B767 Or A Missile? Options

[tumetuestumefais...]

Because the question of a missile now leaves the realm of a fantasy and enters the realm of a good probability I made this poll.
More information how we came to the serious suspicion of a missile in this thread:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum...topic=9179&st=0

This post has been edited by tumetuestumefaisdubien: Nov 11 2007, 06:46 AM

[Carl Bank]

edit / last possible answer added by: Carl

[Factfinder Gener...]

COINTELPRO? Not me! (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/nonono.gif)

As far as I'm concerned, I'm just trying to firmly nail down the planks of Truth so the ship of Knowledge can sail proudly forth.

(IMG:http://www.mariner.org/exploration/mm_images/LP618GoldenHind_large.jpg)

This post has been edited by Factfinder General: Nov 11 2007, 01:33 PM

[Sanders]

Welcome, tumetuestumefaisdubien

If you hang around a bit, you will soon come to the realization IMO that this sort of poll does more to divide than unify, and that that is the reason for the lack of participation. I thank you for bringing new info regarding Mach 1+ speed of the aircraft that hit the south tower, and look forward to your posts. This sort of poll however, is counterproductive.

No worries, I'm just explaining why no one is voting. Cheers

[Factfinder Gener...]

you will soon come to the realization IMO that this sort of poll does more to divide than unify, and that that is the reason for the lack of participation.

I do get what you are saying, Sanders but why should that be though? This is an interesting and perhaps profoundly philosophical question to me.

Are most people afraid of getting off the fence for some reason? Is there some deeper reason? I would love your wisdom shed on this. Maybe have a bevy or two and get back to me. (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

This post has been edited by Factfinder General: Nov 11 2007, 01:32 PM

[Carl Bank]

I do get what you are saying, Sanders but why should that be though?  This is an interesting and perhaps profoundly philosophical question to me.

Are most people afraid of getting off the fence for some reason? Is there some deeper reason?  I would love your wisdom shed on this.  Maybe have a bevy or two and get back to me. (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

The very point in this is not if it was an airplane or a missle
that hit the south tower.

I share your doubts in several ways about the assumption of
UA 175 hit the WTC2, but I am also aware of the political difficulty
of the NPT issues:

My (and not only my) thoughts about the NPT is this:

The Truth Movements first responsibility is to wake up others to the
fact that we have been lied to. That 9/11 wasn't pulled off by Ali Bin Ladin
and his 19 Henchmen. That we all need to look into it and see the deception
and the forces that put this lies forward: The Banks, The Military Industrial
Complex etc.pp.

By knowing that this can only be accomplished when the Movement is
considered as serious and backed by scientific, financial, political, historical
and logical facts and evidence, we all should avoid to spend too much time and
energy with theories -or even facts that can be prooven only by long
explainations.

The No Plane Theory is used over and over by the perpetrators and their
henchmen, aka the MSM, to discredit the Truth Movement as nutjobby
tinfoilheadwearing conspiracy wackos. I for one can't stand to hear the
arguments of "We all saw the planes on TV, what are wrong with these folks?"
anymore.

Imagine some shepole who never questioned the official conspiracy theory
in his live and who comes across this board now - and the very first thread he
stumbles upon is about the question if a 767 or a missile hit the WTC...

Such a peron would shake his head and click back to James Randi's forum
in a second flat.

Second to this most important beef I have with NPT is that the question
if it was a plane or a missle of an energy beam or something so sophisticated
that we cannot even imagine is without any importance at this point.

I appreciate your research, FFG, Don't take me wrong.
But it can also be discussed after the truth about the background of
9/11 has reached the critical stage of widespread acceptence and steps are taken
to restore the constitution, the Media system and alike.

Because before this stage is reached, the NPT only gives "them" the opportunity
to label us "wackos". You can't jump the gun, FFG. Try to see the big picture
even if it's fascinating to do such research and feel like S. Holmes.

end of rant and my 2ct: Carl

[Factfinder Gener...]

I do get what you are saying, Sanders but why should that be though?  This is an interesting and perhaps profoundly philosophical question to me.

Are most people afraid of getting off the fence for some reason? Is there some deeper reason?  I would love your wisdom shed on this.  Maybe have a bevy or two and get back to me. (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

The very point in this is not if it was an airplane or a missle
that hit the south tower.

I share your doubts in several ways about the assumption of
UA 175 hit the WTC2, but I am also aware of the political difficulty
of the NPT issues:

My (and not only my) thoughts about the NPT is this:

The Truth Movements first responsibility is to wake up others to the
fact that we have been lied to. That 9/11 wasn't pulled off by Ali Bin Ladin
and his 19 Henchmen. That we all need to look into it and see the deception
and the forces that put this lies forward: The Banks, The Military Industrial
Complex etc.pp.

By knowing, that this can only be accomplished when the Movement is
cdonsidered serious and backed by scientific, financial, political, historical
and logical eviodence, we all should avoid to spend too much time and
energy with theories -or even facts that can be prooven by long
explainations.

The No Plane Theory is ised over and over by the perpetrators and their
henchmen, aka the MSM, to discredit the Truth Movement as nutjobby
tinfoilheadwearing conspiracy wackos. I for one can't stand to hear the
arguments of "We all saw the planes on TV, what are wrong with these folks?"
anymore.

Imagine some shepole who never questioned the official conspiracy theory
in his live who comes across this board and the very first thread he stumbles
upon is about the question if a 767 or a missile hit the WTC...

Such a peron would shake his head and click back to James Randi's forum
in a second flat.

Second to this most important beef I have with NPT is that the question
if it was a plane or a missle of an energy beam or something so sophisticated
that we cannot even imagine is without any importance at this point.

I appreciate your research, FFG, Don't take me wrong.
But it can also be discussed after the truth about the background of
9/11 has reached the critical stage of widespread acceptence and steps are taken
to restore the constitution, the Media system and alike.

Because before this stage is reached, the NPT only gives "them" the opportunity
to label us "wackos". You can't jump the gun, FFG. Try to see the big picture
even if it's fascinating to do such research and feel like S. Holmes.

end of rant and my 2ct: Carl

The perps have muddied the water for NPT, without a doubt, and I believe that their intention was to program people to "shut down" at the merest mention of it.

Why would the perps do this? IMO because it is the KEY truth (along with NDT) to understanding the whole 9/11 deception.

Presuming for a moment that this is the case: Now we have a real challenge on our hands. It is one thing saying one stands for truth and trying to present that truth to the people but when you aren't certain of what that truth is, or worse, when you are mistaken about what that truth is, how convincing can you be?

In my experience, just saying someone did so and so, without being able to explain your self fully as to who that someone is or what it was exactly that they did, or why it was done, never will come across.

When I am with someone face to face and calmly present them my case, the light comes on and they get it because it makes sense. This is my experience, honestly. It is almost like a revelation to them. I'm hoping that I won't sound too presumptuous or know it all here but I believe this is because: (1) I have gotten to the truth, more or less, and (2) the light of truth shines. The trick is to get to a full understanding of the truth and then convey that understanding. Understanding is what people are hungry for as I see it. painter has a quote by William Blake at the bottom of his posts as his signature:

If the truth can be told so as to be understood, it will be believed.

Do you see where I am coming from, Carl? Basically, I am talking about the ship of Knowledge that I was referring to earlier. This ship carries the important cargo of Understanding. Right now I believe the perps are trying to fool us, maybe even forcing us into sailing in a leaky ship ("us" being the people constituting the Truth Movement).

This post has been edited by Factfinder General: Nov 11 2007, 03:04 PM

[tumetuestumefais...]

The first thing needed to make any progress with a 9/11 truth is to find the 9/11 truth.

It doesn't matter if all have seen a "B767" on the TV. The TV is just an box to show the pictures.

Especially it doesn't matter if there were people (and they were there) saying in that same TV, they just have seen a "small plane" or a "missile" or a "plane I've never seen before"...etc. - all before any "B767" was broadcasted or seen on TV - in the time between the two crashes... etc. etc.

Don't try to dismiss the possible truth with the strawman argument of "political difficulty of NPT" This is not a NPT it is a NB767T.

Politics is able to change a lie to the truth - if the people prefer the lie.

But the truth is able to change the politics not to lie.

When there were no hijackers, why there should be still the Boeings? It does'nt ad up to me. (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/nonono.gif) -The hijackers were the political pretext, not any planes or exploding buildings, or then the pretty confused truthers... etc. etc.

[Factfinder Gener...]

The first thing needed to make any progress with a 9/11 truth is to find the 9/11 truth.

My sentiments entirely! (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/thumbsup.gif)

This post has been edited by Factfinder General: Nov 11 2007, 03:22 PM

[tumetuestumefais...]

And anyway, I don't much feel good on the "truth forum" where the responders change the questions of polls, or open the discussion to it when the author has closed it, where the administrators close the threads, where the author had opened it and where some popes "don't much care" about the purely technical 9/11 truth, but about if that is not a ComIntelPro, or on contrary more a question of a politiacal issue.
Maybe I'm too conservative, but this reminds me again about the Orwell... (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

This post has been edited by tumetuestumefaisdubien: Nov 11 2007, 03:42 PM

[tumetuestumefais...]

And anyway: The "Poll" about the importance of my original question is the FFG's thread - which is now realy pretty leading the most readed and replied in this section. B)

And now I was just reading some interesting post here, and it disappeared sooner, than I was able to finish the read... who is the admin?!! (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/angry.gif) Is this a CoIntelPro page??

This post has been edited by tumetuestumefaisdubien: Nov 11 2007, 04:00 PM

[amazed!]

If they used a missle they would have to also employ the hologram, it seems to me.

And if an aluminum Boeing should not penetrate the tower, why in the hell should an aluminum missle, which weighs a small fraction the amount of the airplane?

[tumetuestumefais...]

If they used a missle they would have to also employ the hologram, it seems to me.

And if an aluminum Boeing should not penetrate the tower, why in the hell should an aluminum missle, which weighs a small fraction the amount of the airplane?

I dont know, the missile could cary a DU, which would be quite unlikely the civil airliner would do so. I don't know. I just preanalyzed the RDR data and it looks like a fake or missile. It couldnt be a flightpath of a B767, seems to me... The hologram is out of the question, there possibly could'nt be a proof of something like that, so why pose the question. (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/dunno.gif)

[Sanders]

And anyway: The "Poll" about the importance of my original question is the FFG's thread - which is now realy pretty leading the most readed and replied in this section.  B)

And now I was just reading some interesting post here, and it disappeared sooner, than I was able to finish the read... who is the admin?!! (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/angry.gif) Is this a CoIntelPro page??

That was me, I am an administrator here. I was attempting to answer FfG's direct question to me, but immediately after I posted it I thought twice, I thought that you, tumetuestumefaisdubien, might interpret my post as a direct criticism of your poll. I didn't want to offend you or criticise you, as a new member, and I welcome the new information you brought to us here. That's why I deleted my own post immediately after I posted it - I didn't want to post something critical of you.

The post is gone, but the jist of it is this:

Polls attempt to define the fence, and who is on which side of it. One of the barriers to constructive discussion about NPT-related topics here, is that people are enchouraged to identify with one side or the other, and identify anyone who discusses the topic as being an advocate of one side or the other. This whole idea of polling is an extension of our US "Democracy", which is simply mob-rule in a pretty package. The founders abhored the idea. Democracy and polls have their place, but they tend to DIVIDE. What we should be interested in, is evidence, not who is on which side or what percentage.

That was the jist of my post - While I wanted to adress FfG's question and explain myself, I decided it would might be percieved as a criticism of your poll, and so I deleted it.

[Factfinder Gener...]

The "fence" is imaginary, or should I say, we create it.  People sense the unconstructiveness of defining the rift, defining where the fence is and who is on or off of it and on what side.

I'm not disagreeing with you Sanders, merely running along with your notion. I get your points and they are well taken. As always your keen insight has proved enlightening and led me to further thoughts, so bear with me while I struggle to bring these thoughts to coherent form.

Here's how I see it: People were led to form a false opinion regarding 9/11 and have been made to feel comfortable with it, up until the reasonable and coherent presentation of certain evidences put them on the pesky fence-top of uncertainty.

A poll can be a useful tool, not to persuade as you so correctly point out, but to assess the progress of an idea, how far an understanding has developed. And yes, I make no apologies for being motivated by wanting to reach understandings here.

But if this was a poll about something less controversial we would probably see more voting going on. I think fear of the unknown is an important factor behind people's reluctance to come off the fence-top of uncertainty that this undeniable and very crucial set of evidences regarding the Boeing 767 flight Impossibility has put people on.

It's possible that maybe people deep down are wondering what people will think of them if they cast a vote for what is essentially the ridiculous notion of NPT? Or even on a deeper level, what will they then think of themselves.

The programming is deep, as Carl hints in his post. People have been persuaded to believe that NPT is unthinkable and I believe that this has something to do with why people can't even think about voting here. In that sense the timing of the poll was possibly premature, though it has led to some interesting discussion and served a valuable purpose in that regard.

In a way the fence can be seen as the barrier that the perps put up to keep people from the truth and thus from understanding, which is of course a position of power. In that case maybe the evidence of the radar returns can be seen as having lifted a number of people up on to the fence and now they are poised upon it in uncertainty. Personally, I'm hoping that more and more people will have what I see as the good sense to jump down onto the side of what I see as the side of truth and understanding, so we can be united in the strength of that position, but as you say, this will take the diligent presentation of empirical evidence and logical discussion about such.

However, as Tume so succinctly said:

"The first thing needed to make any progress with a 911 Truth is to find the 911 Truth".

The much touted notions "911 was an inside job" and "it was controlled demolition" are both so general as to be meaningless, IMO, and thus lacking in power. I believe we need to be more precise in the presentation of our understanding of what happened in order to be convincing.

I feel we are getting there though, slowly but surely, and the intelligent way this thread is moderated is a big part of that and thus, in closing, I want to thank you for taking the time to furnish me with such an eloquent and thoughtful response, Sanders. (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/cheers.gif)

[Factfinder Gener...]

If they used a missle they would have to also employ the hologram, it seems to me.

And if an aluminum Boeing should not penetrate the tower, why in the hell should an aluminum missle, which weighs a small fraction the amount of the airplane?

Penetrator Missiles are designed to penetrate hard targets of steel and concrete, amazed!

Hologram technology is not feasible as a technique to explain the multiple Boeing sightings, relying as it does on strictly limited viewpoints. The use of false witnesses, either paid for or otherwise coerced, is much more feasible, IMO. It is a technique that is tried tested and proven effective in countless frauds.

[Sanders]

But if this was a poll about something less controversial we would probably see more voting going on.

Of course.

It's not a big deal, I was just trying to explain myself - (I was so convinced by my own post that I deleted it (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/doh1.gif) .) You (FfG) understand what I was getting at I assume.

Anyway, carry on (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/salute.gif)

[grizz]

I haven't read the comments above. I think it was a military B767. Could have been something else, cloaked by hologram, I suppose. The idea that nothing but pixels hit the towers is something I cannot entertain.

See you later. Off to fry bigger fish. I'm looking into the inside job inside all of us.

[Factfinder Gener...]

I haven't read the comments above.  I think it was a military B767.  Could have been something else, cloaked by hologram, I suppose.  The idea that nothing but pixels hit the towers is something I cannot entertain.

On your last point: suffice it to say that a missile is not pixels, Oceans Flow. As for your notion that it was a military Boeing 767 that was used: are you talking about a tanker or surveillance version of the plane somehow upgraded to supersonic capability? (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif) (I will put aside the impossibility of such a plane penetrating the hard target of a steel framed building for the moment.)

See you later.  Off to fry bigger fish.  I'm looking into the inside job inside all of us.

"The inside job inside all of us." Hmmmm. What a very cryptic comment. Would you care to expound before you go off and fry this particular big fish? (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

This post has been edited by Factfinder General: Nov 11 2007, 07:57 PM

[tumetuestumefais...]

And anyway: The "Poll" about the importance of my original question is the FFG's thread - which is now realy pretty leading the most readed and replied in this section.  B)

And now I was just reading some interesting post here, and it disappeared sooner, than I was able to finish the read... who is the admin?!! (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/angry.gif) Is this a CoIntelPro page??

That was me, I am an administrator here. I was attempting to answer FfG's direct question to me, but immediately after I posted it I thought twice, I thought that you, tumetuestumefaisdubien, might interpret my post as a direct criticism of your poll. I didn't want to offend you or criticise you, as a new member, and I welcome the new information you brought to us here. That's why I deleted my own post immediately after I posted it - I didn't want to post something critical of you.

The post is gone, but the jist of it is this:

Polls attempt to define the fence, and who is on which side of it. One of the barriers to constructive discussion about NPT-related topics here, is that people are enchouraged to identify with one side or the other, and identify anyone who discusses the topic as being an advocate of one side or the other. This whole idea of polling is an extension of our US "Democracy", which is simply mob-rule in a pretty package. The founders abhored the idea. Democracy and polls have their place, but they tend to DIVIDE. What we should be interested in, is evidence, not who is on which side or what percentage.

That was the jist of my post - While I wanted to adress FfG's question and explain myself, I decided it would might be percieved as a criticism of your poll, and so I deleted it.

But that post was very interesting. I don't take it as an offence when somebody criticises me. (I then realized, that the poll was maybe not a good idea even the forum offers it as a choice, and it was from my side meant more like a joke to atract people to FFG thread, than realy seriously.) I just readed your post, it was long, and then I was in meantime answering some new posts and when I came back and I just realized it disapeared, so I got a bit more angry than usualy, dont take it personaly, I feeled a bit Orwellian after all that closing of the thread and opening the discussion here... (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Anyway, I don't think that the question of "NPT" should "divide" the people. On contrary I find the very concept that there is a "NPT" a ComIntelPro bogus, because most of the so called "no-planers" actually dont challenge the "planes" or something flying as not being there, they just say, it probably could'nt be a "UA175" B767-200 regular airliner. Such hypothesis anyway is not unpopular though, because UA175 was always challenged in some way by the mainstream in the 911 movement and especially by many witness reports recorded even in live TV coverage.
One should not stick the head in the sand.

One utter off topic to ilustrate the 9/11 account confusion I just have found on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVDCzymSTw8 a truck of explosives on King st. ? RC controlled plane alert before 2nd tower hit? mossad agents to "document" the events? ...the 9/11 is realy not a simple question... (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/nonono.gif)

This post has been edited by tumetuestumefaisdubien: Nov 12 2007, 05:57 AM