Please tell me why the cabin door of the Hani hanjour piloted plane was NEVER opened after takeoff....

Originally posted by holywar666
Its all fake.

Yes, everything is fake. The people were fake, the witnesses were fake, the victims were fake, the buildings were fake, etc. Maybe New York City is fake and doesn't really exist?

You should stop insulting peoples' intelligence. Nobody is buying this "it's all fake" disinformation.




Furthermore, one thing no-planers like to do is show images or videos with horrible quality, or tiny unrecognizable images, then want to call it "proof".

Let's look at some proof:




The plane on top is a United Airlines 767 just before it hit the south tower. The plane on bottom is a United Airlines 767 on take-off. Both have the same colors, same shape, same logo on the rear stabilizer.

Sorry, not even in the same universe as a JASSM, or any other missile for that matter.

Originally posted by holywar666
You Dont think they could George Lucas a few airplanes?

Not on private citizens' home videos.

Originally posted by holywar666
What are the chances of catching a non-blurry Boeing 767 jet about to crash into a building on camera?

Almost all digital cameras capture non-blurry images. So, the chances of catching a non-blurry Boeing 767 would be 100% with a digital camera.

Originally posted by holywar666
Look how fast its going.

500 MPH is pretty fast.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by holywar666
Its all fake.

... Maybe New York City is fake and doesn't really exist?

Lol very good. This is the next logical step for truthers. Fake planes crashing into fake towers in a fake NY.

Come to think about it, I've only ever seen a small part of new york city in person. It could have been a stage set populated with actors so that four years later I would believe it was a real place when it was attacked.

[quote]

1. No planes
2. No passengers

Easy as that. If the whole thing is already a lie, why believe in REAL passengers and REAL planes? The TV may not be as honest as you think.

Ever seen Star Wars? This ending scene was created in 1977.
Now compare that to the footage we saw on 9/11. Special effects cant happen 24 years later? How many angles were released to the public from Media/Amateur camera's? Can we trust them?

Look at it this way.............it's WAY easier to accept the original story CNN is passing out. Might as well believe that one.....right?

Are you seriously arguing that these planes and people never existed? That the entire event was special effects?

Why do it that way? If the government is behind this, why would they bother with faking planes with holographic images and populating said planes with make-believe people? What's the motive?

"I have an idea. Let's hire George Lucas and a bunch of computer imaging experts. We'll get them to create holographic images of planes. While we get that set up, let's go ahead and build fake histories for the fake passengers. That way no Americans get hurt when this goes down."

Ludicrous argument. If the government wanted the attacks to galvanize the nation into war, they would have WANTED casualties.

Seriously. I've read some ludicrous statements on ATS, but this...

Originally posted by smyleegrl

When you have to defend your arguments by quoting someone famous, says lots about the caliber of said arguments.

Why not answer my question with a simple and logical reply without resorting to misdirection.

? There is a lot i said besides that quote. You chose to only read the quote. Its a good one by the way.

Where did the planes go? There was no plane. No plane hit anything. You fell for it, not me. Review all the impact footage and ask yourself if they could fake it. Watch the 1977 Star Wars clip i posted. You dont think they could create a plane crash? They did great with the moon landing

-Missile hits WTC/Pentagon/Shanksville.

-Create 20 + helicopter/amateur angles that include a Boeing and release to the public. Pretty easy. Much easier than 19 hi-jackers with box cutters.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by FissionSurplus
Well, gee whiz, glad to know that you know everything about what happened, and what is a hoax and what isn't.

Some of us have been researching 9/11 for many years. Even years before signing up to ATS. The no-plane "theory" was proven to be disinformation and a deliberately-created hoax years ago. And is one of the main reasons that the no-planer threads are in the HOAX bin on this site and most others.

Originally posted by FissionSurplus
You trying to shoot this thread down will not be as successful.

Shooting the no-planer threads down has been a resounding success for many years now. (Hence the no-planer threads being moved to the HOAX bin.)

Originally posted by FissionSurplus
This is my right as an American citizen and a thinking human being.

You are correct. It is your right as a human being to believe in whatever you want. That includes believing in known deliberate hoaxes. However, I wouldn't classify someone who believes in known deliberate hoaxes to be a "thinking" human being. Quite the total opposite, actually.

Some of us have been studying 9/11 for years mate, ever since seeing it live on T.V. to be exact. You really get my goat pal, if the no-plane theory was a deliberate hoax it would go away, it hasn't gone away and it WON'T go away until the lying government produces more evidence of what truly happened, particularly at the Pentagon. Deliberate hoax my right cheek.

I'm not saying planes didn't hit the towers, they most likely did, but they are not the sole reason they collapsed imo.

The U.S. government are liars, but they are also incompetant, that incompetance seemed to multiply ten fold on 9/11. If they weren't directly responsible in the events on that day, then they certainly played a huge part indirectly for letting it happen.

Originally posted by smyleegrl
Did TPTB secretly kill them and hide the bodies?

Unfortunately,i think thats true.The passengers got onboard real airplanes,that were diverted away mid-flight and landed at a secret location and then the passengers were eliminated.A small price to pay,from tptb's perspectives,in order to get their war machine rolling and their industrial megabucks flowing,again.Just like when tptb forcibly prodded the japanese,by cutting off their countries access to oil and then allowing them to attack pearl harbor...

Originally posted by holywar666

Originally posted by smyleegrl

When you have to defend your arguments by quoting someone famous, says lots about the caliber of said arguments.

Why not answer my question with a simple and logical reply without resorting to misdirection.

? There is a lot i said besides that quote. You chose to only read the quote. Its a good one by the way.

Where did the planes go? There was no plane. No plane hit anything. You fell for it, not me. Review all the impact footage and ask yourself if they could fake it. Watch the 1977 Star Wars clip i posted. You dont think they could create a plane crash? They did great with the moon landing

-Missile hits WTC/Pentagon/Shanksville.

-Create 20 + helicopter/amateur angles that include a Boeing and release to the public. Pretty easy. Much easier than 19 hi-jackers with box cutters.

You're right. The quote is nice. It just has nothing to do with your argument.

One more time.

You contend that :

a.) there were no planes and no passengers.
For this to be true, then a huge amount of people were deliberately lying. What about the relatives of those who died? The crew members who reported to work that morning? These people left behind evidence of their existence. What proof do you have that there were no planes?

b.) Instead of planes, the government (or whomever) used special effects to fool everyone.
How? You continually refer to the ending of Star Wars. A great movie, by the way. But it has no bearing on your premise. There is a HUGE difference between the special effects in a movie and those used in a real-life situation. To achieve a special effect in a movie is a pretty sophisticated arrangement. Multiple "runs" of the scene, editing the various stills, using computer enhancements to add to the scene. Now consider your argument that this whole thing was pulled off with special effects. The two don't connect.

I'm sure you'll reply with another snazzy reference to Star Wars or some other movie. Perhaps you'll add another quote to bolster your argument. Or perhaps you'll simply claim I "fell for it" again and move on.

Extraordinary claims must be met with extraordinary evidence.

You don't have it.

---

---