Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
911 confusion
12-28-2007, 02:25 PM, (This post was last modified: 12-28-2007, 02:25 PM by nataraja.)
#1
911 confusion
hello

so we are going into 2008 and still no agreeable conclusions about 911.

planes ? no planes ? tv fakery with planes ? tv fakery without planes ?

i know im sick of discussing the details of 911 and its irrelevant, but i refuse to give up!

i spoke with a girl over IRC and she said that she was coming out of the wtc towers when the 2nd plane hit, she says that she saw the 2nd plane hit. but can i beleive her, or it, i dont even know if its realy a girl.

theres some crazy people out there...

more people have analyzed the videos of 911 and theres no doubt that there was tv fakery from what ive seen.

but does this mean that there was no planes ?

i realy am confused.

http://photo.livevideo.com/photo/AA9D499B5...ash-videos.aspx
Reply
12-28-2007, 03:16 PM,
#2
911 confusion
I understand what youre saying, its frustrating to have followed it for years and just becoming more and more in doubt about all the info there is. I think that what is needed, what i will look more into in 2008 is some more hard evidence about people involved or seemingly involved, and less about all technical details, plane/no plane etc...not that it isnt also necessary, but it puts you off many times to stumble upon all the weirdness. Also, i think its necessary to get our head above certain things and see that something can be disinfo on many more levels than just intelligence agencies deliberate ones, and that we need to let go of information that can just be stories made up by the media to make a story. Sounds obvious but theres so many examples of people who dont think of this, and then its used as an argument for it being an inside job, when it doesnt prove it at all. Also i hope theres gonna be less bitching around across networks and inbetween in 2008 so it doesnt distract so much
&Send Mike a message!!!&
Reply
12-28-2007, 03:31 PM,
#3
911 confusion
Planes or none?:confused:
If there were no airplanes, what would you propose made the holes people jumped to their deaths from?
Reply
12-28-2007, 03:38 PM, (This post was last modified: 12-28-2007, 03:39 PM by nataraja.)
#4
911 confusion
well regardless of the actual real life scenario the media footage has so many conflicting clips where planes are coming in at different angles causing different explosions, backgrounds go misisng, clips changing colour, time frames not syncing, its a disaster.

media footage aside, and first hit aside, second hit could of been a missile could of been explosions planted to look like a plane hit, or it could of been a bloody plane.

im not one for what i would consider crazy conspiracy theories, like lazer beams and aliens but when i see evidence of somthing its difficult for me to hold onto my opinions and the evidence clearly suggests that the media footage was full of shit.

after studying cnn fox and abc footage quiet extensivly its clear that they were not just covering the day as would be expected, but were involved in some sort of manipulation and fakery.

but i like what you said about moving forward and looking for people responsible rather than focusing on what occured that day.
Reply
12-28-2007, 03:45 PM, (This post was last modified: 12-28-2007, 03:47 PM by Vomitor.)
#5
911 confusion
But how exactly is it evidence? Id say that if only a handfull of people are able to manipulate images and video, then it would be somewhat evidence that only this or that group or person could have done it...but since theres loads of people today that can fake footage, then its not really evidence of anything specific, it just proves that news channels possibly let slip through some kind of manipulated footage. Could have been made by anyone, with or without intel knowledge. But i think that they do like us discussing these things instead of coming up with a more hard case.

Id hope we could make some kind of compilation of who were involved that we know of, how exactly they could have brought it about and then not think too seriously about the things that we know are bunk evidence such as surviving passports etc.
&Send Mike a message!!!&
Reply
12-28-2007, 03:57 PM,
#6
911 confusion
well people recorded the live tv footage on their vhs machines ?

ya sure anyone can fake footage.

well anyway.

i did find a site thats sole purpose was to list the people responsible for 911 including the owner of the buildings and the demo company that was hired.
Reply
12-28-2007, 04:16 PM, (This post was last modified: 12-28-2007, 04:19 PM by Vomitor.)
#7
911 confusion
Whats that page?

Yeah i know about some of it being live stuff, and it is suspicious for sure...but i think its just a lot of distraction. I could see myself using ages on figuring it out, and never getting anywhere with it...done that with so many things so now i thought its time to get into more of an overview. Even though it can lead to many wild goose chases too, at least it gives a better overview at teh same time. If we can gather more of a plausible logical scenario for how things could have been planned, covered up and controlled on 9-11, then its gonna be easier to present it to people who wont dismiss you as average conspiracy theorist
&Send Mike a message!!!&
Reply
12-28-2007, 04:28 PM,
#8
911 confusion
i agree completely, sorry i dont have that page anymore, i would just have to look for it by typing into google "who did 911" and i dont think that would get me anywhere:P

like this http://www.whodidit.org/cocon.html

i fully agree with what you are saying, the last thing we need to continue doing is arguing about the details.
Reply
12-28-2007, 04:39 PM,
#9
911 confusion
Owen May of the May Davis Group which was a business on the 87th floor of the North Tower said he saw the plane hit the South Tower. He watched it flying toward wtc2 with hope at first he said because he thought it might be carrying water or something to put out the fire in wtc1.

I have footage of him saying all that as well as other witnesses saying there were plane parts in the courtyard around the globe area. One says that he saw seats with charred bodies in them still smoldering.

The footage is from a one year on anniversary tribute called "A Tale Of Two Towers".

Unfortunately it's on video so I'll have troubled upping it. But I'm working on it.
debate is the vehicle of truth
Reply
12-28-2007, 04:58 PM,
#10
911 confusion
Approach it from different angles. Look for who benefits. Look at the official story, can you convince yourself that any part of it is true? Check out what the first responders said about what happened. There is a wealth of research that shows that the official story is nothing but a disheveled inept conspiracy theory. Knowing what did not happen is valuable information as well.
An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it.
Mohandas Gandhi


Each of us is put here in this time and this place to personally decide the future of humankind.
Did you think you were put here for something less?
Chief Arvol Looking Horse
Reply
12-28-2007, 05:22 PM,
#11
911 confusion
Just out of curiosity, are you aware that the World Trade Center was hit back in 1993 ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_C...r_1993_bombings
Marc "TheQleaner" Fisher
Unseen Head
The Illuminati Order

Novus Ordo Seclorum
Reply
12-28-2007, 06:26 PM,
#12
911 confusion
Quote:Just out of curiosity, are you aware that the World Trade Center was hit back in 1993 ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_C...r_1993_bombings

Dude, this is conspiracy central...:rolleyes:
Reply
12-29-2007, 04:40 AM,
#13
911 confusion
lol hahaha
Reply
12-29-2007, 05:08 AM,
#14
911 confusion
My take on it is... well I have a mate who himself said years ago before any "no plane" stuff that the planes seemed to melt into the towers. "They would hit the side and fall down to the street below" he said and it sounded laudable to me.

he wasn't saying there were no planes you see, he was simply pointing out what we can all see on the video, the plane seems to "melt into" the towers with no resistance whatsoever.

After watching Dave Von Kleist's "911: In Plane Site" I believe what that documentary says about there being a flash just before impact, like a missile was fired to create a hole in the tower for the plane to fly into the hole. This to me would make sense for the people who orchestrated 911, because they would not want one single shred of evidence remaining and if the plane didn't just "melt into" the towers, there was no way of anyone planning the attacks knowing what could fall down to the streets of New York below, what if the black box ended up there or something? So they made sure the plane melted into the tower.

This isn't some "no plane" or "hologram" theory... its just what I have seen on "In Plane Site" with the flash which seems like a missile and watching on the videos how the planes just vanish into the towers. They don't really "hit" the towers they just vanish into the steel and concrete which is just not possible.

Whats really odd is, the morning of 911 I remember distinctly the very first news I heard of the attacks was that the towers had been hit by a missile. Then of course it became plane then planes as the day unfolded but still, I wonder where that guy (just a dude from my work) got that story from about missiles?

Has anyone here ever heard that? You'd have to get the very first report from the very first main source I guess, I just think its a bit weird I mean come on, a missile is nothing like a plane and yet thats what I was told in the very beginning that day.
&Everybody thinks everybody else thinks on their level& - LeveL
Reply
12-29-2007, 05:17 AM,
#15
911 confusion
I was in Arlington on 911. The plane flew over where I was, I heard it. I was just up the hill in Arlington. One of my friends saw it. He was at work on Columbia Pike in Arlington. About 10 minutes after the plane hit, I was at the Pentagon. I spoke with a cab driver who was driving on Rt 27, where the plane hit... We were both standing on Rt 27 having this conversation. He said the plane flew in front of his cab and knocked down the street lights. The counter intelligence efforts out there are trying to discredit all us inside job people, don't buy it. Planes were used..., it was definitely an inside job... The hole where the plane hit seemed very small and there was no debris from the plane... I was there, on and off, most of the day... There are too many cameras in the area not to have recorded the actual plane hitting the Pentagon. It begs to question why they have not released the tapes made by the Hotel and the freeway cameras... Considering it's an inside job, it really does not matter, building number 7 destroys any belief that 911 was not an inside job... not to mention all the other data that counters any chance that 911 is not a Grand Chessboard strategy play by New World Order principality...
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)