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.


Sept Clues Busted

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 3 2007 @ 11:36 AM

While it could go into a lot more detail, it does the job and has rattled many in the NP camp, which has some just resorting to attacks There are definite points of deception seen, the editing of one of the witnesses proves beyond all shadow of a doubt that whomever really is behind this video was doing it to deceive.

No other issue has divided the movement as much as this.

Please note, that with the NO PLANES message forums are usually spammed and or attacked if certain members are banned. Then they run to their own hideouts and proclaim censorship and cry that there is a widespread conspiracy going on.

This is also a good example of human behavior and what it might imply. In the case of this theory, I believe the people who hold to this truly have a very low view and mistrust of people to begin with. Because in order for this theory to be true, it would be a conspiracy of unbelievable proportions.

It would include people as agents posting on the net. It would include that every single witness that was on the news and or took a home video or picture would be in on it. It would include that every single camera man, helicopter pilot and emergency personal would be in on it, or a good portion of them. That every single anchor person who reported it.

Sure conspiracy's happen, but this is to large and would involve way to many people. It also fails to address one startling fact.

THE ONE THING that truly refutes NO PLANES is this.......


If what happened that day was very different then what happened on the news, then you would have seen a riot. Plain and simple. There would have been hundreds of thousands of people looking at the event. With that many eyes you could not do this operation using a by....
just bombs...

New York is filled with street smart people who are no nonsense. They refute NO PLANES by their response.

Now of course you will see certain objections by certain individuals.

"how do you know so many people would have seen this live" etc.

Easy, by virtue of New York being such a huge populace, and given the attack of the NORTH TOWER and tragedy unfolding it is only logical to assume people would be looking, just watch what happens at an accident scene!

Does anyone else find it odd, that with the level of paranoia needed for NO PLANES that oddly enough that this PARANOIA is not often direct toward the people posting this stuff on YOUTUBE, and or using other footage like the Naudet bros>>??

It is taken of face value that the footage isn't doctored! Is that not striking to anyone?

In other words the NO Plane camps trust no-one, except themselves of course.

Lastly, if truly there were NO PLANES, then one would have no reason to conclude 9/11 happened. Perhaps the Towers were demolished and no one was in it? Every single witness is just lying. The news can't be trusted. YOU AND I can't be trusted. Therefore we see the end of the theory.

It refutes itself.

posted on Nov, 4 2007 @ 01:14 AM
I don't want to rag on New Yorkers after all they've been through and all they might have to go through yet, but in their response to 911, they don't seem to be that much different from anyone else.

There are a few outstanding individuals who are questioning in a very courageous way what was done in New York on 911 and that's the only thing I've heard of the famous New York street smarts.

I think all of us, but New Yorkers in particular, have some serious questions to ask Larry "Pull it" Silverstein and Mr. Clean-up-the-crime-scene Giuliani, not to mention that "fresh air fiend" Christy Todd Whitman. The only people staging riots seem to be the We Are Change people and of course that one man riot, Alex Jones.

I'm not advocating riots, but how about some prosecutions? Anybody in New York street smart enough for that?

The main reason that the plane/no plane argument has gotten so much play is that nobody is tuned into the Giuliani trial on obstruction of justice charges, or the Silverstein insurance fraud trial, or the criminal negligence trial of Whitman, or the host of other trials that would follow from these and which would eventually unravel this whole ball of yarns.

posted on Nov, 4 2007 @ 08:02 AM
The last paragraph of ipsedixit's post is where it's at. That's how I usually feel as a NYer in dealing w/ this.

Like I've said, in maybe one other post, I was living in the East Village that day, not more then a mile or two from the site. Awoken to a chorus of sirens, got on a bicycle and rode down, on the way, I swore I saw what looked like a plane from an angle between buildings that wasn't more then 2 seconds before impact.

Non-NYers need to realize how dense the city is, almost everywhere. Unless you're in a spot for a view, the towers DID NOT impose a view from where ever you stood in NY. Some will disagree, and I will hear them out, because the towers were used to get your bearing upon coming up from a subway ride, but THERE are spots where you weren't seeing the towers.... regardless, my point is explaining how I witnessed it and how many others HAVE TO exist in NY or where ever they may live today.

There are more witnesses to this in (potentially) MILLIONS and it sickens me to see Mrs Clinton as someone else who SHOULD be mentioned in that last paragraph by ipsedixit.

My point is, *we* (like that matters in postmodern society, the 'pronoun' -- a little digression here -- "we the people" -- most "Paris Hilton" "Mtv" etc. "reality-show-watching people, even in NY, could careless, let alone, even know the Constitution, so, 'pronouns' have become self-obsession, takeover words and *they* won their NWO in the process. For example, 'my documents' 'ipod' 'iphone' 'mycomputer' -- watch tv ads, they're always aimed at YOU or YOUR or MY or ME. Totally ruining any chance of 'power to the people') should move on from this tragedy in certain regards.

Holograms were used, fine, how were they used to trick maybe a couple million people? New York was nuked, okay, by whom? (I ignore bin Laden/Tim Osmond comments here) Where's the groups filing FOIA requests, are they getting stonewalled into waiting five, ten years for their requests?

Also, like in ipsedixit's post, We Are Change "seem" to be the only 'group' doing anything. Well, looking at their site, if that. Selling 'investigate' tshirts, confronting people and getting celebs doesn't seem to me like anything substantial.

posted on Nov, 4 2007 @ 09:30 AM
Just to update here; for whatever reason the link to Sept Clues Busted is dead, hopefully it will be back.

I do have a video link for it though somehwere else



You mentioned We are Change, and I while I don't agree with all their methods, I do applaud them for bringing the attention of the public to the Emergency workers who now are either sick or totally forgotten.

My point about NEW YORK was that in the event of Tv fakery, if that really occured and so fresh after the attack, if New Yorkers saw this. There would be a riot. The news of this would hit the internet big time.

There would have been a significant number of people who would have known what really happened. This point alone refutes the idea of NO PLANES.

[edit on 4-11-2007 by talisman]

posted on Nov, 4 2007 @ 10:11 AM
Well, I must say that video has some good points, but there is no doubt in my mind that 911 was an inside job, planes or no planes.
I must say that the first thing I thought when I saw the 2nd plane hit on tv was: "Hey, that looked photoshopped". I didn't think anything of it back then, but I do now.

posted on Nov, 4 2007 @ 02:41 PM
reply to post by talisman

Although your comments make sense, just wait for the no-planers to start skittering out from their dark corners to tell you that there were hologram planes or something equally as ridiculous.

I wish people would use a little common sense. The larger the perceived conspiracy, the less likely it is true. In other words, a single criminal stealing is less likely to get caught then 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 1000 criminals stealing the item.

posted on Nov, 4 2007 @ 05:02 PM

Originally posted by anhinga
Also, like in ipsedixit's post, We Are Change "seem" to be the only 'group' doing anything. Well, looking at their site, if that. Selling 'investigate' tshirts, confronting people and getting celebs doesn't seem to me like anything substantial.

What about the law suit?

posted on Nov, 4 2007 @ 05:16 PM

Originally posted by talismanSept Clues Busted...

The first statement by the "buster"

"It is DOUBTFUL that the statements are factual... it is ALMOST certain that the studios would have copies..."

Uh Huh good research here... seems more a personal opinion to me..

The second "bust' Clues says 'fade to black' he says "visual disturbance" but it was still covering the moment of impact...

This 'bust' is a 'joke'


posted on Nov, 4 2007 @ 05:20 PM
Heh heh heh... If the purpose of SC Busted is to prove there were planes, then it's just another one of the many strawmen attack pieces.

One can nitpick at September Clues all they want, but the obvious video anomalies are more than obviously due to video manipulation at the hand of the corporate media.

And SC does not even address the violation of Newton's Laws therefore SC Busted does not address it either.

Anyone believing real planes hit the towers.... get a clue!

Aluminum airplanes with plastic nosecones don't glide effortlessly into steel/concrete buildings, disintegrate after inside the building, and create cookie-cutter cutouts of a plane in steel girders.

See my post "ABC's Peter Jennings Knew The Truth About 9/11" for the obvious:

btw, WHERE are all the eyewitnesses who saw and heard commercial airplanes? Where are they? Nope..... they don't exist in the First Responders. Only a very small percentage reported seeing and hearing the second "plane", and their testimony is not constant with one another:

posted on Nov, 4 2007 @ 07:04 PM
I'm not a no planer. I believe this was an inside job however, and some well placed explosives were used, after the crashed, to help the building "totally" collapse.

Haveing said that, this video does a good job of discrediting Sept Clues in certain areas, and not so good in others.

What I did not like though was the pompous nature of the narrator and video, and the hypocrisy going on here.

He points out where Sept clues adds music to enhance the ideas they wanted to push, but then he uses his own music to "enhance" points he wants to make. Hypocrisy.

He claims the repeated nose in nose out, which I believe was shown 5 times was supposed to hypnotise the viewer. Now he insults our intelligence as if we could be hypnotised by a shot being shown over and over again.

Well....apparently he does; because he used the same "exact" repeated shots of the Naude't film and the Fireman dropping an F-bomb. I believe he repeats his shot 6 times. So is he also trying to hypnotise us? Again Hypocrisy, and I don't care for it.

I mean really it's been 6 years. In my opinion anyone who has done thier research should know what the deal is. Planes did crash into the towers. The planes were fitted with extra equipment (I'm sure if we had a clearer view of the first plane) we'd had seen a pod also.

This was a set up, by our own government. Plain and simple. "Like a New Pearl Harbor."

We need to bring someone up on charges, even it's for a very small crime, just to get the ball rolling. Lord knows I've had my scraped with the justice system, and have watched far too much Law and Order to no, you gotta start somewhere.

You could get someone lower down on the food chain, and lie to him (yes police are allowed to lie). Tell him he's going away for a long time unless he gives up a bigger fish, and so the food chain goes. Then once you got Silverstein, and Guilliani, you get bush, and you give all three of them the needle.

Or some big inditements needs to be made. I'm sure if they scoured through Silversteins monies, and transactions they can come up with some trumped up charges, and Silverstein looks just like the sort of go to roll over and give some people up to save his own skin.

Either way they have evidence in my opinion to make several arrest or at least bring alot of people in front of the Grand Jury. But it's not happeneing. Because the system is Corrupt from top to bottom.

You the the District Attorney of NY is gonna go after the Mayor of NY. Hah , never happened. The only way something will come of this is if an outside investigation team came much for the 9/11 commission eh?

In closing I will say although this video was overall good, but rubs me the wrong way because of the hypocrosy, and sleight of hand done in it as well, similiar stuff that they're trying to expose no less. I'd rather see a better produced version made, with no hypocrocy in it, and lose the pompous attitude, and I'd back it 100%

Because this No Plane stuff has REALLY got to stop, and the Controlled Demolitions need to be exposed, as well asflight 93 being shot down, and the pentogon being hit by a cruise missle(or whatever, they have it on CCTV, but arent releasing it), or else we are getting no where.

Actually forget all that, thats what they want for us to try and figure out everything that we'll never agree on everything.

What we need to do as Americans seeking truth is pick one area of 9/11, whether it be building 7, WTC 1 or 2, or flight 93. Keeping it small and simple would be the best. Something we all can agree on (oh how I wish), then and only then, something may get done, and we may see some justice for all of the innocent people who lost their lives, and families who lost loved ones on 9/11.

posted on Nov, 4 2007 @ 07:33 PM

Originally posted by Nola213
Because this No Plane stuff has REALLY got to stop

The videos violate Newton's Laws of Motion. This has been shown and has not been refuted.

What really needs to stop is the silly real-plane stuff. Those who believe planes hit the towers are really really amazing. Scientific laws have been presented proving the videos were fake, and yet people still don't understand. Yes, the laws of physics have been presented, and they have not been refuted. If anyone wishes to challenge me on Newton's Laws, I am here. I will prove to the challenger and every reader that the 9/11 "plane" videos are fake.

I will prove that any who think those videos are of a real event don't know what they're talking about.

posted on Nov, 4 2007 @ 08:34 PM
reply to post by CB_Brooklyn

Here are some of the LOGICAL problems with the NO PLANE hypothesis. I am using these as examples.

#1. Assume with me that the TV faked all feeds of the event. Now how does that prove there were 'NO PLANES'? Even killtown has said that there may have been 'fly by' planes etc.

So let me pursue this further. We have a video showing a 'NOSE IN and a NOSE OUT'. Let us suppose this. Now what if the TV fakery isn't hiding the fact there were 'NO PLANES' but it was used to hide the fact *MILITARY* planes were actually used?

Planes that can penetrate the building, with high explosives on board.

It seems to me this would take into consideration the lack of a riot in downtown NEW YORK the next day.

It would also take into consideration the 'planted pieces' of plane parts, hiding the 'real planes'.

It would also seem more reasonable in a planning sense, since the planners I am sure would be well aware that most of NEW YORK CITY would be LOOKING. NOT a great plan to fake this on the media when just as many people were looking LIVE!

So really you can't conclude there were NO PLANES.

#2. IF there was that much deception, if there was that much of a conspiracy. IF there were that many eyewitnesses who LIED, then your premise is clearly faulty.

Because it would mean that someone could argue that 9/11 was only a demolition and the rest was a put on with actors and visuals! The very same things you would argue for 9/11 being a *REAL EVENT* is the very same thing other people would argue for there being PLANES!

Sure eyewitness testimony could differ. But look at the twin towers, You probably have different testimony on the time of the Towers Collapse, on the way they collapsed, or on what sounds they made upon collapsing.

So to be consistent are you now going to admit the TOWERS NEVER COLLAPSED due to different eyewitness testimony??

Of course NOT! By using simple reason and logic we can weed through what must be real and what is common amongst the testimony and make logical inferences.

The same can be said on the plane testimony as well.

#3. IF there was truly CGI done so wildly on 9/11 then why on earth would they fail to do as much at the PENTAGON???

Claiming what your claiming is highly inconsistent.

#4. *IF* truly there is that much deception, then in reality what your saying is *NO ONE CAN BE TRUSTED* and this means YOU.

Why would anyone trust you after realizing that almost everyone they heard on 9/11 was JUST either an actor or lying.

Why would anyone put faith in your Youtube links? PERHAPS YOU are using CGI?? Maybe they see to many pixels and wonder what your really about???

You see? Do you now see what happens? This then is the Pandora's Box you have opened.

Again the very fact NEW YORK didn't riot the next day is proof positive that there were planes that hit the Towers.

[edit on 4-11-2007 by talisman]

posted on Nov, 4 2007 @ 09:44 PM

Originally posted by CB_Brooklyn

Originally posted by Nola213
Because this No Plane stuff has REALLY got to stop

The videos violate Newton's Laws of Motion. This has been shown and has not been refuted.

What really needs to stop is the silly real-plane stuff. Those who believe planes hit the towers are really really amazing. Scientific laws have been presented proving the videos were fake, and yet people still don't understand. Yes, the laws of physics have been presented, and they have not been refuted. If anyone wishes to challenge me on Newton's Laws, I am here. I will prove to the challenger and every reader that the 9/11 "plane" videos are fake.

I will prove that any who think those videos are of a real event don't know what they're talking about.

wow, that military video of an f4 phantom going through like 7 feet of concrete must be fake too....they must of faked that test footage because they knew 9/11 was gonna happen and wanted people to think it could really happen right...
You no planers just dont get it do give the media exactly what they want, a perfect reason to call all truthers crazy CT's...get over it. Newtons 3rd law wasnt even close to being broke...are you a physics professor???

posted on Nov, 4 2007 @ 10:23 PM
reply to post by talisman

This does not address my original challenge, but I'll take a bite.

I believe it very possible that real commercial airplanes headed toward one or both towers, but veered off using optical camoflouge. This technology exists, and was reported in Time Magazine. (It's not limited to movies like Predator!)

It's certainly possible for the media to have broadcasted fake video AND for commercial/military planes to have hit the towers, but it's not very plausible:

Parts of the planes would have fallen and been found. Too risky.

Something (not a plane) made the cookie-cutter cutout of the wings. Possibly a DEW.

Too many inconsistencies in the eye/ear witnesses. Not all are lying, some must have seen projections. It's the only explanation. If the technology exists to camouflage a real airplane I'm sure they can project a fake one.

I'm not expecting anyone to trust me. What I expect is for people to use some common sense, some logical reasoning, and the laws of physics.

If people want to believe that real planes hit the towers, that's fine with me. All they have to do is come up with a reasonable explanation for the cookie-cutter cutouts.

But, IMO the important issues are:

The corporate media broadcasted fake video

There were no hijackings

For me, and many others, everything else falls into place; which is why I do not believe any type of real airplane hit the towers.

posted on Nov, 4 2007 @ 10:29 PM
reply to post by SilentBob86

you're making a total jackass out of yourself. The F4 did not go through the wall. Try reading the analysis I typed out in the Peter Jennings thread instead of acting duncy.

posted on Nov, 4 2007 @ 11:17 PM
reply to post by CB_Brooklyn

Here is the key though. Enough people would have seen what really happened. People within the building, People with a birds eye view beneath the Towers etc.

YES there is always different eyewitness testimony in any event. But the majority of the testimony is consistent with what we saw.

People who say they didn't see the plane could easily be explained, since they might have been on the other side, or looked right after.

People who thought it was a missile can be explained in much the same way.

There were a number of helicopters up and emergency workers who saw what happened. They can't *ALL* be lying. That is just paranoia.

There are a number of people right here on ATS who got a bird's eye view of the plane going in.

Differing eyewitness testimony can be found explaining the Collapse of the Towers, which defy physics.

Just by that, are you now going to conclude that the Towers didn't collapse because the Testimony isn't consistent?

Talking of plane parts since you postulate such control of the MEDIA and the planting of plane parts, any parts of a MILITARY plane could easily be done away with. *IF* as you claim they planted parts, then the could just as easily done away with the *MILITARY PARTS OF THE PLANE*. That would be consistent with the control you claim the perps had.

Now again.

We have NO CGI of the PENTAGON.


IF what you claim happened, then by your own theory someone can then claim 9/11 itself didn't happen.

Since using your logic.....

Different eyewitness testimony= The event didn't happen
People can't be trusted
The MEDIA was completely lying.

*YOU* have eliminated eyewitness testimony.
*YOU* have eliminated the MEDIA

Then according to this.....There is NO REASON TO believe 9/11 happened. Someone could just as easily turn around and say......

It was just a building demolition!

[edit on 4-11-2007 by talisman]

posted on Nov, 4 2007 @ 11:53 PM
reply to post by talisman

I'm going to respond to that post to reiterate something I have said numerous times in this forum.

I will put it in large font size as well, because you seem to ignore this every time:

I believe most of the eyewitnesses who claim to have seen planes saw nothing but projections.

Therefore, I don't believe they are all "lying".

and of course, ATS screws it up

[edit on 4-11-2007 by CB_Brooklyn]

posted on Nov, 5 2007 @ 12:31 AM
If you plan on doing something, such as 911.. with the aim of duping the WORLD... then why go to so much effort, include so much risk and do some so ridiculously complex, when there's such a simple alternate plan?

Why on Earth would they take 2 dummy boeings... paint them up.... coat them in super-duper camo technology...
fly them TOWARDS the towers... then cloak them.. fly them away, and use explosives on precise timing relays to make it APPEAR as if an impact occured..

when you could simply take 2 of 1000's of dead and dying boeings from a graveyard, paint them up and fly them in like its nothing else?

Wouldnt it be so much simply to use fake planes and make them impact, than use fake plans, camo them and fly them away ensuring demo made it APPEAR like a explosion?

Planes hit... I beleive terrorists hijacked 3 planes as was reported.
IT was something they had planned for a long time, it was so easy to do, so effective...

We stood by and let them, knowing full well what they were doing.
AS for the pensylvania plane and pentagon 'incident'
thats the 2 altered versions from that day.

And I agree above,
nonsense theories like Nuke's in the wtc's... camo technology and all that gaff, make the real and genuine theorists look like idiots!

posted on Nov, 5 2007 @ 12:46 AM
reply to post by CB_Brooklyn

That is not going to account for the people who saw the planes fly into the buildings. There is numerous testimony to this.

Also if this were the case....

CHINA, Russia, countries that are no friend to the STATES would speak openly about their being 'NO PLANES' or "projections". China and Russia I am sure also had foreign correspondents that day in NEW YORK.

Also we should see surfacing on the NET these projected planes flying about, or we should see other news agencies posting this.

Or do you think the whole world was in on this conspiracy?

You know it just wasn't the UNITED STATES MEDIA, Amateur's and others with camera's. There were other MEDIA as well.

[edit on 5-11-2007 by talisman]

posted on Nov, 5 2007 @ 01:05 AM
Just to go along with the theme.

Anyone who is interested view these Amateur video tapes.

The NO PLANES camp will just sit back and cry 'Actors'. As if Actors all over New York were set up and there wasn't anyone with a Film of what happened!

These are two clips that catalog the human emotion.

When you factor in that certain ATS board members saw the planes, that there were so many people watching, that video like this is out there.

You are left with one conclusion...



new topics

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in