| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
David WJ Sherlock
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 Jan 2007
Posts: 471
Location: Kent GB
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:55 am Post subject: No Planers. The side of 9/11 to be wary of... |
 |
|
I am sorry. but I cannot buy into this "No Plane Theory" I have been compared to a loony for not accepting this ridiculous theory. Hologram projecting orbs, Lasers and all the loony stuff like that. I have no doubt that it was airliners that hit the towers that day. I'm open minded enough to support claims that it could have been unmarked military planes. I will even go down the road that claims missiles were fired from the planes nano-seconds before the planes hit the towers. I'm sorry. But as far as I am concerned, No planers are of the ilk, that make well versed Geo-political researchers, look like the "tinfoil hat wearing CT's" people such as Bill O'reilly says we are.
Lets stick to the hard facts. Planes hit the towers. Shaped Charges, not fire brought those towers down. Bin Laden is a CIA tactician. PNAC wanted it to happen. And so on..... Lets not loose our credibility! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ray Ubinger
Minor Poster
Joined: 09 Apr 2007
Posts: 90
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
David WJ Sherlock
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 Jan 2007
Posts: 471
Location: Kent GB
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:55 pm Post subject: Re: No Planers. The side of 9/11 to be wary of... |
|
|
| Why do they, (the powers that be) want to discredit the 9/11 movement? Well, because we are so close to exposing them for the liars they are. So, their tatic is to try to discredit us first and have us written off as nutballs. And it would seem a small minority is falling into the pit. The mainstream media has jumped on the NPT very quickly. and in some cases it is working. I have already been compared to the NPT loons. This will discredit our movement and to all those who are just opening their eyes, they will snap them shut again and write us off as nutters. By circulating this nonsense, you are playing into the Neo-cons hands. You may as well be shrilling for them. in fact these NPT's are more damaging to us than anything Fox News can put out about us. It is clear to me, that these images and flash shots are clear cut fakes, spread throughout the movment to cause disinformation debate, thus, causing a split in the movement. I am not a Christian as such. But it true what the Bible says. "A house divided cannot stand". I have seen a lot of debate over this subject, in turn, which is leading to disharmony among us all in the TM. the Neo-cons are out to split us up. do not allow your self to become complicit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ray Ubinger
Minor Poster
Joined: 09 Apr 2007
Posts: 90
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 4:14 pm Post subject: Re: No Planers. The side of 9/11 to be wary of... |
|
|
| NWOWATCH wrote: | | these images and flash shots are clear cut fakes |
The Flash Frame and Whatzits at the links above, came from the world-renowned Naudet dvd. Shall I quote you the dvd clock times so you can verify them for yourself? I just presumed you were a serious enough S11 researcher to be familiar with that most famous of all S11 documentaries. Here's the complete series of Naudet 1st Hit dvd frames, in original and three treatments:
http://missilegate.com
So, now, are YOU calling the Naudets con artists?
Ray Ubinger
Durham NC USA
"The Flash Frame changes history ... if we'll let it." -- Rosalee "Webfairy" Grable, Chicago grandmother, American hero |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fallious
Moderate Poster
Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 762
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 5:03 pm Post subject: Re: No Planers. The side of 9/11 to be wary of... |
|
|
Holy cow, you are right, it doesn't look like a plane! Ah, but what did you say was captured in that video?
Perhaps you could indulge me and demonstrate that a 'real' plane would look any different at that resolution and encoding level?
| Quote: | | I just presumed you were a serious enough S11 researcher to be familiar with that most famous of all S11 documentaries |
From you with 10 posts on this forum aimed at someone with 40. That takes some guile, and a good quantity of distain of the truth movement in general, I would venture.
You make a mockery of all our search for the truth and the spirit of powerful teamwork of this movement. Care to apologize to us all?
_________________
"Thought is faster than arrows, and truth is sharper than blades." - David Gemmell | RealityDown wiki
Last edited by Fallious on Wed Apr 11, 2007 5:10 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Micpsi
Moderate Poster
Joined: 13 Feb 2007
Posts: 505
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 5:09 pm Post subject: Re: No Planers. The side of 9/11 to be wary of... |
|
|
| NWOWATCH wrote: | | Why do they, (the powers that be) want to discredit the 9/11 movement? Well, because we are so close to exposing them for the liars they are. So, their tatic is to try to discredit us first and have us written off as nutballs. And it would seem a small minority is falling into the pit. The mainstream media has jumped on the NPT very quickly. and in some cases it is working. I have already been compared to the NPT loons. This will discredit our movement and to all those who are just opening their eyes, they will snap them shut again and write us off as nutters. By circulating this nonsense, you are playing into the Neo-cons hands. You may as well be shrilling for them. in fact these NPT's are more damaging to us than anything Fox News can put out about us. It is clear to me, that these images and flash shots are clear cut fakes, spread throughout the movment to cause disinformation debate, thus, causing a split in the movement. I am not a Christian as such. But it true what the Bible says. "A house divided cannot stand". I have seen a lot of debate over this subject, in turn, which is leading to disharmony among us all in the TM. the Neo-cons are out to split us up. do not allow your self to become complicit. |
Yes. You are right about the NPT's being more damaging than anything the media can throw at us. People's zeal for searching for anomalies that they can then claim as smoking guns has made some make errors in their own analysis which they don't wish now to admit. Hence the current impasse between the plane-hugging and NPT factions in the 9/11 truth movement. But that reluctance to lose face has worked BOTH ways. Whilst the claim by Prof Jones that thermite was used to help weaken the towers is a safe, respectable hypothesis that does not stretch credulity in the way that directed, high-energy particle beams or lasers do, the fact remains (as pointed out by Dr Fetzer and Dr Wood) that Jones' claim - even if others confirmed the presence of thermite - does not amount to proof that some kind of demolition took place. Perhaps thermite was used by the clean-up workers at Ground Zero to take down or reduce in size steel girders. Indeed, there exist photos suggesting that it was in fact used then (see Figs 14a, b & c at http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=trouble_with_jones) . By pushing so strongly this claim, Jones could be setting up the truth movement for a fall with weak evidence that can easily be explained away by supporters of the US government's fairy tale - just as they do with NPT. We CANNOT therefore put all our eggs in one basket if we think the true modus operandi of the destruction of the towers needs to be known (I argue that it does NOT, and a fight over pride between two scientists should not be allowed to wreck the 9/11 truth train). That was why Dr Wood examined the photographic evidence more extensively for evidence that something other than high-explosives and/or thermite/thermate destroyed both towers. HER problem is that, although she thinks she has found such anomalies (e.g., lots of cooky-cutter holes in WTC5 and WTC6 that have no debris inside that could have fallen on the roofs and created them), the implication that such weird damage was caused by exotic weapons is too much for most people to believe, quite apart from being impossible to prove because, if it existed, it would no doubt require people that have worked with such military research programs to determine whether weapons exist to do the job Wood thinks they did on 9/11. So she has painted herself into a corner out of which her research cannot move even if more people take it seriously. Her line of investigation necessarily leads to a dead end irrespective of whether it is true or not. Sadly, Fetzer failed to realise this.
Surely the lesson we need to take on board is this: forget the fine details of the demolition of the two towers. They do not need to be established because we have more than enough evidence to prove that the US government's account of 9/11 is completely wrong. Fetzer made a strategic mistake in championing Wood, because he failed to realise that her directed particle/laser beam hypothesis is not provable by those outside the secret world of military weapons research, quite apart from being too far out for most people waking up to the truth behind 9/11 to accept unless that proof can be given. But it can't, and we can't risk weakening the growing pressure for truth by haggling over the details of how the WTC was destroyed. This is NOT an academic issue, Jim! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MadgeB
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Nov 2006
Posts: 164
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fallious said: "You make a mockery of all our search for the truth and the spirit of powerful teamwork of this movement. Care to apologize to us all?"
Oh, pur-leeze! Don't pretend to speak for all of 'us' Fallious. The number of people who realise that deliberate fakery was used is growing all the time. As Gerard Holmgren said, it's a subject video and film makers have puzzling over for years, "Why oh why can I never film a plane that looks like a plane?" On 9/11, anyway. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WhoKilledBambi?
Minor Poster
Joined: 03 Feb 2007
Posts: 36
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 10:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That certainly shut the bogus truth seekers up Madge.
LOL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ray Ubinger
Minor Poster
Joined: 09 Apr 2007
Posts: 90
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:09 pm Post subject: Re: No Planers. The side of 9/11 to be wary of... |
|
|
http://thewebfairy.com/911/flyingpig/flashframe.jpg
| Fallious wrote: | | Holy cow, you are right, it doesn't look like a plane! Ah, but what did you say was captured in that video? |
I usually call it American Airforce Blob 11. Sometimes simply the 1st Hit Murder Weapon. I think the Flash Frame reveals its true shape. I speculate that its blobby half-sideways U-shape in all the other frames (changing a little from frame to frame) is from some kind of holographic cloak-disguise. I speculate that the Flash is an electrostatic charging of the air in preparation for a fuel-air bomb detonation using aerosolized thermite. I speculate that the energy needed to create the Flash disrupted the holo-disguise for one instant of nakedness.
| Quote: | | Perhaps you could indulge me and demonstrate that a 'real' plane would look any different at that resolution and encoding level? |
I have no skill at creating visual aids. But we are all familiar enough with real planes from below to know that they appear shaped about like an x or a t, not like a wingless missile (the Flash Frame) and not like a blobby half-sideways u (the other Naudet 1st Hit vid frames). And by the way a real 767's wingspan is 3/4 of a WTC Tower width. Also, the distance from the object to the camera was only 7/10ths of a mile.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | I just presumed you were a serious enough S11 researcher to be familiar with that most famous of all S11 documentaries |
From you with 10 posts on this forum aimed at someone with 40. That takes some guile, and a good quantity of distain of the truth movement in general, I would venture.
You make a mockery of all our search for the truth and the spirit of powerful teamwork of this movement. Care to apologize to us all? |
I was accused of a serious offense--trying to pass off faked pictures as real--with no actual argument proffered to back up the accusation. I think I was entitled to get a little snide at my accuser. All serious S11 researchers really should be quite familiar with the world-famous Naudet movie. It is a treasure trove of unique first-hand footage. The dvd has been out since 2002 and Webfairy's enlargements of its Flash Frame and other 1st Hit frames have been up at missilegate.com since 2004. Let's wake up and smell No Plane already: they have put it right under our noses.
Ray Ubinger
Durham NC USA |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ray Ubinger
Minor Poster
Joined: 09 Apr 2007
Posts: 90
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:33 pm Post subject: Re: No Planers. The side of 9/11 to be wary of... |
|
|
| Micpsi wrote: | | the implication that such weird damage [as Dr Wood has found] was caused by exotic weapons is too much for most people to believe, quite apart from being impossible to prove because, if it existed, it would no doubt require people that have worked with such military research programs to determine whether weapons exist to do the job Wood thinks they did on 9/11. |
You don't need a scientific or military background to see that exotic technology was used. Besides Judy Wood's evidence there is also the way the towers fizzed to dust during midair freefall, like an Alka-Seltzer through water. There are also the innumerable u.nidentified f.lying o.bjects, with their many weird properties like shape-shifting, hyper-speed, shadow-casting, laser-projecting, bird-mimicking, flashing, cloaking, multiplying, toggling-between-bright-white-and-dark-black. FOR EXAMPLE
http://thewebfairy.com/911/canale/terroristattack/
http://911foreknowledge.com/rayswhatzits.htm
http://thewebfairy.com/911/newwhatzits
http://thewebfairy.com/911/bird/
http://www.orbwar.com/ufo-photos-wtc-attack-9-11.htm
http://www.orbwar.com/woolworth/
http://thewebfairy.com/whatzit/j2/index.htm
http://thewebfairy.com/911/slideshow/blackbird/
Ray Ubinger
Durham NC USA
http://911foreknowledge.com
exposing the Naudet-FDNY snuff film since 2004 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flamesong
Major Poster
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ray Ubinger, can you explain to me why the aerial (sorry, antenna if you are American) mast in the photo looks like an artists palette knife? And there is clearly a heavy fall of snow on WTC2 - in September FFS! And why has the snow all drifted into one corner of the roof of WTC1?
Perhaps the photo has been tampered with? Oh, yes, look! Somebody has applied some amateur analysis using totally inappropriate Photoshop filters and didn't stop until he got something he liked the look of!
If you want to try to convince other people of your idiotic theory, at least have the honesty to use genuine evidence.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fallious
Moderate Poster
Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 762
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 12:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MadgeB wrote: | Fallious said: "You make a mockery of all our search for the truth and the spirit of powerful teamwork of this movement. Care to apologize to us all?"
Oh, pur-leeze! Don't pretend to speak for all of 'us' Fallious. The number of people who realise that deliberate fakery was used is growing all the time. As Gerard Holmgren said, it's a subject video and film makers have puzzling over for years, "Why oh why can I never film a plane that looks like a plane?" On 9/11, anyway. |
Sorry, did I say a word about TV fakery? If you'd quoted my entry in full you'd have seen that my point was levelled plainly at Ray's unprovoked attack on NWOWATCH's failure to recognise the Naudet documentary footage. Last time I checked, 9/11 truth didn't have an entry examination and I consider it offensive and damaging to practise the kind of conspiratorial one-upmanship that Rays comment demonstrates.
That kind of attitude is quite rightly applied to conspiracy theorists who are in it for some kind of personal gratification; a feeling of intellectual superiority rather than working for the greater good. Your attack on me - quoting my comment out of context, impossibly re-arranging it’s meaning to be an attack on NPT and puking out an irrelevant Holmgren quote is another such example.
I hope that makes my original comment entirely clear to you, as such, I expect you would agree with it wholeheartedly?
_________________
"Thought is faster than arrows, and truth is sharper than blades." - David Gemmell | RealityDown wiki |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 12:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| flamesong wrote: | Ray Ubinger, can you explain to me why the aerial (sorry, antenna if you are American) mast in the photo looks like an artists palette knife? And there is clearly a heavy fall of snow on WTC2 - in September FFS! And why has the snow all drifted into one corner of the roof of WTC1?
Perhaps the photo has been tampered with? Oh, yes, look! Somebody has applied some amateur analysis using totally inappropriate Photoshop filters and didn't stop until he got something he liked the look of!
If you want to try to convince other people of your idiotic theory, at least have the honesty to use genuine evidence.
|
look at how detailed it is, hehe.
you cannot make out one window on or outlines of windows on either tower, yet we are meant to beable to see a fully detailed and sharp imagine of a plane  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fallious
Moderate Poster
Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 762
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 1:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| marky 54 wrote: |
look at how detailed it is, hehe.
you cannot make out one window on or outlines of windows on either tower, yet we are meant to beable to see a fully detailed and sharp imagine of a plane |
If that single frame represents the pinacle of NPT evidence, as it purports to... Whatever. 
_________________
"Thought is faster than arrows, and truth is sharper than blades." - David Gemmell | RealityDown wiki |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thermate
Angel - now passed away
Joined: 13 Nov 2006
Posts: 445
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 3:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Don't waste your breath on these NPTards.
_________________
Make love, not money. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thought criminal
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 574
Location: London
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 3:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thermate and Fallious = Creeps
_________________
| chek wrote: |
look at NIST's and other photos in a decent resolution to see what damage was actually caused. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ray Ubinger
Minor Poster
Joined: 09 Apr 2007
Posts: 90
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 4:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://thewebfairy.com/911/flyingpig/flashframe.jpg
| flamesong wrote: | | can you explain to me why the aerial (sorry, antenna if you are American) mast in the photo looks like an artists palette knife? |
I believe that's just motion blur plus imperfect focus, while panning up from the Alleged Odor of Alleged Gas scene, 7/10ths of mile from impact, down at the Church-Lispenard intersection (sorry, junction if you are British).
http://911foreknowledge.com/odorofgas.htm
On the other hand, maybe the antenna was actually throbbing with some exotic visible energy as the attack was gearing up, because, some of the same smear of that same antenna portion seems to exist in the deliberate foreshadowing setup shot taken a few minutes prior:
http://www.spingola.com/App4-1d.jpg
My turn for a question now: Can you explain to me what that non-plane-shaped thing that's about to hit the Tower is?
| Quote: | | And there is clearly a heavy fall of snow on WTC2 - in September FFS! And why has the snow all drifted into one corner of the roof of WTC1? |
You're referring to the two rooftop corner devices. One sat on the NW corner atop each Tower. I don't know their nature or purpose. Innocent window-washer elevators, nefarious HAARP generators, something else, I just don't know. But they are present in a number of S11 and pre-S11 photos. They are fairly clear in the above "odorofgas" video link.
| Quote: | | Perhaps the photo has been tampered with? |
No, you can see for yourself that it has not been, if you check the dvd out from your local library. No tampering, no Photoshopping, just a bit of sharpening from the Focus Magic algorithm applied uniformly to the whole original frame. See
http://missilegate.com/051.htm
wherein the original is just as lacking a plane as the enhancement is.
For reassembly of all four versions back into video continuity, see
http://missilegate.com/video.htm
Ray Ubinger
Durham NC USA
http://911foreknowledge.com
exposing the Naudet-FDNY snuff film since 2004 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stefan
Banned
Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 1219
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 4:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It looks like an artists pallette knife because the image has been run through several photoshop filters to make it half legible.
Remember the only footage of the first plane hitting is the Naudet brothers film- and that's where this image comes from. The instance being captured here was in the far back ground a few pixels across on a digital camera; it's been buffed up a lot to look like a clearer image than it really was.
_________________
Peace and Truth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ray Ubinger
Minor Poster
Joined: 09 Apr 2007
Posts: 90
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 5:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Stefan wrote: | | the image has been run through several photoshop filters to make it half legible. |
You are MAKING THAT UP. ZERO Photoshopping was involved. It is simply enlarged and then Magic-Focused. Viewing a copy of the dvd--on a computer screen, not on a TV--will show the same as the "Original" at
http://missilegate.com
Frame 51 is the Flash Frame, for reference.
| Quote: | | The instance being captured here was in the far back ground |
It was barely 7/10ths of a mile away.
| Quote: | | a few pixels across on a digital camera |
Don't confuse digital camera pixels with TV screen pixels. The latter are large, bulky, low-resolution, and have only three colors to choose from. Digital video pixels are orders of magnitude finer, with thousands of color choices per pixel.
Again, there is NO tampering at missilegate.com, NO Photoshopping, NO video data inserted or deleted. They are simple enlargements, with optional enhancements offered for consideration alongside. The Original version shows how the video frames really look, on a dvd-capable computer screen, and the enhanced versions are clearly labeled as such.
| Quote: | | it's been buffed up a lot to look like a clearer image than it really was. |
No, it has not been. Watch a copy of the dvd on a computer and see for yourself. There is NOTHING WRONG with the video data here. It just doesn't have a plane in it, that's all.
Ray Ubinger
http://foreknowledge.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stefan
Banned
Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 1219
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 6:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"Magic-Focused" instead of "Photoshopped" big difference.
The point is a digital filter has been applied to it to get rid of the pixelation - it has been altered.
_________________
Peace and Truth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ray Ubinger
Minor Poster
Joined: 09 Apr 2007
Posts: 90
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 7:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Stefan wrote: | | a digital filter has been applied to it to get rid of the pixelation - it has been altered. |
The frames labeled "Original" are DIRECTLY from the DVD -- NO filtration, NO enhancement, NO alteration, NO fattening-up, NO filling-in, NO adding or deleting of data, NO getting rid of ALLEGED pixelation -- and they are just as planeless as the mildly enhanced Magic Focus version.
http://missilegate.com/
in particular
http://missilegate.com/051.htm
reassembled into authentic video continuity at
http://missilegate.com/video.htm
HERE are some filtrations -- EXTREME enhancements of a few frames from the same footage:
http://thewebfairy.com/911/flyingpig/beautyshots.htm
Overhead airplanes only 7/10ths of a mile away in broad cloudless daylight appear like a crisp x or t. Not like a wingless missile as in the Flash Frame, and not like a blobby half-sideways u as in the other frames.
Ray Ubinger
discoverer of many S11 ufo's
like
http://911foreknowledge.com/rayswhatzits.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Banish
Moderate Poster
Joined: 18 Mar 2006
Posts: 250
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 12:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Physics 101.
Kinetic Energy flows BOTH ways in a collision between two objects. So forget that fallacious argument.
Objects in collision are "dumb". They, the objects, don't know which object is moving and which is standing still.
Simply put, the "plane" wouldnt know that it was moving, the building wouldnt know if was standing still or not.
It doesn't matter because each action has an equal and opposite reaction.
The building hit the plane, the plane hit the building. Same thing.
BTW airplanes look like this!
NOT this...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_ko3FMpQs0
http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/cmh/simulation/phase3/3d_640_480.avi |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig W
Validated Poster
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 485
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 10:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Who cares?
This is all a diversion.
_________________
"Nothing can trouble you but your own imagination." ~ Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Banish
Moderate Poster
Joined: 18 Mar 2006
Posts: 250
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Craig W wrote: | Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Who cares?
This is all a diversion. |
You sound like a pre-pubescent moron. A real Kevin. Or another Tony Blair with his Ludicrous Diversion speech.
A Diversion from what? Your truth? A man in a cave and zombie hijackers impossibly flying airplanes that didnt take off while the US military stood picking it's nose, then unzipping the most technologically advanced nation on earth with some box cutters, turning an ocean of steel and concrete to particle dust with two holllow aluminium tubes.
Worse, you are a fcuking idiot moron.
Again show me a photo of a Boeing 757 hitting tower 1. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Annie
9/11 Truth Organiser
Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Posts: 830
Location: London
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 1:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'll say this till I'm blue in the face:
What is self-evident to us - that the OCT is a pile of nonsense - is still a frightening intellectual leap for most people out there. But there are many pieces of solid evidence we can use to get them to look at and question 911. Whatever the rights or wrongs of holograms/pods/beam weapons, as an initial argument these theories just sound too mad and "out there" and will scare people away.
What are we trying to achieve? Is the movement's primary function to establish, down to the last detail, exactly what happened that day? Or is it to wake people up to the reality of geopolitics?
With another war looming in the Middle East, people being murdered, tortured and imprisoned, and our liberties being decimated, I would say that the most urgent task is to expose the root cause of the bogus "war on terror" as a lie, and to get as many people as possible to re-engage with politics and say enough is enough.
Only once we have reached a tipping point will we be in a position to demand answers to what actually happened that day. Until then, these discussions will remain speculative, and I would urge people to get out there and spread the word, rather than obsess over the details of what might have happened.
This is not a game - we need to campaign as effectively as possible and as quickly as possible in order to prevent further innocent lives being destroyed.
Regards
Annie
_________________
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing - Edmund Burke.
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem Americanam appellant - Tacitus Redactus. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig W
Validated Poster
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 485
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 1:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Banish wrote: | | Craig W wrote: | Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Who cares?
This is all a diversion. |
You sound like a pre-pubescent moron. A real Kevin. Or another Tony Blair with his Ludicrous Diversion speech.
A Diversion from what? Your truth? A man in a cave and zombie hijackers impossibly flying airplanes that didnt take off while the US military stood picking it's nose, then unzipping the most technologically advanced nation on earth with some box cutters, turning an ocean of steel and concrete to particle dust with two holllow aluminium tubes.
Worse, you are a fcuking idiot moron.
Again show me a photo of a Boeing 757 hitting tower 1. |
See Annie's response. The negative emotions you express demonstrate why this is a diversion.
We do not need to know, or attempt to prove, what really happened on 911. In fact, we may never know some of the details for sure.
It doesn't matter what exactly caused the explosions and eventual collapses. What matters is that we know that the OCT is a tissue of lies. That is where our focus needs to be, not bickering over speculative theories.
Any attempts to force people to decide one way or another on these divisive issues is totally counter-productive, and is exactly what opponents of 911 truth would want.
_________________
"Nothing can trouble you but your own imagination." ~ Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Banish
Moderate Poster
Joined: 18 Mar 2006
Posts: 250
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 2:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Why should I care if one or two people are frightend off by TV fakery (not holograms or beams from outer space)? You do it all the time with Jew hangout nonsense. You think "people" are not put off by that? Thats why they were used as patsies, to scare people away from the truth.
Let people make their own minds up! Thats not your job. Present the FACTS!
And the facts are that there were NO hijackers. NO phonecalls, NO Standown orders, NO airplanes. Just some cartoons of airplaens on CNN.
So simple even an IDIOT, not looking at anybody Craig W, could understand. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Banish
Moderate Poster
Joined: 18 Mar 2006
Posts: 250
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John White
Site Admin
Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 6:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Please do, as soon as you can seperate them from the needs of your ego
_________________
Free your Self and Free the World |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Banish wrote: | Physics 101.
Kinetic Energy flows BOTH ways in a collision between two objects. So forget that fallacious argument.
Objects in collision are "dumb". They, the objects, don't know which object is moving and which is standing still.
Simply put, the "plane" wouldnt know that it was moving, the building wouldnt know if was standing still or not.
It doesn't matter because each action has an equal and opposite reaction.
The building hit the plane, the plane hit the building. Same thing.
BTW airplanes look like this!
NOT this...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_ko3FMpQs0
http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/cmh/simulation/phase3/3d_640_480.avi |
a moving object provides momentum, the object that isnt moving absorbs the shock of the momentum, the momentum will determine which direction the damage will go. both objects will take damage.
so if a car moving at any speed for example hits a parked car the parked car will move in the direction opposite to where it was hit as will all dents etc.
if a car hits a wall it will go through it because the momentum of the moving object is provided in the impact and pushes bricks inward.
on 9/11 we have the same thing the plane provided the momentum and force of the impact the building could only absorb what it could. any damage the plane took came from its own momentum and force being repelled down the lenght of the plane.
i think the plane did take damage, i dont remember seeing a fully intact passenger airliner parked inside the towers. sections of steel were pushed inward due to the force and momentum the plane provided, which determined the direction things would bend,snap,giveway.
the object standing still dosnt give a punch back to make things fly bend or be pushed the other way, the object that is moving is destroyed by its own momentum when hitting things toughier than itsself untill it comes to a stand still, but the moving object will continue to move in one direction unless deflected by a much toughier object that itself, but even then the toughier object will have a dent and be pushed the way of the momentum the object provided.
so where sections of steel pushed inward intact leaving the softer outer cladding in the shape of a plane?
regardless of if the plane entering the building is strange or not i can assure you the building didnt hit the plane. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
