in that vein.

edit on 19-9-2010 by Hemisphere because: video ID correction

edit on 19-9-2010 by Hemisphere because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 08:01 AM

Originally posted by Mr_skepticc
If any of you feel like your goverment had any thing to do with 9/11 heres what you do. Buy a plane ticket and leave, go anywhere you want, but just leave now. We don't want you here, nor do we need you here in America. Understand that you have severe mentall issues, and need medical help.

I would have to say that you should go look in the mirror. Let me tell you who you are accusing of having mental issues:

300+ 9/11 survivors and family members.
Many of our hero first responders.
1300+ architects and engineers.
Scholars and scientists.
Actors and artists.
Medical professionals.
Military officers.
Senior military officials.
Pilots and aviation professionals.
Intelligence, Law Enforcement and Government officials.

These people are patriots. Dissent and questioning the government is not a form of mental illness. I'll bet you haven't even looked at any of the evidence.

What we don't need in this country are people who would defend the criminals in the government that carried out these attacks. Especially without looking at any of the evidence. That's just hypocritical in itself. What we also don't need in this country is people who would accuse some of the world's top professionals, and millions of truth seekers around the world of having mental illness, instead of dealing with their own ignorance and denial.

People like that are a danger and a disgrace to this country and the rest of the world.

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 08:01 AM

Originally posted by Skellon
With all due respect, How can you say the DEW theory has been debunked?

Did you even read any of the papers, articles or debunks that I posted? How can you say that DEW is not debunked after reading them?

In case you posted without actually reading the above, I'll post the link yet again:

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 08:01 AM

Originally posted by Pentothal
It is also a failure of moderation in my opinion. I say this because it still has not been clearly marked as the hoax that it so clearly is.

This is 100% correct. Most of the 9/11 truth movement has labeled this DEW and no-plane BS as disinformation and has actually banned the discussion of those "theories". Why has most of the 9/11 truth movement banned the discussion of these disinfo theories? Because there's no evidence, no scientific basis for them, and there's no scientific data that can be tested.

If most of the 9/11 truth movement can and has banned the discussion of these disinfo theories, why does ATS allow them to be discussed? Especially when the very first rule of the ATS T&C says that disinformation is not allowed to be posted here?

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 08:01 AM

Originally posted by DrEyebrows
Can someone explain to me in the first video presented, how/why the nose of the plane breaks off on the other side?

How are we seeing the nose of the plane, intact, break off through the other side of one of the worlds tallest skyscrapers after hitting it how fast?

It didn't. And you would've had your question answered more than once just by reading this thread. My post below answers your question:

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 08:05 AM
reply to post by Hemisphere

Notice how the lights in the room had to be off to see the infrared light from the remotes? Yeah, that's because infrared can't easily be seen in daylight.

Your video is of a piece of paper floating through the air.

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 08:15 AM
57 flags for this nonsense? OMG wow this is just the lowest I have seen this site have done. Maybe ATS is a government front then? I mean after the anniversary of 911 this site was doing good with strong evidence and then after more support for 911 all of a sudden these things trying to make 911 supporters look like quacks.

I am just appalled at how many sheople there are.

go to around 32:00 minutes It starts there. It is no wonder I just get tired of humanity.

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 08:25 AM

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
Why has most of the 9/11 truth movement banned the discussion of these theories?

Because they are worried they may lose some of their funding - hence their attempt to stop another silly conspiracy theory getting any support!

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 08:47 AM
reply to post by mr-lizard

read about operation paperclip
google it.

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 09:18 AM
I saw the plane hit Live. This bs gets so old.

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 09:38 AM
A legitimate question to moderators: Why has this thread STILL not been marked as hoax?

What does a thread have to do to be marked as hoax?

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 09:41 AM

Originally posted by PookztA Also, if you wish to review a statistical analysis of the 'eye-witnesses', which shows that 80% of eye-witnesses admit to not seeing and/or hearing an airliner, you can check out the analysis here in this free e-book by Andrew Johnson:

You just said 20% did see it. So that makes your whole theory a moot point now doesn't it?

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 10:25 AM

Originally posted by lilsmurf
52 Flags!!!!!!!! What the hell is wrong with you 52 people, many different independent videos and photos and hundreds and hundreds of different witnesses saw the planes, you 52 people are dumb, very dumb

different independent videos really?

Yea but all of them are edited that doesn't scream much for independent videos and also you say there are many
many different videos, i have seen all of these videos and if you ask me

hundreds and hundreds of different witnesses saw the planes

The witnesses saw the planes? the witnesses probably were paid by the FBI and the military and also there were strangely large presence of international troops on the grounds and witnesses could have been threaten.

no need for been anger or aggressive on people with different theories
you people wont believe what kind of technology of military has under its belt.

edit on 19-9-2010 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in