Is this what the 4chan "alien" is distracting us from?

a reply to: CHickMagNet5000

Why 4chan?

Because as raucous and chaotic as it is, there is a lot of conversation that takes place online that has it's beginnings there and it eventually bubbles up to other places; the alien pic story is a prime example, I wonder how many forums are discussing it right now?

I don't think anything in the alleged alien pic ties back to 9/11, I think it may be distracting from an image that did. It's been reported that other than the screenshot I included in the OP, there was a pic which showed a plane in a hanger that is reputed to be one of (or related to one of) the planes that was used in the attack. I have not seen that pic, but it has been mentioned in connection to the distraction idea.

And yeah, I haven't forgotten the missing trillions spoken about the day prior either. I have heard that there were bonds of questionable nature issued during the Clinton administration and other financial shiftiness that was documented in one of the buildings destroyed/damaged. And incriminating evidence tying William Jefferson Clinton to this shiftiness as well.

The Clintons and the Bushes were in the drug running business together and yes, lots of that money went to fund various alphabet soup activities; much of which was aimed at bringing down the former Soviet Union.

MotherMayEye has done a lot of digging around the Bush/Clinton drug running; Mena airport comes to mind.

Am familiar with the mountain, have not heard of the tank though.

As for all the money that goes into the black hole, well I imagine the secret space program isn't cheap. Not to mention all of the other things that they get up to.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

The "missing trillions" is a false hole to look down. The media reported that the Pentagon couldn't account for it in March of 2000. Rumsfeld was talking about getting a new accounting system for the Pentagon, because of that situation. It wasn't announced the day before.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

She may have been traveling under a different name. I used to have in laws in the Philippines that frequently used a different name than their legal one when talking about family members. They may have been using the Dominican version of her name, instead of the American version.

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical

And yeah, I haven't forgotten the missing trillions spoken about the day prior either. I have heard that there were bonds of questionable nature issued during the Clinton administration and other financial shiftiness that was documented in one of the buildings destroyed/damaged. And incriminating evidence tying William Jefferson Clinton to this shiftiness as well.

The Clintons and the Bushes were in the drug running business together and yes, lots of that money went to fund various alphabet soup activities; much of which was aimed at bringing down the former Soviet Union.

My mom was staying with me the morning the events of 9/11 took place. I was 30 years old. I woke her up to tell her about the reports that said a plane hit the first tower. She woke up briefly and then went back to sleep. I woke her up shortly after to tell her the second plane hit and she immediately said it was a terrorist attack. She even mentioned al Qaeda. The seed had been planted from the 1993 bombing under Clinton.

Now, I've read theories that the 1993 bombing happened, in part, to allow for reconstruction which removed asbestos and replaced it with stuff that wasn't so effective at protecting the vaults in the basement where the tower had been bombed. The same theory also includes $240 billion in bunk government securities in the vault(s) (originated in September of 1991) which were set to mature on 9/11/2001 and the days following. When banking regulations were lifted in the days following 9/11, those bunk securities were allegedly cleared. Masses of broker-witnesses were killed on 9/11, evidence of financial crimes was destroyed.

IOW, the theory is that 9/11 was at least 10 years in the making.

There is also the story of a small aircraft (Cessna, IIRC) that managed to crash land at the White House on *COUGH* September 11, 1994 (The Clintons were conveniently staying at the Blair House, at the time). This particular story is often cited by proponents of the official story to explain how easy it is for unauthorized aircraft to enter such protected areas in DC.

Given the Bushes involvement and the history the Bushes have with the Clintons (and the CIA...in Mena), and given the scope of 9/11 -- assuming it was not random but actual planned targets...buildings, vaults, witnesses, and evidence were actually destroyed -- then I think it's fair to wonder if the Clintons and the Bushes were complicit together.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Again, the absence of the full story is what bothers me most.

ETA: Actually your theory the girl was traveling under any other name is so dubious. The grandmother was photographed in a dire state of shock and grief. Those photos plastered the news coverage of the crash -- because it was confirmed her grandddaughter 'Yoely Mejias' was on Flight 587.

But no 'Yoely Mejias' or any name close to that was on the official passenger list that was eventually released.

And there's no follow up stories to explain it.

I think that's very odd.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical
So 4chan went down because of the other image? the one relating to 9/11

You know thats funny because when i was digging around on there early last week i kept coming across links referring to 9/11 didn't think much of it that and pizzagate

Nice post btw

there was a pic which showed a plane in a hanger that is reputed to be one of (or related to one of) the planes that was used in the attack.

Thats American Airlines Flight 77 Boeing 757-200 that allegedly flew into the Pentagon
Has anything else been mentioned on 4chan about this plane?

a reply to: Bigburgh

GOTTA LOVE ATS detectives!
this is something! =D

will get back to this once I've digested it all

Has anyone thought that maybe this whole thing is just one of the many distractions employed by TPTB to make people look somewhere unimportant? They've gotten pretty much the two biggest conspiracy groups (aliens and 9/11) pouring so much energy and research into something that could just be a distraction to keep eyes looming where they want them looking.

The only reason I say this is because:

1) Why would they care if a picture of an alien was posted when it could easily be attributed to photoshop or good makeup/costume?

2) It makes absolutely no sense why they would store a plane that supposedly ran into the pentagon for 15+ years for no good reason instead of getting rid of it and any chance of it leaking to the public.

I personally think that this could either be a giant hoax/prank on the part of 4chan and its moderators or a huge distraction being used by those in power to get the heat off of real issues.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Yep, that notion was mentioned early on in the thread by another and acknowledged by me:

I'm open to the idea that there was something else which may have been dropped and been distracted from by the alien story if anyone has any ideas as to what that might be.

I just went down the 9/11 path as that was one of the things hinted at by others. Heck, it may have been some sort of free energy device that actually works, I don't know.

As juvenile as 4chan is and has been, a prank of this magnitude is not something I would peg the mods there for; /pol/ mods especially. I can see them 404ing threads that don't have a political bent, but the reaction to people merely asking about the original thread just doesn't quite fit with what I know of that forum.

Reiterating, I am open to the idea that it is something else, let's hear those ideas and see some links!

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

I'm thinking it might ALL just be a distraction to put people on a wild goose chase instead of putting their energy toward things that actually matter. The whole alien and 9/11 angls are just ways to get large portions of conspiracy theorists chasing after the wind. They're not covering anything up they just created the scenario for pure distraction.

I could be wrong but there's just something about this that seemed fishy from the get go.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Eyewitness testimony has been proven repeatedly to be unreliable. Whether it's in a robbery case, or a plane crash. Just because five people say five different things that disagree with the NTSB report, which is backed by facts recorded by the aircraft itself, doesn't make them right. There's a very good reason that investigators don't listen to eyewitnesses to determine a cause of an accident.

Your point about eyewitness testimony is valid. Many times witness testimony is contradictory or at odds with some evidence. Witnesses see things through perception filters. Many times however it is language that causes a reader to think that there is a contradiction where in fact one does not actually exist. For example your quote of the witness saying "the wing with the engine fell off" when the investigation showed that no wing actually fell off. That person could have been talking about the wing but they could have also been using "wing" to refer to the Engine mounting strut. It could be called a small "wing" holding the engine to the larger wing.
I would also like to point out that 20 years in the field of electronics and communications have taught me that no electronic device is infallible. Ever sensor has to be calibrated and if that calibration is off or if the sensor has some internal failure it can indeed return incomplete or erroneous data. We cant always say that "data does not lie".

a reply to: Dragoon01

No, it's not infallible, and the recorders in this case cut off before impact, as they do many times. But data recorders in aircraft are about as bulletproof as you can make electronics. It's extremely rare for there to be an issue with the recorders, not caused by what's going on with the aircraft.

As for eyewitnesses, in most crashes, it's far more than just language or verbage. I've seen witness statements where some say the engine was sputtering, others say it was at full power, while others will disagree if they were upside down or right side up.

No idea, still never saw the so called image....

a reply to: BenSisko
This may answer your question as to why building 7 came down. I have also wondered if the command centre, reinforced with its own air supply and all, was used to guide the planes remotely into the two towers. A lot of secret squirrel paperwork and records were destroyed that day, possibly records of the missing trillions or what those trillions bought that Rumsfeld was being grilled over the day before. This is what was in the building. WTC7

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

it has not " distracted " me from anything - i does multi-tasking

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

CHECK THE LINK TODAY, information has been altered
aircraft changed to 757-200 and status to scrapped
link only works from your orig post, or the orig thread on 4ch
try to copy and paste it, takes you to a dead page.

archived Feb 22: archive.vn...
today: www.planespotters.net... (link from your orig post)

Well, that was an entertaining and interesting thread. I was getting sleepy till that last post^^^.

a reply to: EndtheMadnessNow

Yeah, somewhere around a year after the thread was originally posted, the potential plane of interest was scrapped. Nothing out of the ordinary in as much as decommissioned planes are scrapped on a regular basis.

I'm kind of curious what prompted alan8 to dig up this old thread and make their one and only post on this forum here.

Maybe they've been here before? Ellisrb1 a couple of posts above. 1 post--removed. Just struck me as a possibility.