IPB




POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

16 Pages V  « < 4 5 6 7 8 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Debunkers Respond To Dennis Cimino, A Few Comments Copy & Pasted

amazed!
post Mar 24 2012, 10:12 AM
Post #101





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 3,929
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



I wonder how hard it would be to compile a short collection of videos taken by other, ordinary, common folk (as opposed to the various 'official' videos) showing the approach and impact of the second strike?

I remember seeing them years ago, and testimony from people who actually saw it happen, but did not archive them, or whatever the proper term is.

That is the material that can put the 'no plane at WTC' controversy to rest IMO.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Mar 24 2012, 11:50 AM
Post #102



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



QUOTE (amazed! @ Mar 24 2012, 03:12 PM) *
I wonder how hard it would be to compile a short collection of videos taken by other, ordinary, common folk (as opposed to the various 'official' videos) showing the approach and impact of the second strike?

I remember seeing them years ago, and testimony from people who actually saw it happen, but did not archive them, or whatever the proper term is.

That is the material that can put the 'no plane at WTC' controversy to rest IMO.


The video that Jim Fetzer links to, allegedly taken by Mike Hezarkhani is apparently corroborated by an image which appears to be taken from the same vantage point. It was allegedly taken by Carmen Taylor.

http://beyondpoliticsand911.com/photogalle...-Taylor-pic.jpg

She was interviewed by Jeff Hill (copy and paste to browser - eliminate gap)

Http://www.pump itout.com/audio/ct_101407.mp3

Put your bullshit detector on and I defy anybody here to tell me that she isn't genuine.

There are many more images and videos. Here's a few just from a quick google

Scott myers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2hY0QleiHY

Luis Alonso

http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/5145/fantadevscr4.gif

Ronald Pordy

http://img212.imageshack.us/img212/1646/citylights1ev2.gif


Robert Fisch

http://old.911digitalarchive.org/images/details/515


Luke Cremin

http://old.911digitalarchive.org/images/details/1200

Rob Howard

http://beta.images.theglobeandmail.com/arc..._354027gm-o.jpg

Question. Would the perps leave 100% knowledge and proof of the scale some are suggesting in the hands of so many? Proof that could see gallows being put up all over the US in the morning? I know it's a dramatic image but I'm just giving some a reality check here.

As for tower 1, I suggested to Jim Fetzer that we know that the alleged 757/767s weren't used on 9/11. I also suggested that the aircraft used in Manhattan may have been modified to enable penetration using the same technology used in the missile to bring down TWA800 (for example)

The best resolution and close-up of the Naudet brothers film is to be found on Simon Shack's video

01:10 and 02:04 specifically. Watch repeatedly. It's clear as day to me that there is an explosion just before impact. He doesn't focus on this at all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjQmxS-DpyM

Maybe this burying of a more obvious anomaly was the source of NPT?

No, I can't explain the physics of the impacts but there was some form of aircraft used.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Mar 24 2012, 12:37 PM
Post #103





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 913
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 22 2012, 07:24 AM) *
Yes, we do. It has been on the top of our home page since 2006.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org

Pay particular attention to the underlined sentence.



Naturally I didn't speak on behalf of P4T, but only from a personal viewpoint.
This thread is in the 'Alternative theories' section, where I presumed one was
permitted to speak ones mind without fear or favour!!

Dom DiMaggio do not believe a plane crashed in Shanksville. I agree.
CIT and P4T do not believe a plane crashed into the pentagon. I agree.
Some people believe no planes crashed into the WTC towers. I agree.
Some people believe the 3 towers were brought down by CD. I agree.
Etc. etc..

I know little about J. Fetzer; only what I can gather through his posts in this
forum.
Not for a second do I believe he in this forum has been attacked by a 'pack of
…. wolves', so naturally I couldn't have been referring to this gentleman.

I was in fact referring to people like Craig Ranke, Aldo Marquis, Bob Balsamo,
Dennis Cimino, John Lear, Barry Twicker, Kevin Ryan and many others who
over the years have been viciously haunted by the infamous howling-chorus.

When I advised Aldo not to sink to "their" levels, that should naturally be taken
in the positive.I know all too well that these opponents, living mostly in a world
of Darkness, are far too skilled in the game of derision and nastiness, than those
for Truth and Justice could ever 'hope' to be!

I have supported CIT and P4T in the thick and the thin the last 5 – 6 years, and
will of course continue to do so, no matter if Aldo choose to believe planes crashed
into the towers. I respect his views in this regard even though I cannot share them
with him personally at this point.

Cheers

This post has been edited by Tamborine man: Mar 24 2012, 12:39 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elreb
post Mar 24 2012, 02:00 PM
Post #104





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,589
Joined: 31-December 07
From: Maui
Member No.: 2,617



QUOTE (Tamborine man @ Mar 24 2012, 06:37 AM) *
Some people believe no planes crashed into the WTC towers.

This reminds me of “Nitroglycerine”…shock and sensitive make it dangerous…

It would be interesting to have a “Poll” of members.

Just guessing out loud, I would “not” think that anyone believes that AA11, AA77, United 93 and United 175 hit anything.

From there you could elaborate to the question of special aircraft hitting the towers, and special flying objects hitting the Pentagon and Shanksville.

This whole idea of 19 Saudi Arabians [15] pulling this off…is great material for the Brothers Grimm.

In this fairy Tale, we actually roll out the Red carpet and wait for Dorothy to click her Silver slippers…”There’s no place like Home” [Homeland Security…I mean]
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Mar 24 2012, 04:28 PM
Post #105



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



QUOTE
From there you could elaborate to the question of special aircraft hitting the towers, and special flying objects hitting the Pentagon and Shanksville.


No "special flying object" struck the Pentagon.

There's no evidence whatsoever of another craft or missile striking the Pentagon bar misconstrued witness quotemines from the media. Anything as long as something "struck" the building, eh? Something that can easily be debunked. A "grey area" that tptb can manipulate.

Crazy.

On the one hand we have the "chosen ones" at 911Blogger and TruthAction berating and blatantly lying about the NOC evidence and the work done here by Rob. Branding Pentagon research "toxic" and "detrimental" to the research done in Manhattan (irrelevant utter bollox).

On the other, we have people in the NPT camp trying to drag the same research and evidence into their "fight". That's not a nice sandwich. And it's particularly disrespectful to the same people who've been taking this flack incessantly for six years only to have another boulder strung around their necks.
Especially when they want to clearly distance themselves from it.

Same goes for the "laymen" amongst us who go out into the "ethernet" to defend and spread their work (amazed! - hopefully you'll dazzle us all one day with your aeronautical knowledge).

I agree with Woody that this has all the hallmarks of a "bad cop, good cop" routine.

For the government nodding dogs skulking around this thread. This is what a real forum with real people looks like. Take your rara skirts off and join the party. Bob.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elreb
post Mar 24 2012, 05:57 PM
Post #106





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,589
Joined: 31-December 07
From: Maui
Member No.: 2,617



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Mar 24 2012, 10:28 AM) *
No "special flying object" struck the Pentagon.

You apparently missed my point!

I said: “It would be interesting to have a “Poll” of members”.

It does not matter what I think. I live in a glass tent!

…shock and sensitive make it dangerous…
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DoYouEverWonder
post Mar 24 2012, 06:04 PM
Post #107





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 770
Joined: 1-February 09
Member No.: 4,096



QUOTE (elreb @ Mar 24 2012, 01:00 PM) *
Just guessing out loud, I would “not” think that anyone believes that AA11, AA77, United 93 and United 175 hit anything.


That is the real issue. Because if those specific planes did not hit the targets, the entire Official Myth is a stinking pile of bullshit.

What did or did not hit the targets is a separate issue, that without a real investigation is impossible to prove and all anyone can do is speculate. Of course, the gov has billions to spend poisoning the well and they've done a masterful job of it.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Mar 24 2012, 06:54 PM
Post #108



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



QUOTE (DoYouEverWonder @ Mar 24 2012, 11:04 PM) *
That is the real issue. Because if those specific planes did not hit the targets, the entire Official Myth is a stinking pile of bullshit.

What did or did not hit the targets is a separate issue, that without a real investigation is impossible to prove and all anyone can do is speculate. Of course, the gov has billions to spend poisoning the well and they've done a masterful job of it.


Spot on DYEW.

Just as SanderO (not having a go at him) was adding his "subplot" as to how WTC7 fell, he was missing the point that NIST claimed that "office fires" and "office fires" alone were the culprit. Anything else is irrelevant.

Just as CIT uncovered the NOC witnesses, any other claims regarding "missiles", "NOC impact" and "A3 Skywarrior" claims are irrelevant. Speculation can be good but if there's no evidence, what's the point?
Let tptb explain.

Just as Pilots found the major discrepancies in the alleged FDR for "Flight 77", Warren Stutt and his "data" are irrelevant. The NTSB hasn't changed its stance one iota. Let them explain.

Just as Rob found that "Flight 175" was supposed to have flown way over its limitations and that ACARS messages deciphered for the FBI are unambiguous in that it (and "Flight 93") were nowhere near the alleged crash sites, (again) Stutt's and GL's opinions are meaningless. Let them explain.

Thing is, imagine newcomers to this information are actually posed the dilemma that "oh, by the way, that was a hologram you saw hitting the towers" and/or "there were actually 2 planes/1 plane plus missile involved in the Pentagon op".

Unfounded speculation is as helpful as a chocolate fireguard. It's healthy between truthseekers but trying to tie it all up in one neat bundle as fact is another matter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Mar 24 2012, 11:35 PM
Post #109





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 913
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Mar 22 2012, 09:54 PM) *
Spot on DYEW.

Just as SanderO (not having a go at him) was adding his "subplot" as to how WTC7 fell, he was missing the point that NIST claimed that "office fires" and "office fires" alone were the culprit. Anything else is irrelevant.

Just as CIT uncovered the NOC witnesses, any other claims regarding "missiles", "NOC impact" and "A3 Skywarrior" claims are irrelevant. Speculation can be good but if there's no evidence, what's the point?
Let tptb explain.

Just as Pilots found the major discrepancies in the alleged FDR for "Flight 77", Warren Stutt and his "data" are irrelevant. The NTSB hasn't changed its stance one iota. Let them explain.

Just as Rob found that "Flight 175" was supposed to have flown way over its limitations and that ACARS messages deciphered for the FBI are unambiguous in that it (and "Flight 93") were nowhere near the alleged crash sites, (again) Stutt's and GL's opinions are meaningless. Let them explain.

Thing is, imagine newcomers to this information are actually posed the dilemma that "oh, by the way, that was a hologram you saw hitting the towers" and/or "there were actually 2 planes/1 plane plus missile involved in the Pentagon op".

Unfounded speculation is as helpful as a chocolate fireguard. It's healthy between truthseekers but trying to tie it all up in one neat bundle as fact is another matter.



I too agree with DYEW, and as i said earlier, it deserves it own scrutiny and investigation.
It's definitely a dicey subject, and it seems like people are too afraid to think the problem
through to its conclusion and therefore treat it as a far too hot potato. I got no such fear.

On another forum, i joined a discussion about 'infinity'. The OP and others maintained infinity
to be only a concept used to describe f.ex. the rationals between zero and 1.
I argued that infinity, together with its inseparable companion eternity, should never be used
in connection with math and numbers, as these two terms describe absolute reality, and hence
could never be confined within two limits. I argued that as Cosmos is it, so are these two realities
completely without a beginning and without an end. They have always existed, and will always
exist, endlessly and boundlessly.
Would have liked to say more, but after that, the thread came to a complete stop. It 'died' there
and then. Not a word more after 18 pages!

"Arr well, such is life", said Ned Kelly, when they put the robe around his neck .......

Cheers



".......
Truly, I ask of you: what do you fear? Fear you the evil words?
Fear you to be hurt by stones which are cast upon you? Do you
not know that a child's arm reacheth but short? Guide the child
and rebuke it, for a child's hurling of stones and evil words
should not hinder that you speak for truth and justice.
......."


This post has been edited by Tamborine man: Mar 25 2012, 12:16 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Mar 24 2012, 11:52 PM
Post #110



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



I'm not afraid to discuss it.

I've directly addressed the subject a few posts ago and nobody has answered it.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10804272

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Mar 25 2012, 04:30 AM
Post #111





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 913
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Mar 23 2012, 02:52 AM) *
I'm not afraid to discuss it.

I've directly addressed the subject a few posts ago and nobody has answered it.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10804272



I never doubted you for a moment, OSS!

So, no planes enter the towers (is my understanding), and yet we see planes enter!!

I personally think that we all have been made 'victims' to the greatest hoax and the
greatest "illusion" this world has ever seen - since perhaps the so-called 'moon landing'.

'Something' strange happened atop the Woolworth building, that I personally think warrants
yet more investigation:

http://www.orbwar.com/woolworth/

(I'm not into the ufo and orb bit, so please ignore that part!)

And I think also that one maybe should again familiarize oneself with what actually lies
behind 'the Indian rope trick', as this gentleman gives quite a good explanation about:



Fast forward to 9:00 and end it at 15:00. The rest is not important!

Cheers



This post has been edited by Tamborine man: Mar 25 2012, 04:42 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Mar 25 2012, 10:12 AM
Post #112



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



I think the 9/11 cartel are given too much credit.

They've been running the show/shadow government for decades. Their methods have always been the same.

Waco - mass murder, MSM complicity, denial, denial, more MSM complicity, denial, a corrupt forensics lab, corrupt senate, corrupt FBI/ATF, denial, denial, more MSM complicity and blackening the name of any witness who counters the official story and blanket censorship. Destruction and removal of the "crime scene". And denial.

TWA800 - as above but with the gall to ignore all witnesses (on the ground and in the air), their own radar data and whistleblowers. Again topped off with denial and MSM complicity.

Oklahoma - as above, with the added denial of physical evidence and the actual murder of witnesses. Denial from the MSM of early reports of secondary devices. Withholding of video evidence. Destruction and removal of the "crime scene". Denial and MSM complicity.

9/11 - as above, only this event was to be stage managed by MSM (at the top) from the beginning. The official story, disinfo and soundbites to suckerpunch an already gullible and pathetic public. Then denial, denial, denial. Withheld video evidence. Second hand denial of all witnesses to explosions in Manhattan and the flightpaths in Arlington and Shankesville. Destruction and removal of "crime scenes".

There was no great "masterplan". The military ops and subsequent control of information, yes, but that's it. They've enabled this event and OCT script to have multiple layers that can morph but basically, they've been making shit up as and when necessary.

Couple the above with them realizing that they can get away with anything if they have the media and a dumbed down population. Job done. No need for Jedi mind tricks.

TM, what do you make of the post I made with all of those named photographers? Particularly Carmen Taylor? And the explosion preimpact on Tower 1?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Mar 25 2012, 11:40 AM
Post #113





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 3,929
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



OSS

Thanks so much for those pictures. Years ago I had seen some of them, but thought maybe I was losing my mind. The 'pumpshitout' link did not work, but the others did.

My interpretation is that the exoskeleton of the towers would have allowed what we see--the airplane 'melting' into the structure. With I think 2 foot wide windows, with about 40 inch spacing, that was a type of steel seive on a large scale.

When one has all the assets the perps did, and the story line is that airliners hit the towers, then why the hell NOT use real airplanes?

Anyway, thanks again for refreshing my memory.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Mar 25 2012, 11:58 AM
Post #114



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



CODE
Http://www.pumpshitout.com/audio/ct_101407.mp3


You have to eliminate the "sh". biggrin.gif

It's worth the listen. She's allegedly a hospital auditor and her story in no way sounds scripted to me.

I couldn't even attempt to explain the penetration but there were definitely aircraft involved.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Mar 25 2012, 02:57 PM
Post #115





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 3,929
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



I could not get an interview with her OSS. What I got was a video played to banjo music about her and some guy who took pictures from a tourist boat at Battery Park. The piece suggested she and the man were plants.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Mar 25 2012, 04:08 PM
Post #116



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



QUOTE (amazed! @ Mar 25 2012, 07:57 PM) *
I could not get an interview with her OSS. What I got was a video played to banjo music about her and some guy who took pictures from a tourist boat at Battery Park. The piece suggested she and the man were plants.


I can hear it okay (it's a recorded phonecall).

I will say though that I once tried to listen to another interview of his and I kept getting a "banjo" with some techno music crap. He must be watching this thread and messing with it? dunno.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Mar 25 2012, 11:39 PM
Post #117





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 913
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Mar 23 2012, 01:12 PM) *
I think the 9/11 cartel are given too much credit.

They've been running the show/shadow government for decades. Their methods have always been the same.


Yes far too much! I don't give them anything at all.
As have now been proven far far beyond even the tiniest shadow of doubt - that we all survive 'death' -
these people have nothing to look forward to, except some extremely uncomfortable questions they will
have to answer with utmost truthfulness and sincerity, when they return home to their respective spheres
in the transcendental world. I feel truly sorry for the poor buggers!

QUOTE
Waco - mass murder, MSM complicity, denial, denial, more MSM complicity, denial, a corrupt forensics lab, corrupt senate, corrupt FBI/ATF, denial, denial, more MSM complicity and blackening the name of any witness who counters the official story and blanket censorship. Destruction and removal of the "crime scene". And denial.

TWA800 - as above but with the gall to ignore all witnesses (on the ground and in the air), their own radar data and whistleblowers. Again topped off with denial and MSM complicity.

Oklahoma - as above, with the added denial of physical evidence and the actual murder of witnesses. Denial from the MSM of early reports of secondary devices. Withholding of video evidence. Destruction and removal of the "crime scene". Denial and MSM complicity.

9/11 - as above, only this event was to be stage managed by MSM (at the top) from the beginning. The official story, disinfo and soundbites to suckerpunch an already gullible and pathetic public. Then denial, denial, denial. Withheld video evidence. Second hand denial of all witnesses to explosions in Manhattan and the flightpaths in Arlington and Shankesville. Destruction and removal of "crime scenes".

There was no great "masterplan". The military ops and subsequent control of information, yes, but that's it. They've enabled this event and OCT script to have multiple layers that can morph but basically, they've been making shit up as and when necessary.

Couple the above with them realizing that they can get away with anything if they have the media and a dumbed down population. Job done. No need for Jedi mind tricks.


Yes, horrific stuff. As said above, the - for them - terrible fact is that they will never get away with anything.
True Justice will one day overtake them. There's no escape. They will not be able to progress further until
they have given back absolutely everything they unlawfully have taken, both of human lives and of all other
kinds of more physical valuables.

QUOTE
TM, what do you make of the post I made with all of those named photographers? Particularly Carmen Taylor? And the explosion preimpact on Tower 1?


Well i never trusted that Hezarkhani fellow for one minute. Very shady character i thought!
Carmen Taylor's long question and answer sessions with the pumpshitout crowd last year,
gave me nothing but 'nausea' .....actually. There are too many 'abnormalities' in her account,
imho!

Apart from the 'grand illusion', i think it's clear that CGI has been employed at strategic places
here and there. Whether it was used in connection with the pre-impact flash i do not know, but
the possibility is there, for whatever mischievous trick they could use to mislead and misdirect
us, i suppose! One can only speculate at this point, unfortunately ....

Cheers
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jfetzer
post Mar 26 2012, 01:29 PM
Post #118





Group: Troll
Posts: 129
Joined: 16-July 08
Member No.: 3,735



When Tamborine man has done such an excellent job of summarizing my position (in post #90), I don't understand why anyone here wants to deny the use of "video fakery" when what I mean by that phrase is any use of video footage to convey a false impression, which means that, since Pilots has confirmed that the plane shown in the footage was flying at an aerodynamically impossible speed, we already know that video fakery was involved. And since Pilots has also confirmed that Flight 175 was over Pittsburgh, how can anyone deny it?

Rob Balsamo, of all people, interprets my point about "the impossible speed" for a standard Boeing 767 as a denial that any aircraft could attain that speed at that altitude--and offers an F-14 "Tomcat" as a counter- example. But I was not making that point at all. And he insists that "video fakery" is inconsistent with the witnesses who report having seen a plane, which is not the case, either. The use of CGIs or of video compositing would be inconsistent with the witness reports, but not something that looked like a real plane but was not.

Since I have made these points many times, I am baffled by the persistent failure to acknowledge even that "video fakery" does not mean that all of those who reported seeing a plane were wrong. It does require that what they saw was something they took to be a real plane but was not a real plane, since no real plane could perform the feats of this plane (enter Rob Balsamo, showing that a "real plane" could fly as fast as the one shown in the videos), in particular, by entering the building effortlessly in violation of Newton's laws.

Woody and Aldo want to attack some other position and claim that it is mine. I have no idea what inspires them to do that, because it is dishonest and unprofessional on their part. They want to hold onto some old position that they loved to hate, but it is seriously misleading to attack me for positions that I may or may not hold--especially when not only have I laid out my position very clearly but Tamorine man has offered an excellent presentation of what I have in mind: none of the "official planes" crashed at any of those 4 sites.

Moreover, when onsliceshort (in post #102) observes, "As for tower 1, I suggested to Jim Fetzer that we know that the alleged 757/767s weren't used on 9/11. I also suggested that the aircraft used in Manhattan may have been modified to enable penetration using the same technology used in the missile to bring down TWA800 (for example)", he is already implicitly endorsing "video fakery", since those videos have been used to promote the myth that Boeing 767s hit the North Tower and the South. Does anyone deny that?

Perhaps no evidence more powerfully undermines the "official account" of 9/11 than what we know about those four flights and their crash sites. Given the complete absence of any deceleration when "Flight 175" enters the South Tower together with the witness reports, I am trying to figure out what happened (how it was done), which, so far as I can see, is only explainable by the use of something that looked like a plane but was not a plane, namely, the projection of the image of a plane, which could perform impossible feats:

(1) Flights 11 and 77 were not even scheduled to fly that day, according to BTS records, which I reproduce in my articleds;

(2) The planes corresponding to Flights 93 and 175 were not de-registered by the FAA until 28 September 2005, by FAA Registration records, which I also reproduce in my articles;

(3) So how can planes that were not in the air have crashed?; and,

(4) How can planes that crashed have still been in the air four years later?

(5) Pilots for 9/11 Truth has determined that Flight 93 was in the air but over Urana, IL, at the time it was supposed to be crashing in Shanksville, as you can verify at http://pilotsfor911truth.org.

(6) Pilots of 9/11 Truth has also determined that Flight 175 was in the air but over Pittsburgh, PA, at the time it was supposed to be effortlessly entering the South Tower, as you can also verify at Pilots' home page.

(7) The plane shown in the videos was traveling at an aerodynamically impossible speed for a standard 767 and therefore cannot have been a standard 767, which confirms the use of video fakery.

(8) The plane in the videos enters the South Tower in violation of Newton's laws: it should have crumpled, its wings and tail broken off, bodies, seats and luggage fallen to the ground.

(9) None of that happened, where an engine component found at Church & Murray was obviously planted and did not even come from a 767, as my articles have also explained.

(10) If we take the witness reports seriously, as I do, then they saw something that looked like a real plane but was performing feats that no real plane could perform.

From that evidence, I infer that what we are seeing in those videos appears to have been the projection of a sophisticated hologram. What else could it possibly be consistent with (1) through (10)? I am reminded of the adage, "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth." This appears to be a perfect illustration of what initially (before considering the evidence) has a very low probability, yet subsequently (after considering the evidence) has to have been what happened.

I am doing my best to bring together all of the evidence and apply the principle known as "inference to the best explanation", which I have explained many places. I not only taught logic, critical thinking and scientific reasoning but my Ph.D. is in the history and the philosophy of science. No real object can violate the laws of physics, of engineering and of aerodynamics, which includes real Boeing 767s. Here are studies that bring together the evidence about all 4 crash sites, where another focuses on Flight 77 and the third on Flight 93:

“9/11: Planes/No Planes and ‘Video Fakery’”
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/02/20/91...d-video-fakery/

“9/11: The official account of the Pentagon attach is a fantasy” (with Dennis Cimino)
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/03/13/91...k-is-a-fantasy/

“The 9/11 Passenger Paradox: What happened to Flight 93?” (with Dean Hartwell)
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/03/15/th...d-to-flight-93/

Flight 93, by the way, was not only over Pittsburgh at the time of its effortless entry into the South Tower, but, as John Lear has observed, has no strobe lights; as Ben Collet has observed, casts no shadows; and as the fourth of these videos displays, has a left wing that disappears and reappears in flight. I simply do not understand how anyone who takes the time to view these videos could not appreciate that we are dealing with something that admittedly looks like a real plane but cannot possibly be a real plane. Check them out:

9/11 Fake: Media Make Believe (bee-lie-live) - YouTube

► 7:57► 7:57
www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFqCU4VdFqo
Oct 6, 2010 - 8 min - Uploaded by FringeReality
Have you ever played physics games, like any Burnout games, Little Big Planet, Armadillo Run or whatever...? 1 ...

Totally fake! But you would still believe it! - YouTube

► 6:02► 6:02
www.youtube.com/watch?v=_i5v_vioaMU
Oct 5, 2010 - 6 min - Uploaded by FringeReality
Yes you would! 1. Planes are made of light materials like aluminum and fiberglass. Think of them as long beer ...

Theory of Ghostplane - YouTube

► 5:07► 5:07
www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNXmgF2yAEc
Jul 25, 2008 - 5 min - Uploaded by CollinAlexander
http://psy-opera.com "9/11 - The Great American Psy-Opera" is the Ultimate 9/11 Truth movie, and it has begun ...

PROOF "PLANE" WAS HOLOGRAM or CGI - YouTube

► 2:41► 2:41
www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVaC5SH_B6o
Jun 13, 2010 - 3 min - Uploaded by AMolvar
Watch carefully, especially the left wing. All I have done is slow down this video, zoom in, and freeze some ...

QUOTE (Tamborine man @ Mar 23 2012, 01:39 AM) *
Com'on people be real now, please!

If NPT simply means that none of the 'official' planes crashed at either locations, then I'm certainly also a NPT adherent and supporter.

Please try to use your imagination to the fullest. Regarding second tower, we see on all videos a plane slicing into the building effortlessly.

No resistance by the steel columns nor the steel spandrel plates or the concrete floors behind the plates is offered to any of the weaker parts of the airplane, such as the wingtips and the horizontal and vertical stabilizers. None whatsoever.

But if that's not enough, next we come to the truly bizarre and totally mad:

In the instant the plane has fully penetrated the facade it comes to an abrupt halt!!??

We know this, because the split second after the plane disappears into the building, a big fireball takes shape on the right side of the building 15 – 20 meters along from the impact facade. Not halfway, not ¾ way into the building, but within the first quarter, or third, of the way in!

A fireball also forms outside of the entry hole.

We also know (because of the impact hole and the alleged direction the plane flew), that apart from the port side wing, most of the plane would have missed the center core of the building, and hence should have continued more or less partly intact (because of the floors only) on its over 800 km/h speed through the open office spaces, impacting the side wall and the far end wall, a mere 64 meters away from the
entry opening – or ca. 26 meters away from the 'undamaged' nose of the plane!! But (ignoring everything about the so-called "nosecone") none of this happened!

No further impact (now from the inside of the tower) was visible either from the right side wall or from the North end wall in any of the videos or photos we have seen of the exterior of the building. No outward bulging whatsoever of the walls, is seen anywhere!

The plane apparently stopped, dead in its track, just inside the perimeter wall!

I truly hope that not one single member of PF9/11T will even dream of entertaining this idea that such insanity could have taken place

…….Please!!!!

Let us instead gladly give this preposterous lunacy to the 'loyalists', the shills, the 'paid agents' and their 'research assistants', together with the rest of the truly ignorant and hopelessly immature twerps amongst them.

The planes seen and witnessed in the skies that day is a completely different story that deserves its own close scrutiny and investigation, and which has already for a long period admirably been started by many good people.

NPT therefore - seen in the Right Light - is an absolute fact as far as I'm concerned, and should naturally be supported by all other just and wise people! wink.gif

Cheers


This post has been edited by jfetzer: Mar 26 2012, 01:31 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jfetzer
post Mar 26 2012, 01:51 PM
Post #119





Group: Troll
Posts: 129
Joined: 16-July 08
Member No.: 3,735



And, in anticipation of those who will claim there was some virtually imperceptible deceleration, let me observe that what I am talking about is not subtle: the velocity of (most of) the plane should have dropped to zero!

There are those who like to cite the Sandia experiment as showing that the plane might have blown into very tiny pieces. But nothing like that happens at the South Tower--and that plane did not penetrate the barrier!

The velocity of the Sandia plane drops to zero, just as the velocity of Flight 175 should have dropped to zero --and would have, were we dealing with a real plane! But we are dealing with the image of a real plane, which can perform feats no real plane can perform.

I would also like to remind everyone of "Joe's Law", which offers a consolidation of Newton's laws of motion as they apply to the effortless entry of Flight 175 into the South Tower as observed in these videos:

"Joe’s Law is a consolidation, into one law, of Isaac Newton’s three laws of motion, which are: 1. An object in motion remains in motion until acted upon by a force. 2. When a force is applied to an object, the object accelerates in the direction of the force until the force is removed. 3. Every action creates an opposite an equal reaction. I concocted Joe’s Law in order to destroy the BIG LIE and get to the truth. Thusly, Joe’s Law states: 'AIRPLANES DON’T MELD INTO STEEL AND CONCRETE BUILDINGS, THEY CRASH AGAINST THEM!'"

Joe also observes, "The Media’s defense will be: “We didn’t fake these videos, we merely bought them, believing them to be actual videos of the catastrophe as it occurred!” The question now is: When this fakery is exposed, will the little people still believe THE BIG LIE? For those of you searching for the truth, I am offering a reward of $5000 to anyone who can provide me with a video of an airliner that crashes into WTC2 without violating Joe’s Law. Proof of date of origination must be provided." Here's a chance to make $5000!

And for those who would like to see what I mean by "inference to the best explanation", see "Thinking about 'Conspiracy Theories': 9/11 and JFK", which I published in THE 9/11 CONSPIRACY (2007) and archived here. I regard Pilots as the most important research society investigating 9/11. There is no good reason that we should not be natural allies. I am marshaling the available evidence to fashion coherent arguments about what happened on 9/11, where Pilots have made some exceptionally important contributions toward that goal.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Mar 26 2012, 02:02 PM
Post #120



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,697
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (jfetzer @ Mar 26 2012, 01:29 PM) *
...since Pilots has confirmed that the plane shown in the footage was flying at an aerodynamically impossible speed, we already know that video fakery was involved..


Wrong.

Again Jim, Impossible speed does not validate Video Fakery nor NPT.

Re-read the answer I gave to your question number 2. I'll bold and underline it since it is clear you missed it the first 3 times (via email, on facebook, and on this forum).



When we say "Impossible speed", this does not mean the speeds are impossible for all aircraft. The speeds are impossible for a standard 767-200. The speeds reported are not impossible if the aircraft were modified. This is covered thoroughly in our presentation "9/11: World Trade Center Attack".



Read it three more times Jim. Hopefully it sinks in. Let me know if you need me to increase the font size if you are still having trouble reading the above statement.

In other words Jim. Aircraft are modified all the time for increased performance. Modifications which cannot be detected on a blurry youtube video, or even on close inspection without opening up cowlings, wing panels.. .etc. If we are to theorize, it is quite possible the 767-200 observed in the videos was modified (read: not standard)... especially considering the fact that the FBI refuses to provide positive identification of the aircraft via the numerous aircraft parts recovered in lower Manhattan. If I were you, I would explore this route first before thinking all those videos were faked... and all the witnesses lying or mistaken, including the many pilots who i know personally that watched the aircraft hit the WTC, from JFK and EWR with their own naked eyes.



QUOTE (jfetzer @ Mar 26 2012, 01:29 PM) *
Rob Balsamo, of all people, interprets my point about "the impossible speed" for a standard Boeing 767 as a denial that any aircraft could attain that speed at that altitude--



"So it is the position of Rob Balsamo, the head of Pilots for 9/11 Truth, that a real plane can not only travel faster than a standard Boeing 767 at 700-1,000' foot altitude...." - Jim Fetzer

"What witnesses reported seeing hit the South Tower CANNOT HAVE BEEN A REAL PLANE, BECAUSE IT WAS PERFORMING FEATS THAT NO REAL PLANE COULD PERFORM." - Jim Fetzer


Contradict yourself much?


All I did was show Jim Fetzer (through a quick search)... that yes... a "real plane" could perform those "feats" and speeds "faster than a Boeing 767 at 700- 1,000'" .... and then some. I also specifically stated that I do not believe an F-14 hit the South tower.


The rest of your post I didn't bother to read. Stop using our work to further your theories Jim.

Regards.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

16 Pages V  « < 4 5 6 7 8 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th October 2014 - 06:48 PM