Planes Yay or Nay

[THETRUTHWILLSETU3]

Lets Vote

[Wokeman]

There are enough potential differences to split the movement. This step would open up a chasm

[optimus79]

If the planes win, can the NPT be bannished to the 7th level of hell and be forgotten about.


(At least until officially 9/11 is exposed as a lie, then we can look at the small print)

[hampton]

at least two other options should be added to polls of this nature:
probably & probably not.

regarding the 'no planes theory', i don't see it makes any difference either way.

there's enough hard evidence out there.

and this only muddies the waters and makes a hard job even harder.

it's already hard enough trying to convince some people, even with the overwhelming evidence that's available.

i have a fairly open mind but i think if i'd have heard this early on it wouldn't have helped my understanding of the situation.

.

[ian neal]

Hi

There are series of problems with this vote.

1) Just because you are registered here does not mean you are 'on-side'

2) Not everyone will be equally familiar with the evidence (both pro and counter) to make an informed decision

3) The whole TV fakery, etc. debate does not boil down to planes or no planes. Andrew Johnson, who does follow this debate closely describes in theories more accurately as 'no big boeings'

4) As well yes or no, there should be an option for don't know, undecided, not familiar with the evidence

5) Any vote could well be seen as unnecessarily devisive, so I won't be voting

Cheers

Ian

[scubadiver]

I won't be voting either. Not because I don't believe "no planes" but mostly because I have to agree with Ian, esp. (5).

I think it is more important that we just get the nuts and bolts evidence out among the general public. Any muddied topics like this won't do us or anybody else any favours.

[Bicnarok]

I voted "planes" because ist so bloody obvious that planes hit the 2 towers (not pentagon or that field). Whether they were the actual planes that they claimed is another question.

Just because 1 reporter said he didn´t see a plane because he wasn´t looking at the towers constantly, and probably looked away at that second. And some artifact, compression frame loss errors on some videos get blown out of preportion by those who have no experience of video editing/compression.

the "no plane" idea was put out to discredit the whole 9/11 truth movement imo.

Im not going to sit on the fence.!

[James C]

[xmasdale]

[ian neal]

[adam1]

I agree that the vote idea should be binned.
What will it gain?
Further, and I don't want to slander anyone unnecessarily, but it does not seem that Truthwillsetusfree, or whatever their name is, has contributed a lot of divisive issues recently, the latest being the Holocaust thread which was closed by the moderators (thank you).
Unless this poster is able to respond fulsomely, displaying a fair degree of human empathy using a respectful and reasoned tone, then I, for one, will remain suspicious of their intent.
Feel free to change my opinion.

[ian neal]

Whilst Truthwillsetus3 is not known to me, s/he is known to Andrew Johnson, whose judgement I do trust, so I don't doubt his or her motives.

On certain occasions such as here I do question his/her judgement but that's fine. We don't have to agree about everything

[James C]

[suspecta]

This is a forum for public debate but it's also a platform for getting out the information that 9-11 was very likely an inside job. We are already battling a common perception that we are ' irrational conspiracy theorists', so we should be aiming to broadcast the known facts of that day as clearly and comprehensibly as possible, bearing in mind the less questioning general public's propensity to turn away at the slightest sign of irrationality.

The no-planes theory may well be just too alienating for the general public to be worth giving much airspace to here. If I was an idle websurfer who came across this site by accident I would be immediately put off by excessive or prominent reference to 'no planes hit the WTC'.

The vast majority of idle surfers would have seen so much footage of the planes hitting that they would just be disinclined to give the idea any credence, and it would just conform them in their view that the posters here are indeed the irrational conspiracy theorists they had always suspected.

Do we really want to put these people off?

Yes there should be debate here but not to the extent that these people should be frightened off - time could well be too short.

Surely the priority should be to convince as many people as possible that the war on terror is phony, and that the stories we have been fed about 19 Muslim hijackers are lies. Anything else is self-indulgent and even irrelevant and detracts from the crucial issue.

Even if the no planes theory is true (which I very much doubt), how can it possibly help the cause here to keep discussing it ad infinitum? The war on terror is just as phony with or without planes and surely the priority is to discuss it without alienating the general public.

Suspecta

[ian neal]