Planes Or No Planes Is A Total Distraction.

[keystone]

Well it is isn't it?

[banoyes]

Well it is isn't it?
You lack understanding
the use of TV Fakery is critical, is key, to gaining an understanding
perhaps you'll wake up

[disorder2k8]

9/11 is a total distraction, its done exactly what they wanted by them not releasing all the evidence and messing up all the investigations.

It Divided us. And it was a total success.

9/11 happened.. who cares who did it?

Time to set sights on whats happening now and in the future.

[banoyes]

9/11 is a total distraction, its done exactly what they wanted by them not releasing all the evidence and messing up all the investigations.

It Divided us. And it was a total success.

9/11 happened.. who cares who did it?

Time to set sights on whats happening now and in the future.
What did it distract you from... some biskits?

[keystone]

You lack understanding
the use of TV Fakery is critical, is key, to gaining an understanding
perhaps you'll wake upDon't patronise me. I woke up eons ago for four reasons:

1. There was no way that a 757 hit the Pentagon that day.

2. Shanksville was a lie because of the dependence of the story on the "cell phone calls" nonsense.

3. WTC 7.

4. WTC 1 & 2 were demolished whether planes hit them or not.

It's the stupid facile arguments which are a distraction because to only serves to divide.

Part of me has an inkling that NPT is a deliberate obfuscation on behalf of TPTB to confuse and divide because in the eyes of the majority of the woirld it's so unbelieveable as to make the party line believeable. You are a prime example of "the pulling the rug out and muddying pools" brigade.

I know it was not done the way they say it was. That's the only fact that matters. This far down the track planes hitting WTC 1 & 2 is a complete irrelevance in the greater scheme of things.

[banoyes]

Don't patronise me. I woke up eons ago for four reasons:

1. There was no way that a 757 hit the Pentagon that day.

2. Shanksville was a lie because of the dependence of the story on the "cell phone calls" nonsense.

3. WTC 7.

4. WTC 1 & 2 were demolished whether planes hit them or not.

It's the stupid facile arguments which are a distraction because to only serves to divide.

Part of me has an inkling that NPT is a deliberate obfuscation on behalf of TPTB to confuse and divide because in the eyes of the majority of the woirld it's so unbelieveable as to make the party line believeable. You are a prime example of "the pulling the rug out and muddying pools" brigade.

I know it was not done the way they say it was. That's the only fact that matters. This far down the track planes hitting WTC 1 & 2 is a complete irrelevance in the greater scheme of things.


No planes is divisive because you say it is.
The obfuscation comes from protectors of the official or the semi offical story
You are ...at this point ,very suspect
A MAJOR TELL
Claiming what is NOT YOURS TO CLAIM

"because in the eyes of the majority of the woirld it's so unbelieveable"
You cannot speak for the majority of the world
You are the divisive force
You are the denier
You are the one making up stories

Just the way you started this thread
tells me enuff to know
you are not interested in the truth
but in protecting some myth.

You're awake huh
well
perhaps you are

[keystone]

No planes is divisive because you say it is.
The obfuscation comes from protectors of the official or the semi offical story
You are ...at this point ,very suspect
A MAJOR TELL
Claiming what is NOT YOURS TO CLAIM

[quote]You cannot speak for the majority of the worldI don't but you would have everyone believe your story is the only acceptable one.

You are the divisive forceNonsense. Actually my standpoint is to try and unite. All you are up to is dividing.

You are the denierOh yeah - of what? Please read this carefully I DO NOT CARE IF IT WAS A REAL PLANE OR NOT PLANE OR NOT. It doesn't matter.

You are the one making up storiesShow me please.

Just the way you started this thread tells me enuff to know
you are not interested in the truth but in protecting some mythOh what a load of old bollocks. Tell me please what myth I am protecting.

You're awake huh well perhaps you areAh the most accurate thing you've said all day.

[banoyes]

[QUOTE=banoyes;502249]
No planes is divisive because you say it is.
The obfuscation comes from protectors of the official or the semi offical story
You are ...at this point ,very suspect
A MAJOR TELL
Claiming what is NOT YOURS TO CLAIM

I don't but you would have everyone believe your story is the only acceptable one.

Nonsense. Actually my standpoint is to try and unite. All you are up to is dividing.

Oh yeah - of what? Please read this carefully I DO NOT CARE IF IT WAS A REAL PLANE OR NOT PLANE OR NOT. It doesn't matter.

Show me please.

Oh what a load of old bollocks. Tell me please what myth I am protecting.

Ah the most accurate thing you've said all day.


You are a proven commidity to me
Theres your made up story

the majority of the world
I won't remark on the obvious
"No planes are divisive"
followed by
"I DO NOT CARE IF IT WAS A REAL PLANE OR NOT PLANE OR NOT. It doesn't matter"
You clearly care
you just want the fact no planes were used to remain hidden
and still
You have posted absolutely no cititation

Just take it on your word ,huh
I mean
ole keystone wouldn't make up stuff,would he
PS
Quite the Masonic inspired name Keystone

[disorder2k8]

What did it distract you from... some biskits?

I have no idea what you're on about :p

[keystone]

You are a proven commidity to me

As you are to me - you can't read or you deliberately misread.

At no time have I said nor do I intend to say that NPT is divisive. EVER. What I say is that the never ending argument between the plane huggers and the NPT peeps is what is divisive.

Again it is the argument which is divsve irrespective of the relative merits of either case.

Is that clear or not?

If it isn't then you either have to be the most obtuse or stupid person I have ever talked to.

I have made nothing up. I don't intend to.

I have denied nothing. I don't intend to.

Bye

[keystone]

You are a proven commidity to me

As you are to me - you can't read or you deliberately misread.

At no time have I said nor do I intend to say that NPT is divisive. EVER. What I say is that the never ending argument between the plane huggers and the NPT peeps is what is divisive.

Again it is the argument which is divisive irrespective of the relative merits of either case.

Is that clear or not?

If it isn't then you either have to be the most obtuse or stupid person I have ever talked to.

I have made nothing up. I don't intend to.

I have denied nothing. I don't intend to.

Bye

[banoyes]

As you are to me - you can't read or you deliberately misread.

At no time have I said nor do I intend to say that NPT is divisive. EVER.
It's the stupid facile arguments which are a distraction because to only serves to divide.

behalf of TPTB to confuse and divide

What I say is that the never ending argument between the plane huggers and the NPT peeps is what is divisive.

Again it is the argument which is divisive irrespective of the relative merits of either case.

Is that clear or not?

If it isn't then you either have to be the most obtuse or stupid person I have ever talked to.

I have made nothing up. I don't intend to.
because in the eyes of the majority of the woirld it's so unbelieveable

I have denied nothing. I don't intend to.

Bye [/QUOTE]

You denied the very things you wrote
You made up stories
There is a name for people who do that
Yup

[keystone]

You denied the very things you wrote. You made up stories. There is a name for people who do that
YupMore nonsense. Go and play on the I95 there's a good boy.

[rhydra]

There was the comment "a good day to bury bad news" from the secretary of the transport minister, and I think it wasn't just a good day to bury it, it was a good era to bury it.

While everyone's looking at one big event the state apparatus is busy enslaving and restricting, what they do best. While people prevaricate and debate the net is relentlessly closing in.

We do need to be looking at what is happening, whether it was faked, genuine, allowed to happen, we will never know, it matters, yes, but what is happening today matters a lot more. There are things going on that we probably haven't yet imagined and I think in the near future something even more life changing than 9-11 will happen.

[keystone]

There was the comment "a good day to bury bad news" from the secretary of the transport minister, and I think it wasn't just a good day to bury it, it was a good era to bury it.

While everyone's looking at one big event the state apparatus is busy enslaving and restricting, what they do best. While people prevaricate and debate the net is relentlessly closing in.

We do need to be looking at what is happening, whether it was faked, genuine, allowed to happen, we will never know, it matters, yes, but what is happening today matters a lot more. There are things going on that we probably haven't yet imagined and I think in the near future something even more life changing than 9-11 will happen.

Thank you Rhydra!! Banoyes NOW do you understand?

[christophera]

Well it is isn't it?

Yes it is. I vote we petition the administration to test the NPT'ers. Either they come up with reasonable plan to officially utilize their evidence and theories or attain justice with it or forever ban the NPT discussion either way from the forum.

[christophera]

9/11 is a total distraction, its done exactly what they wanted by them not releasing all the evidence and messing up all the investigations.

It Divided us. And it was a total success.

9/11 happened.. who cares who did it?

Time to set sights on whats happening now and in the future.

I certainly understand the sentiment but disagree that it was a total success or that we are divided solely by NPT. It sure feels that way tho.

As soon as the NPT controversy stops, we will forget it and continue with our other futile methods, albeit, all show more promise than NPT.

who cares who did it?

True, at this point, we really need to focus on WHAT happened. That, ....... still is not a stationary target and after 7 years it should be.

DEW, nukes and NPT are ALL ABOUT defusing and confusing that discussion.

The bottom line is that the officials want it to be a collapse and we know it wasn't. How do we prove it or at least start meaningfully on that path?

[christophera]

You lack understanding
the use of TV Fakery is critical, is key, to gaining an understanding
perhaps you'll wake up

No one will ever understand why the perps chose a backwards impact fall sequence and my efforts to get any of the NPT'ers to provide a logical reason for such a sequence PROVES that NPT is NOT understandable and that the NPT'ers cannot reason the motives coherently.

[christophera]

We do need to be looking at what is happening

I say WHAT happened is what we need to focus on.

Most everybody know that the enslavement has started in a big and real way. However, stopping it or interveneing it is another story.

We are all using our various information with an intent to stop it, even the NPT'ers. But, which information will be accepted by the largest group of people WHO ARE NOT 9-11 activists is the most important thing to decide IF we wnat to stop it.

Whatever information we decide to use it must be wholly accpetable in discussion with people who are not 9-11 truthers. Only by this approach will we expand the movement to a degree where it can be politically effective.

[ronisron]

I agree with the author of the thread, it is divisive. It's all it seems to be.

[christophera]

I agree with the author of the thread, it is divisive. It's all it seems to be.

I do too. However, methinks it's going to take more than that to stop the compulsive nonsense and imposition of irrational, subjective beliefs.

[bryan]

We do need to be looking at what is happening, whether it was faked, genuine, allowed to happen, we will never know, it matters, yes, but what is happening today matters a lot more. There are things going on that we probably haven't yet imagined and I think in the near future something even more life changing than 9-11 will happen.

Finding out what happened in the past might just help us to imagine what's happening now.

[keystone]

The problem is that posters like Banoyes have become so focussed on proving that they are right and eveybody else is wrong in the minutiae of the technical analysis that they have totally lost sight of the FACT that nearly 3,000 people lost their lives on that day. Unless, of cousre, some bright spark is going to pop up and claim / prove that they are all well and living in isolation in one (or more) of the FEMA camps.

The devisive bickering about planes / no planes is utterly disrespectful to their memory and is quite shameful.

I don't care which it was. This far down the track it's irrelevant IMHO.

Rant over.

[mr_self_destruct]

The devisive bickering about planes / no planes is utterly disrespectful to their memory and is quite shameful.


Oops - you shouldn't have used that line ;)

[keystone]

Oops - you shouldn't have used that line ;)Why? Is it too close to the mark for comfort then?

[christophera]

The problem is that posters like Banoyes have become so focussed on proving that they are right


Great rant!

But, .......... they are not trying to prove they are right. Such and action requires evidence and reason. They provide none.

They are focussed on imposing their unreasonable beliefs on the world of 9-11 truth and cannot fathom that their activity would be disruptive. Indeed, they feel as though their disruption is justified by the weight of their evidence.

They are proving they are acting on what ............ is UNCONSCIOUS and impelling them.

[mr_self_destruct]

Why? Is it too close to the mark for comfort then?

The no-planers don't like it :)

[christophera]

Finding out what happened in the past might just help us to imagine what's happening now.

The problem is that posters like Banoyes have become so focussed on proving that they are right and eveybody else is wrong in the minutiae of the technical analysis that they have totally lost sight of the FACT that nearly 3,000 people lost their lives on that day. Unless, of cousre, some bright spark is going to pop up and claim / prove that they are all well and living in isolation in one (or more) of the FEMA camps.

The devisive bickering about planes / no planes is utterly disrespectful to their memory and is quite shameful.

I don't care which it was. This far down the track it's irrelevant IMHO.

Rant over.

What is curious is that a comment on bryan's message also addresses the secrecy which conceals the true past, or how that secrecy has been used in the present.

Unconscious is better than secret and can serve secret purposes better. So to be bickering after being manipulated and decieved with those secrets, now that is shameful. It means we cannot even use the words of a president assinated around the same time that the towers were concieved, who spoke of secrecy AND 3k dead to justify opening the dialog about our unconscious existence and how it may contain information from the past that details a cycle effecting our futures.

[jalexander]

Great rant!

But, .......... they are not trying to prove they are right. Such and action requires evidence and reason. They provide none.

They are focussed on imposing their unreasonable beliefs on the world of 9-11 truth and cannot fathom that their activity would be disruptive.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Subjective

Also, is not the entire 9/11 movement considered "disruptive" by the MSM?
Whats good for the goose is good for the gander eh? Sure is eye opening to see the same tactics used by those in power to control the masses being employed by those who are supposedly "awake" to attempt to control each other.

[christophera]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Subjective

Also, is not the entire 9/11 movement considered "disruptive" by the MSM?

Yes, but it is proven they are guilty of criminal neglect for not conducting in depth investigations of the evidence, so naturally they would consider their competition and those exposing them as "disruptive".

Whats good for the goose is good for the gander eh? Sure is eye opening to see the same tactics used by those in power to control the masses being employed by those who are supposedly "awake" to attempt to control each other.

Yes logic works both ways. Leaving out the neglect of media to the logical publicity of the issues does not equate to the logical researchers abandonment of rightful demands for reasonable explanations from other researchers who marginalize the research environment with unevidenced and illogical propositions compulsively imposed.

[mynameis]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Subjective

Also, is not the entire 9/11 movement considered "disruptive" by the MSM?
Whats good for the goose is good for the gander eh? Sure is eye opening to see the same tactics used by those in power to control the masses being employed by those who are supposedly "awake" to attempt to control each other.

NPT isn't disruptive many of its mockingbirds are agent provocateurs and spooks.

[graflok]

Discussing "no planes" isn't simply a distraction and here is the reason why:

If it is true that no planes struck the towers (real, remote-controlled or
otherwise) then it follows that the military must has a technology to
create 3D illusions real enough to fool local witnesses and any bystanders
that might have captured the event on a video camera. Faking only the
video would not have been enough.

If that is the case, it is an extremely important aspect of this and future
false flag events. It would mean that 9/11 was the first time (that I know
of, anyway) that such tech was used. It also means that we can expect
more of the same in the future.

It also means the PTBs would be rather interested in suppressing this
information such as by discouraging its discussion. The most logical
"reason" for discouraging its discussion being to claim that it "hurts the
9/11 truth movement" or "causes division."

The real distractions, in my view, are all the arguments about physics,
laws of motion, architecture, etc., etc. and the claims that discussing
this topic is "disrespectful of the people who died on 9/11." :)

[mynameis]

Discussing "no planes" isn't simply a distraction and here is the reason why:

If it is true that no planes struck the towers (real, remote-controlled or
otherwise) then it follows that the military must has a technology to
create 3D illusions real enough to fool local witnesses and any bystanders
that might have captured the event on a video camera. Faking only the
video would not have been enough.

If that is the case, it is an extremely important aspect of this and future
false flag events. It would mean that 9/11 was the first time (that I know
of, anyway) that such tech was used. It also means that we can expect
more of the same in the future.

It also means the PTBs would be rather interested in suppressing this
information such as by discouraging its discussion. The most logical
"reason" for discouraging its discussion being to claim that it "hurts the
9/11 truth movement" or "causes division."

The real distractions, in my view, are all the arguments about physics,
laws of motion, architecture, etc., etc. and the claims that discussing
this topic is "disrespectful of the people who died on 9/11." :)

And what is the screen this new unreal technology is supposedly displayed upon? What is its background name? And don't give me that fake project bluebeam horseshit that can't be proven. We are talking full 3-D holographic technology, that'd being inserted at speeds simulating 400+ mph in broad daylight on the backdrop of blue sky and air for 360 degrees and miles around. Where is this technology show me a link from a credible source please; that's the first step.

[christophera]

Discussing "no planes" isn't simply a distraction and here is the reason why:

If it is true that no planes struck the towers (real, remote-controlled or
otherwise) then it follows that the military must has a technology to
create 3D illusions real enough to fool local witnesses and any bystanders
that might have captured the event on a video camera. Faking only the
video would not have been enough.

Correct, and the bystanders stand by their accounts and the supposed technology is completely unknown or evidenced while the damage at the impact zone is well evidenced by photos from many angles.

[graflok]

Correct, and the bystanders stand by their accounts and the supposed technology is completely unknown or evidenced while the damage at the impact zone is well evidenced by photos from many angles.

Yes, that's the thing about military secrets. They're secret. :)

The damage you mention wasn't an illusion, however.

[christophera]

Yes, that's the thing about military secrets. They're secret. :)

The damage you mention wasn't an illusion, however.

NPTer's ought to get your story straight at least.

And, produce some evidence that the military can decieve witnesses with technology on the scale that existed in NYC at the WTC on 9-11.

We KNOW that credible, fake video can be created, but how do they create people that will invest in it without question against all evidence.

Oh gee, MKultra is a proven mind control project. How old are you graflok? Where did you grow up? Do you have any family in the military?

[graflok]

NPTer's ought to get your story straight at least.

We don't necessarily all view it the same way. It's not like it's a club. :)


And, produce some evidence that the military can decieve witnesses with technology on the scale that existed in NYC at the WTC on 9-11.

I've already posted some here (http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=27256&highlight=vanishing+planes).

[bryan]

Oops - you shouldn't have used that line ;)

Why? Because it shows how much you have in common with conspiracy debunkers?

[mr_self_destruct]

Why? Because it shows how much you have in common with conspiracy debunkers?

I don't know, ask a no-planer.

[bryan]

Also, is not the entire 9/11 movement considered "disruptive" by the MSM?
Whats good for the goose is good for the gander eh? Sure is eye opening to see the same tactics used by those in power to control the masses being employed by those who are supposedly "awake" to attempt to control each other.

Bush say: 'Anti-war movement hurt War on Terror'

Chomsky say: '9/11 Truth hurt anti-war movement'

Keystone say: 'TV fakery hurt 9/11 Truth'

Anybody see a pattern?

[mr_self_destruct]

Shouldn't it be "NPT'ists", by the way, and not "NPT'ers"? :confused:

We talk about conspiracy theorists, not conspiracy theoriers. Just my pedantic English teacher side coming out, please excuse me.

[christophera]

Bush say: 'Anti-war movement hurt War on Terror'

Chomsky say: '9/11 Truth hurt anti-war movement'

Keystone say: 'TV fakery hurt 9/11 Truth'

Anybody see a pattern?

The pattern is that Keystone and I have evidence and we bash un evidenced theories that alienate people from the quest for truth while bush and chomsky appear to not like any of it and those presenting theories without evidence and logic are not bashed by bush and chomsky

[mr_self_destruct]

Bush say: 'Anti-war movement hurt War on Terror'

Chomsky say: '9/11 Truth hurt anti-war movement'

Keystone say: 'TV fakery hurt 9/11 Truth'

Anybody see a pattern?

I see a pattern, and a problem - what's going to come next? :confused:

[christophera]

We don't necessarily all view it the same way. It's not like it's a club. :)

Yes it is a club and please keep your divisive, unsolved, illogical inconsistencies within your ranks until some logic explaining critical aspects is developed.

[graflok]

Yes it is a club and please keep your divisive, unsolved, illogical inconsistencies within your ranks until some logic explaining critical aspects is developed.

No, I will not keep my thoughts to myself. :)

[graflok]

The pattern is that Keystone and I have evidence and we bash un evidenced theories that alienate people from the quest for truth while bush and chomsky appear to not like any of it and those presenting theories without evidence and logic are not bashed by bush and chomsky

Post evidence that talking about "no planes" has alienated anyone from 9/11
truth. And, by evidence, I don't mean saying, "it's obvious" because it isn't.

[christophera]

Post evidence that talking about "no planes" has alienated anyone from 9/11
truth. And, by evidence, I don't mean saying, "it's obvious" because it isn't.

Those most alienated don't discuss/post anything about 9-11.

http://www.truthmove.org/content/disinformation/

http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=3140

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x221017

[christophera]

No, I will not keep my thoughts to myself. :)

Okay then make sure they are always accompanied by evidence and reason and that your evidence has corroboration.

[graflok]

Okay then make sure they are always accompanied by evidence and reason and that your evidence has corroboration.

I will post whatever I please. :)

[graflok]

Those most alienated don't discuss/post anything about 9-11.

Post some evidence for this assertion, please.

And, please explain that if these people don't post anything as you assert
then how do you know what their feelings are?


http://www.truthmove.org/content/disinformation/

http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=3140

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x221017

I see no evidence of your claim on these links. Just opinions of others similar
to yours. The Rodriguez thing does not state he has abandoned the 9/11
truth movement. Only that he disagrees with the idea of no planes
and stopped supporting one web site.

[mynameis]

I will post whatever I please. :)

Without a credible link or support to a credible link you can't be trusted as a source of information. Its like the basics of disinformation 101.

[christophera]

I will post whatever I please. :)

Okay, but you and the others posting unsupported nonsense will bear the guilt for WWIII and the complete unpreparedness for other disaster.

In which case there will be a time in your life where your support for NPT will be a shameful secret. If you reveal it you will be outcast and banished from any group you try to be a part of because their futures and loved ones were lost in a rightous effort by a few to use truth to protect lives that was derailed by confused, ill informed and irrelevant compulsive attempts to dominate discussion with unprovable, inconsequential nonsense.

[mynameis]

Okay, but you and the others posting unsupported nonsense will bear the guilt for WWIII and the complete unpreparedness for other disaster.

In which case there will be a time in your life where your support for NPT will be a shameful secret. If you reveal it you will be outcast and banished from any group you try to be a part of because their futures and loved ones were lost in a rightous effort by a few to use truth to protect lives that was derailed by confused, ill informed and irrelevant compulsive attempts to dominate discussion with unprovable, inconsequential nonsense.

Eek that was harsh....

[graflok]

Okay, but you and the others posting unsupported nonsense will bear the guilt for WWIII and the complete unpreparedness for other disaster.

In which case there will be a time in your life where your support for NPT will be a shameful secret. If you reveal it you will be outcast and banished from any group you try to be a part of because their futures and loved ones were lost in a rightous effort by a few to use truth to protect lives that was derailed by confused, ill informed and irrelevant compulsive attempts to dominate discussion with unprovable, inconsequential nonsense.

"... and the Oscar goes to ... " :D

http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/8485/29qgjv8fo2.gif

[christophera]

"... and the Oscar goes to ... " :D

http://i33.tinypic.com/29qgjv8.jpg

I'm serious. Our futures depend on us being able to unify around relevant information and take action. No planers are interefering with that and have already cost the movement its functionality.

[graflok]

I'm serious. Our futures depend on us being able to unify around relevant information and take action. No planers are interefering with that and have already cost the movement its functionality.

... and the supporting Oscar goes to ... :D

http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/8485/29qgjv8fo2.gif

[christophera]

... and the supporting Oscar goes to ... :D

http://i33.tinypic.com/29qgjv8.jpg

Okay, so you think that death and slavery are funny and so mock the notion that your support for the confusion that creates and propagates it will catch up to you.

[keystone]

Keystone say: 'TV fakery hurt 9/11 Truth'

Where Keystone say that huh? Keystone is perplexed. :)

[dave52]

I'm serious. Our futures depend on us being able to unify around relevant information and take action.

No Chris - you want us to unify around you. We can stick together as long as we do it on your terms, embracing your theories.

But life doesn't work like that, otherwise we'd all be unified behind the military industrial complex, cheering as we watched US, UK and Israeli hardware roll into the next God-foresaken town on the map.

All options on the table - that's the only way forward.

[christophera]

No Chris - you want us to unify around you. We can stick together as long as we do it on your terms, embracing your theories.

But life doesn't work like that, otherwise we'd all be unified behind the military industrial complex, cheering as we watched US, UK and Israeli hardware roll into the next God-foresaken town on the map.

All options on the table - that's the only way forward.

Not about wants, about needs. People NEED to unify around real information tat is useful. The military industrial complex is perfectly happy with just your simple uses of misinformation. It serves the purposes they want.

You imply that every tool is good for every job. Big error.

[ronisron]

OK, all I can gather from the NPT-ists is that these folks want everyone to understand the media is complicit, and used fakery on 9/11. Many already agree, myself included, because the BBC reported that WTC 7 fell, a full 23 minutes before it actually did. They were rehearsing the script because someone knew that the building was coming down. This is a provable, verifiable piece of video. It is more than enough to show there was media complicity. With every mention of "Osama" by the networks, the media is complicit. By saying there was a plane at the Pentagon when there wasn't -- even when CNN's first responder said this:

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

the media is complicit. I believe a very high percentage of us think that the WTC's were ultimately brought down by a controlled demolition. In one way or another, that 9/11 was planned and executed at the highest levels of gov't and military. No plane hit the Pentagon, there is simply no evidence of a crash there, or at Shanksville, where first reporters from different networks saw nothing but a gaping hole in the ground -- one that turned out to be there at LEAST since 1994 according to a USGS overhead view taken in 1994.

So we all can agree that the media was complicit, to one level at least. It's still not the crux of the whole 9/11 truth movement. That crux would be that 9/11 was an inside job orchestrated by members of the Bush administration, the military, CIA and Mossad. The media has always been a tool of propaganda, misinfo and mind control. Most understand this. No plane anywhere ultimately proves it was a massive inside job that was and continues to be aided by the media's propaganda. Saying the media orchestrated and carried out this plan, and is the only place to lay blame, is disinfo at best, and is obviously not helping.....

So perhaps we could agree to disagree about the extent of the media's role as far as No Planes at the WTC goes, and move on? This is getting nowhere otherwise.

[graflok]

Okay, so you think that death and slavery are funny and so mock the notion that your support for the confusion that creates and propagates it will catch up to you.

... and the best screenplay Oscar goes to ... :D

http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/8485/29qgjv8fo2.gif

[graflok]

Saying the media orchestrated and carried out this plan, and is the only place to lay blame, is disinfo at best, and is obviously not helping.....


Who said that? I sure didn't.

[christophera]

OK, all I can gather from the NPT-ists is that these folks want everyone to understand the media is complicit, and used fakery on 9/11. Many already agree, myself included, because the BBC reported that WTC 7 fell, a full 23 minutes before it actually did. They were rehearsing the script because someone knew that the building was coming down. This is a provable, verifiable piece of video. It is more than enough to show there was media complicity. With every mention of "Osama" by the networks, the media is complicit. By saying there was a plane at the Pentagon when there wasn't -- even when CNN's first responder said this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1NR-eTkdtA

the media is complicit. I believe a very high percentage of us think that the WTC's were ultimately brought down by a controlled demolition. In one way or another, that 9/11 was planned and executed at the highest levels of gov't and military. No plane hit the Pentagon, there is simply no evidence of a crash there, or at Shanksville, where first reporters from different networks saw nothing but a gaping hole in the ground -- one that turned out to be there at LEAST since 1994 according to a USGS overhead view taken in 1994.

So we all can agree that the media was complicit, to one level at least. It's still not the crux of the whole 9/11 truth movement. That crux would be that 9/11 was an inside job orchestrated by members of the Bush administration, the military, CIA and Mossad. The media has always been a tool of propaganda, misinfo and mind control. Most understand this. No plane anywhere ultimately proves it was a massive inside job that was and continues to be aided by the media's propaganda. Saying the media orchestrated and carried out this plan, and is the only place to lay blame, is disinfo at best, and is obviously not helping.....

So perhaps we could agree to disagree about the extent of the media's role as far as No Planes at the WTC goes, and move on? This is getting nowhere otherwise.

I agree with that technically but feel that the five thing is a built in red herring, and the fact that there was no plane there is intended to bleed over into the WTC investigation by citizens.

Such can be evidenced by the fact that when I first start posting aginst "no plans" I always have an NPTist (like that?) ask me "What about the pentagon".

The five thing has incredibly inconsistent witness reports, which completely make it a discussion disaster because there is also little evidence.

[ronisron]

Who said that? I sure didn't.


banoyes ascertains that the media are the real perps of 9/11. If you haven't said that, it doesn't apply to you. I guess that singular conclusion to NPT info relates to how how I view the whole NPT in a microcosm. If you feel it was an inside job by the CIA controlled gov't and military, and there is proven media complicity..... what else is there? Agree to disagree about NPT and move on.

[graflok]

If you feel it was an inside job by the CIA controlled gov't and military, and there is proven media complicity..... what else is there?

"CIA controlled gov't and military" is also not what I said and is not quite
what I think, but that's another topic.

I do agree with the idea there was and is media complicity. I don't feel the
media is the only culpable party, however.


Agree to disagree about NPT and move on.

So, you'll be moving on as well then?

As for me, I will move on when I'm ready to move on, thank you. :)

[christophera]

As for me, I will move on when I'm ready to move on, thank you. :)

That should be right after you cannot produce a reasonable explanation for the perps apparently sabotaging their own secret operation of mass murder by creating what is percieved as a backwards impact/fall sequence.


Or right after you realize that the planes don't matter, because this, was not caused by planes.

http://algoxy.com/psych/images/wtc1plumecascade.jpg

And you moved on because you realized that there is good evidence which needs to be discussed and the movement is seriously distracted with irrelevant and unprovable theories which must be pushed aside for theories of substance that are logical and proveable.

[ronisron]

"CIA controlled gov't and military" is also not what I said and is not quite
what I think, but that's another topic.

I do agree with the idea there was and is media complicity. I don't feel the
media is the only culpable party, however.



So, you'll be moving on as well then?

As for me, I will move on when I'm ready to move on, thank you. :)

I'm sorry, I guess I just ass-u-me-d it was understood that the CIA controlled the gov't of the US, and the highest levels of its military........the Bush family is CIA through and through.

Thank goodness you agree with both media complicity and them not being the only culprits.... I thought this was the end result of all this info, to prove this fact. It's just banoyes?? i guess I shouldn't be surprised....

I would move on, but it appears my input will be needed here a while longer.... *sigh* :D

[ronisron]

That should be right after you cannot produce a reasonable explanation for the perps apprently sabotaging their own secret operation of mass murder by creating what is percieved as a backwards impact/fall sequence.


Or right after you realize that the planes don't matter, because this, was not caused by planes.

http://algoxy.com/psych/images/wtc1plumecascade.jpg

And you moved on because you realized that there is good evidence which needs to be discussed and the movement is seriously distracted with irrelevant and unprovable theories which must be pushed aside for theories of substance that are logical and proveable.

I have to concur with this.

Whether there were planes or no planes at the WTC, ultimately it's irrelevant because it wasn't the cause of the collapse of the towers. We are all aware of media complicity in presenting the official story here.......

[graflok]

That should be right after you cannot produce a reasonable explanation for the perps apprently sabotaging their own secret operation of mass murder by creating what is percieved as a backwards impact/fall sequence.


Or right after you realize that the planes don't matter, because this, was not caused by planes.

http://algoxy.com/psych/images/wtc1plumecascade.jpg

And you moved on because you realized that there is good evidence which needs to be discussed and the movement is seriously distracted with irrelevant and unprovable theories which must be pushed aside for theories of substance that are logical and proveable.

Huh? Sorry, all non sequitur to me. :confused:

[mynameis]

Huh? Sorry, all non sequitur to me. :confused:

He is saying that why would they i.e. make a mistake if they have such control over the attacks as NPT would make believe. Either way there is no reason logic would dictate. The backward detonation sequence.

[graflok]

Thank goodness you agree with both media complicity and them not being the only culprits.... I thought this was the end result of all this info, to prove this fact. It's just banoyes?? i guess I shouldn't be surprised....

I don't know bayones viewpoint on that subject. You would have to ask
bayones. I do respect bayones' opinions, however.

[ronisron]

I don't know bayones viewpoint on that subject. You would have to ask
bayones. I do respect bayones' opinions, however.

You don't know banoyes viewpoint, but respect the opinions of said poster?...OK. I can tell you that banoyes has said repeatedly that the media is the real culprit behind 9/11. I wish I could say I misunderstood what the posts say, but they are repeated, and repeated often. I even asked for clarity...... and it was confirmed.

I'll respect that you don't see it that way, and I agree with you on that. As for the rest, I've already agreed to disagree, so i'm good.

[graflok]

You don't know banoyes viewpoint, but respect the opinions of said poster?...OK.

Let's be clear ...

I said, "I don't know bayones viewpoint on that subject" which you have now
shortened to "You don't know banoyes viewpoint" which alters the original
meaning.

So, let me say it again:
I don't know bayones viewpoint on that subject.

And, I also said "I do respect bayones' opinions."

Meaning I don't know his/her opinion on that specific topic but I respect
his/her opinions in general.

Is that clearer?


I can tell you that banoyes has said repeatedly that the media is the real culprit behind 9/11. I wish I could say I misunderstood what the posts say, but they are repeated, and repeated often. I even asked for clarity...... and it was confirmed.

I can't comment on the meaning of someone else's posts. Perhaps bayones has a different
definition of "real culprit" then you do.

[ronisron]

Let's be clear ...

I said, "I don't know bayones viewpoint on that subject" which you have now
shortened to "You don't know banoyes viewpoint" which alters the original
meaning.

So, let me say it again:
I don't know bayones viewpoint on that subject.

And, I also said "I do respect bayones' opinions."

Meaning I don't know his/her opinion on that specific topic but I respect
his/her opinions in general.

Is that clearer?



I can't comment on the meaning of someone else's posts. Perhaps bayones has a different
definition of "real culprit" then you do.

Clearer? Absolutely, and apologies for misquoting your context there, if it really matters. Oh, and I'm quite sure "real culprit" in any language means.... real culprit. Perhaps banoyes could qualify it in some other way.... if banoyes is reading please explain how the media are the real culprits, please!

That doesn't include you of course, graflok, because you don't believe the media to be the real culprits behind 9/11. Although you do respect that opinion in general.

[graflok]

That doesn't include you of course, graflok, because you don't believe the media to be the real culprits behind 9/11. Although you do respect that opinion in general.

Again, it all depends on one's definition of "real culprit," a matter of syntax
which I am not particularly interested in discussing the finer points of.

But, they certainly qualify as major wrongdoers in my book.

[kamakazi]

Originally Posted by ronisron
I can tell you that banoyes has said repeatedly that the media is the real culprit behind 9/11. I wish I could say I misunderstood what the posts say, but they are repeated, and repeated often. I even asked for clarity...... and it was confirmed.


i think most (including banoyes, correct me if im wrong) know the media aren't the organisers for everything that happened on 9/11. But if there were no planes used at the towers than they are A MAJOR part of the coverup (clearly it couldnt've been done without their co-operation), and needs to be exposed.

[banoyes]

banoyes ascertains that the media are the real perps of 9/11. If you haven't said that, it doesn't apply to you. I guess that singular conclusion to NPT info relates to how how I view the whole NPT in a microcosm. If you feel it was an inside job by the CIA controlled gov't and military, and there is proven media complicity..... what else is there? Agree to disagree about NPT and move on.

"Real Perps"?? I said no such thing
I said the fact no planes were used pinpoints the perps
it shows the direct involvement of the criminal media
it pulls the mask of the workings of the NWO
The media is a "real perp"
not the only one,
but certainly
one of the easiest to prove

Move on, forget what you know
embrace BS and let's be friends
How about
wake up
planes don't fly into buildings ,as is, into a cloud

[christophera]

I have to concur with this.

Whether there were planes or no planes at the WTC, ultimately it's irrelevant because it wasn't the cause of the collapse of the towers. We are all aware of media complicity in presenting the official story here.......

Yes, and I wish NPT wasn't such a distraction and I could just ignore until it went away. However, I felt that was a few years ago and the nonsense is still here distracting people as much as it always did.

Using valuable space to attempt discussion on a non evidenced, unprovable, illogical theory justifies serious opposition to it just to clear the trash so newcomers don get alienated and associate the garbage with the quality information that is available.

So ultimately we may have to clear a space to present what is relevant, or at lest defend it against illogical interlopers that have no sense of HOW to get justice.

[christophera]

The media is a "real perp"


Media didn't blow up the buildings, media obstructed justice with intentional neglect that borders on treason with regard to the public trust issue. They need to go.

[kamakazi]

Originally Posted by christophera
Media didn't blow up the buildings, media obstructed justice with intentional neglect that borders on treason with regard to the public trust issue. They need to go.

obstructing justice with intentional neglect that borders on treason doesnt classify them as being one of the perps involved?

[christophera]

obstructing justice with intentional neglect that borders on treason doesnt classify them as being one of the perps involved?

No, not quite. Accomplices after the fact to assist in evasion.

[ronisron]

"Real Perps"?? I said no such thing
I said the fact no planes were used pinpoints the perps
it shows the direct involvement of the criminal media
it pulls the mask of the workings of the NWO
The media is a "real perp"
not the only one,
but certainly
one of the easiest to prove

Move on, forget what you know
embrace BS and let's be friends
How about
wake up
planes don't fly into buildings ,as is, into a cloud

Embrace BS?? I believe 9/11 was an inside job, and the media was complicit in the cover up. There you go. Whether there were planes or no planes at the WTC, they weren't the reason that the towers collapsed anyway. The NPT -ists waste valuable time arguing with other truthers about the same points....... It's much easier to prove that the media was involved by showing the BBC reporting on the collapse of 7, 23 minutes before it did. Or showing the hole in Shanksville that existed at least 7 years before 9/11. These things are verifiable and easier to prove. You've been calling everyone stupid, unenlightened, and what have you, to prove a point that is ultimately irrelevant to the picture as a whole, because planes or no planes, they weren't the cause of the towers' collapse.

Thanks for your time.

[keystone]

You (banoyes) 've been calling everyone stupid, unenlightened, and what have you, to prove a point that is ultimately irrelevant to the picture as a whole, because planes or no planes, they weren't the cause of the towers' collapse.Precisely and that's why I initiated the thread in the first instance.

[banoyes]

Originally Posted by ronisron
You (banoyes) 've been calling everyone stupid, unenlightened, and what have you,
A lie (Though YOU may have felt like that)... notice the "everyone"

to prove a point that is ultimately irrelevant to the picture as a whole, because planes or no planes, they weren't the cause of the towers' collapse.

The towers destruction was "caused by airplanes"
yup
it's in the 911 Report..you know fire and all that BS

Airplanes are the picture, they did everything.. and you call them "irrelevent"
HHMM
What " picture " are you looking at??
Must be on TV

[mynameis]

Post evidence that talking about "no planes" has alienated anyone from 9/11
truth. And, by evidence, I don't mean saying, "it's obvious" because it isn't.

How interested do you think these people are about leaning any 911 evidence after this person's display?

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

http://i33.tinypic.com/29qgjv8.jpg

Best Actor in a Cointelproduction.

[ronisron]

Originally Posted by ronisron
You (banoyes) 've been calling everyone stupid, unenlightened, and what have you,

A lie (Though YOU may have felt like that)... notice the "everyone"

Quote:
to prove a point that is ultimately irrelevant to the picture as a whole, because planes or no planes, they weren't the cause of the towers' collapse.

The towers destruction was "caused by airplanes"
yup
it's in the 911 Report..you know fire and all that BS

Airplanes are the picture, they did everything.. and you call them "irrelevent"
HHMM
What " picture " are you looking at??
Must be on TV quote banoyes.......:rolleyes:


Excuse me, WTH is wrong with your abilty to read and comprehend?? I said planes or no planes they did not cause the collapse of the towers, and you quoted it... but seized the opportunity to pound forward with trying to belittle my post anyway. Yikes... this seems atypical to your usual posts though, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

The buildings were not brought down by TV fakery, nor by airplanes, so the whole exercise of trying to force the NPT on people to prove that the media is complicit is IRRELEVANT to the topic as a whole. We already have direct evidence of media complicity. The BBC report on WTC 7, and the Pentagon and Shanksville "crashes". Trying to prove the NPT is trying to prove nothing but a footnote at this point. UNLESS there is another agenda behind it, of course.

[christophera]

The buildings were not brought down by TV fakery, nor by airplanes, so the whole exercise of trying to force the NPT on people to prove that the media is complicit is IRRELEVANT to the topic as a whole. We already have direct evidence of media complicity. The BBC report on WTC 7, and the Pentagon and Shanksville "crashes". Trying to prove the NPT is trying to prove nothing but a footnote at this point. UNLESS there is another agenda behind it, of course.

Yes.

I would add that the NPTists, who are sincere, and in control of themselves, if they have the aptitude for this message, should consider that they are actually helping the perps by providing displacement for productive, meaningful discussion. They have been manipulated and they are not alone.

Also consider that the titillation of the fantasy of governmental technological power required to conduct the NPT is artificially installed by a psyops that goes back about 15 years. Do not buy into it! Do not participate!

Be your own person with your friends. Get local with a global thought and separate yourself somewhat from technology. It is in everyones best interest.

[mr_self_destruct]

NPTists

Hurrah! ;)

[keystone]

Nine pages and 90 posts later sort of proves my original point really then. Doesn't it?

[banoyes]

Originally Posted by ronisron
You (banoyes) 've been calling everyone stupid, unenlightened, and what have you,

A lie (Though YOU may have felt like that)... notice the "everyone"

Quote:
to prove a point that is ultimately irrelevant to the picture as a whole, because planes or no planes, they weren't the cause of the towers' collapse.

The towers destruction was "caused by airplanes"
yup
it's in the 911 Report..you know fire and all that BS

Airplanes are the picture, they did everything.. and you call them "irrelevent"
HHMM
What " picture " are you looking at??
Must be on TV quote banoyes.......:rolleyes:


Excuse me, WTH is wrong with your abilty to read and comprehend?? I said planes or no planes they did not cause the collapse of the towers, and you quoted it... but seized the opportunity to pound forward with trying to belittle my post anyway. Yikes... this seems atypical to your usual posts though, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

The buildings were not brought down by TV fakery, nor by airplanes, so the whole exercise of trying to force the NPT on people to prove that the media is complicit is IRRELEVANT to the topic as a whole. We already have direct evidence of media complicity. The BBC report on WTC 7, and the Pentagon and Shanksville "crashes". Trying to prove the NPT is trying to prove nothing but a footnote at this point. UNLESS there is another agenda behind it, of course.

Must be catching...another indecipherable post
Yikes... this seems atypical to your usual posts though, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised
unless "atypical means typical ..this is senseless

Something is really wrong with plane people.
No planes is solid... the evidence backs it
yet they do all they can to avoid it.
disruptive,divisive (the truth is divisive??,irrelevent too )
It, as I have said ,pinpoints an active perp, a participant, a planner

Plane people have to deny Newtons Laws.
forgive videos showing planes with no wings,
accept the impossible speed,
poo pah ,that there is not one identified piece of wreckage
accept the different flight paths shown on TV
believe untrained pilots can do navigation and target acquisition
and fly with a skill that amazes aces
and accept an airplane flying into a building , as if into a cloud

They accept all that

They fail to see the critical point of Medias participation
in planning and carring out the attack

and then call No Planers , disinformers.etc
well
if you can accept all that,something is wrong with you

[ronisron]

Must be catching...another indecipherable post



Don't be too hard on yourself, I assume you're translating from another language, because you don't seem to understand English very well. I'll go slow...

Planes didn't cause the WTC's to collapse.

The media didn't cause the WTC's to collapse.

Controlled demolition caused the towers to collapse.

If there were planes, they were used as a distraction.

If there were no planes, it was still used as a distraction.

The distraction was to hide the controlled demolition of the WTC's.

The distraction from the actual event is irrelevant to those who see the controlled demolition. People who believe planes hit the towers know that they had nothing to do with the collapse. It was meant to distract attention away from the controlled demolition, and provide a really weak reason for the collapse.

_______________________________________________

The media reported on the collpase of WTC 7 23 minutes before it came down.

The media says there were plane crashes at the Pentagon, and at Shanksville. They lied.

The media reported extensively that Osama Bin Laden was the man behind 9/11. They lied.

The above 3 statements (1,2,3 ...) show that the media was complicit and are easy to prove as lies.

You obviously love to argue and will say anything to keep an argument going for a long time , and I guess I was willing to play along, but I can't keep making a point to you, that's being understood by a lot of folks, except you.... not that I really think you don't understand, but it's how you're playing this. You'll have to play by yourself from now on as far as I go. You're basically there already. Howver, graflok respects your posts! ;)

Later ban - oh - yes.

[thematrix]

Must be catching...another indecipherable post



talking about your ownwork again??


No planes is solid... the evidence backs it
yet they do all they can to avoid it.

bollocks - I have repeatedly (as have other posters here) pointed out why your evidence is "shaky" at best and very very far from solid - your typical response is to ignore us or insult us and keep repeating the same old same old. If anyone is avoiding discussion here it is you.



Plane people have to deny Newtons Laws.

you totally misunderstand the laws of physics - and then scream like a little kid about how you are right and everyone eles is wrong.


forgive videos showing planes with no wings,

poor quality video footage shot on 2001 commercially available technology is hardly going to be perfect - I see video artifacts that don't mean that the planes do not exist.


accept the impossible speed,


very very very very unadvisable speed if you plan to land the plane soon - NOT an "impossible speed"


poo pah ,that there is not one identified piece of wreckage

how many more times??

THERE S LOTS OF IDENTIFIED WRECKAGE AS BEING CONSISTANT WITH COMING FROM BOEING 757/767 AIRCRAFT. Just because not one single piece has been IDed as coming from a PARTICULAR aircraft does NOT mean t has not been identified - I have explained this point to youat least three times now and you accuse ME of avoiding....


accept the different flight paths shown on TV

oooh some new evidence - what different flight paths? where?


believe untrained pilots can do navigation and target acquisition
and fly with a skill that amazes aces

the pilots WERE trained - three of four had FAA COMMERCIAL PILOTS LICENCES. Here is a copy of Hani Hanjours:

http://www.historycommons.org/events-images/643_hani_hanjour_pilot_license2050081722-10063-1.jpg


and accept an airplane flying into a building , as if into a cloud


Planes fly through clouds - come out theother side and land safely sometime later - exactly what was the same about the way flights 11 and 175 flew through the towers??

They slowed on impact (in the case of UA175 by about 18%) were smashed to pieces and killed everyone on board....


They fail to see the critical point of Medias participation
in planning and carring out the attack


The media had fuck all to do with planning and carrying it out - the media are complicit because of the way they control the story afterwards. And it's not like every person who ever worked in media is involvled.

[banoyes]

Don't be too hard on yourself, I assume you're translating from another language, because you don't seem to understand English very well. I'll go slow...
hhmmm
That's just it
assumptions...not "atypical" of you
I understand more then you post

The whole opperation was designed to usher in world wide fascism
The whole thing is a distraction.
You name the media as a culprit for covering up
which is blatent and obvious
you don't name them as participants ,
which is covering up for the criminal media.

I find it interesting you keep mentioning "demolition"
Plane people push this myth as well
explosives were used
but that is not what dustified the buildings
so
IMO
You not only cover up for the criminal media
you also cover up DEW technology

You clearly have not studied the evidence
and are here to be a verbose defender
of the PTB fall back position
a purveyor of mis-direction

[banoyes]

bollocks - I have repeatedly (as have other posters here) pointed out why your evidence is "shaky" at best and very very far from solid - your typical response is to ignore us or insult us and keep repeating the same old same old. If anyone is avoiding discussion here it is you.

A complete reversal of the truth
but
that is part of the method

[christophera]

the evidence backs it


You didn't post it. Never mind, don't post it. We know what it is.

The evidence is fake video presented with cognitive distortions. The reasoning given for it is unsupported by the hard evidence and sequence of the major events while NPTists have failed to even invent an alternative motive to explain the sequence that does exist.

It is shown that outreach in 9-11 is NOT appropriate with NPT. If you must hold to your beliefs, do so. Seek better evidence and explanation to fit your theory into events as they exist plainly. Do not compulsively try to compete with hard evidence and the issues of demoltion for position in the thread que.

That is EXACTLY what the perps need to get away with this. They need you to distract people from issues which can can be developed into meaningful strategy on the ground to force official actions by legal and political means. Your activities help get them off the hook.

[banoyes]

You didn't post it.

A lie Posted and reposted

Never mind, don't post it. We know what it is.
Who is we??

The evidence is fake video presented with cognitive distortions.
The evidence is the plane doing the impossible

The reasoning given for it is unsupported by the hard evidence and sequence of the major events while NPTists have failed to even invent an alternative motive to explain the sequence that does exist.
HUH??

It is shown that outreach in 9-11 is NOT appropriate with NPT. If you must hold to your beliefs, do so. Seek better evidence and explanation to fit your theory into events as they exist plainly. Do not compulsively try to compete with hard evidence and the issues of demoltion for position in the thread que.
The only evidence shows
NO PLANES

That is EXACTLY what the perps need to get away with this. They need you to distract people from issues which can can be developed into meaningful strategy on the ground to force official actions by legal and political means. Your activities help get them off the hook.
Wow reading this guy is an adventure
crimminny

Last response to this fine fellow
Well darlin
you spend a lot of time writting many words that lead nowhere
KISS
planes cannot fly into buildimgs as if
they were flying into a cloud

[dave52]

crimminny

That made me spit my coffee out... :D

[thematrix]

The evidence is the plane doing the impossible


HUH??
The only evidence shows
NO PLANES

no - there is plenty of evidence that shows planes. You just choose to ignore all of it.

The BEST evidence that supports NPT comes from John Lear.

Personally I think John is wrong about No Planes - yes he is a *very* well credentialled pilot/flight instructor - there is no doubt about that. He chooses his allies poorly however (he rates Ace Bakers research highly - and I think Ace Baker is an idiot, and he seemingly demonstrates a lack of understanding about physics and what a 500mph impact will do.

this is copied from Johns 15 page affidavit submitted to the New York District Court Southern Division on January 28, 2008.

9. My opinion, based on extensive flight experience both as captain and instructor in large 3 and 4 engine aircraft is that it would have been impossible for an alleged hijacker with little or no time in the Boeing 767 to have taken over, then flown a Boeing 767 at high speed, descending to below 1000 feet above mean sea level and flown a course to impact the twin towers at high speed for these reasons:

A. As soon as the alleged hijackers sat in the pilots seat of the Boeing 767 they would be looking at an EFIS (Electronic Flight Instrumentation System) display panel comprised of six large multi-mode LCDs interspersed with clusters of 'hard' instruments. These displays process the raw aircraft system and flight data into an integrated picture of the aircraft situation, position and progress, not only in the horizontal and vertical dimensions, but also with regard to time and speed as well.

Had they murdered the pilot with a box knife as alleged there would be blood all over the seat, the controls, the center pedestal, the instrument panel and floor of the cockpit. The hijacker would have had to remove the dead pilot from his seat which means he would have had electrically or manually place the seat in its rearmost position and then lifted the murdered pilot from his seat, further distributing blood, making the controls including the throttles wet, sticky and difficult to hold onto.

....

10. No Boeing 767 airliner(s) exceeded 500 mph in level flight at approximately 1000 feet on 9/11 as fraudulently alleged by the government, media, NIST and its contractors because they are incapable of such speeds at low altitude.

11. One of the critical issues of the 'impossible' speeds of the aircraft hitting the World Trade Center Towers alleged by NIST as 443 mph (385 kts. M.6, American Airlines Flight 11) and 542 mph (470 kts. M.75, United Airlines 175) is that the VD or dive velocity of the Boeing 767 as certificated by the Federal Aviation under 14 CFR Part 25 Airworthiness Standards; Transport Category Transports of 420 kts CAS (Calibrated Air Speed) makes these speeds achievable. This is unlikely.

12. The 'Dive Velocity' VD is 420 knots CAS (calibrated airspeed)(483 mph). Some allege that this speed, 420 knots (483 mph) is near enough to the NIST alleged speeds that the NIST speeds 443 (385 kts.) mph and 542 mph (471 kts.), could have been flown by the alleged hijackers and are probably correct.

13. In fact VD of 420 knots (483 mph) is a speed that is a maximum for certification under 14 CFR Part 25.253 High Speed Characteristics and has not only not necessarily been achieved but is far above VFC (390 kts. 450 mph) which is the maximum speed at which stability characteristics must be demonstrated.(14 CFR 25.253 (b).

14. What this means is not only was VD not necessarily achieved but even if it was, it was achieved in a DIVE demonstrating controllability considerably above VFC which is the maximum speed under which stability characteristics must be demonstrated. Further, that as the alleged speed is considerably above VFC for which stability characteristics must be met, a hijacker who is not an experienced test pilot would have considerable difficulty in controlling the airplane, similar to flying a bucking bronco, much less hitting a 208 foot target dead center, at 800 feet altitude (above mean sea level) at the alleged speed.

15. Now to determine whether or not a Boeing 757 or Boeing 767 could even attain 540 miles per hour at 800 feet we have to first consider what the drag versus the power ratio is.

Drag is the effect of the air pushing against the frontal areas of the fuselage and wing and horizontal and vertical stabilizers. Drag also includes the friction that is a result of the air flowing over these surfaces. If there was no drag you could go very fast. But we do have drag and there are 2 types: induced and parasite. Assume we are going really fast as NIST and the defendants claim, then we don't have to consider induced drag because induced drag is caused by lift and varies inversely as the square of the airspeed. What this means is the faster you go the lower the induced drag.

What we do have to consider is parasite drag. Parasite drag is any drag produced that is not induced drag. Parasite drag is technically called 'form and friction' drag. It includes the air pushing against the entire airplane including the engines, as the engines try to push the entire airplane through the air.

16. We have two other things to consider: induced power and
parasite power.

Induced power varies inversely with velocity so we don't have to consider that because we are already going fast by assumption and it varies inversely.
Parasite power however varies as the cube of the velocity which
means to double the speed you have to cube or have three times the power.

17. So taking these four factors into consideration we are only concerned with two: parasite power and parasite drag, and if all other factors are constant, and you are level at 800 feet and making no turns, the parasite drag varies with the square of the velocity but parasite power varies as the cube of the velocity.

What this means is at double the speed, drag doubles and the power required to maintain such speed, triples.

The airspeed limitation for the Boeing 767 below approximately 23,000 feet is 360 kts [414 mph] or what they call VMO (velocity maximum operating).

That means that the maximum permissible speed of the Boeing 767 below 23,000 feet is 360 knots and it is safe to operate the airplane at that speed but not faster.

18. While the Boeing 767 can fly faster and has been flown faster during flight test it is only done so within carefully planned flight test programs. We can safely infer that most commercial 767 pilots have never exceeded 360 knots indicated air speed below 23,000 feet.

19. The alleged NIST speed of 443 mph (385 kts,) for American Airlines Flight 11 would be technically achievable. However the NIST speed of 542 mph (470 kts) for United Airlines Flight 175 which is 50 kts. above VD is not commensurate with and/or possible considering:

(1) the power available,* **
(2) parasite drag (NAVAIR 00-80T-80 Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators
(3) parasite power (NAVAIR 00-80T-80 Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators
(4) the controllability by a pilot with limited experience. 14 CFR Part 25.253 (a)(b)
* http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?...01MA063&rpt=fa
** http://www.content.airbusworld.com/S...PW4000_FAA.pdf

20. Therefore the speed of the aircraft, that hit the World Trade Center, as represented by NIST, particularly that of United Airlines Flight 175 is fraudulent and could not have occurred.

21. One more consideration is the impossibility of the PW4062 turbofan engines to operate in dense air at sea level altitude at high speed.

The Boeing 767 was designed to fly at high altitudes at a maximum Mach of .86 or 86/100ths the speed of sound. This maximum speed is called MMO, (Maximum Mach Operating). Its normal cruise speed, however, is Mach .80 (about 530 mph) or less, for better fuel economy. (The speed of sound at 35,000 feet is 663 mph so 530 mph is Mach .7998 see

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/sound.html.)

The fan tip diameter of the PW4062 which powered UAL 175 was 94 inches, over 7 feet in diameter making it, essentially a huge propeller.
This huge fan compresses enormous amount of air during takeoff to produce the thrust necessary to get the airplane off of the ground and into the air.
At high altitudes, in cruise, where the air is much thinner and where the engines are designed to fly at most of the time, the fan and turbine sections are designed to efficiently accept enormous amounts of this thin air and produce an enormous amount of thrust.

But at low altitudes, in much denser air, such as one thousand feet, where the air is over 3x as dense as at 35,000 feet, going much faster than Vmo or 360 knots, the air is going to start jamming up in the engine simply because a turbofan engine is not designed to take the enormous quantities of dense air at high speed, low altitude flight. Because of the much denser air the fan blades will be jammed with so much air they will start cavitating or choking causing the engines to start spitting air back out the front. The turbofan tip diameter is over 7 feet; it simply cannot accept that much dense air, at that rate, because they aren't designed to.

So achieving an airspeed much over its Vmo which is 360 knots isn't going to be possible coupled with the fact that because the parasite drag increases as the square of the speed and the power

required increases as the cube of the speed you are not going to be able to get the speed with the thrust (power) available.

It can be argued that modern aerodynamic principles hold that if an aircraft can fly at 35,000 ft altitude at 540 mph (~Mach 0.8), and for a given speed, both engine thrust and airframe drag vary approximately in proportion to air density (altitude), that the engine can produce enough thrust to fly 540 mph at 800 ft. altitude.

That argument fails because although the engine might be theoretically capable of producing that amount of thrust, the real question is can that amount of thrust be extracted from it at 540 mph at 800 ft.

22. To propose that a Boeing 767 airliner exceeded its designed limit speed of 360 knots by 127 mph to fly through the air at 540 mph is simply not possible. It is not possible because of the thrust required and it's not possible because of the engine fan design which precludes accepting the amount of dense air being forced into it.

23. I am informed that the lawsuit for which this affidavit is intended is in its preliminary, pre-discovery phase. I am further informed that actual eyewitness statements cast considerable doubt on the jetliner crash claims, irrespective of the media-driven impression that there were lots of witnesses. In fact, the witnesses tend, on balance, to confirm there were no jetliner crashes. I am also informed that information that will enable further refinement of the issues addressed in this affidavit will be forthcoming in discovery including, without limitation, the opportunity to take depositions and to request relevant documentation (additional information). When that additional information is obtained, I will then be in a position to offer such other and further opinions as, upon analysis, that additional information will mandate.

24. At this stage, it cannot properly be assumed, much less asserted
as factual, that wide-body jetliners crashed into the then Twin Towers of the WTC. Any declaration that such events occurred must be deemed false and fraudulently asserted, video images notwithstanding.

I have looked long and hard at NPT - and the quoted parts above from JL's affidavit are the BEST evidence I can find to support the case.

Thats the expert view of an eminently qualified pilot re: the practicalities of the hijackers taking over the aircraft and piloting it to the buildings , and comment on the "impossible speed"

His affidavit also comments on and states he opinion of the crash mechanics regarding the planes hitting the towers - given that he is not an expert in physics or engineering pertaining to buildings, I don't see how his opinion is relevant.

As counterpoint to that I have spoken via email with other pilots who say that such a speed IS possible at low altitude - but ONLY for very short periods of time (say maximum 2-3 minutes) and that the aircraft will very likely stall/shake apart if flown for long at these speeds, which is why it is verboten to fly these types of aircraft at those high speeds at low altitudes - the plane will break apart before too long.

I post all this here to make the point that I HAVE done the research - I HAVE looked at both sides of the argument.

in my opinion NPT is a deluded fantasy that is unsupported by any solid evidence. Whether or not the speed is impossible is a question that can only be answered definitively by boeings engineers. THe most qualified people I have talked to - or read comment from online - disagree. Some say "impossible speed" - some say possible speed, but there is no way any trained pilot who wants to live through the experience would go at that speed.

In my opinion what JL outlines above is further evidence that the planes were likely remote controlled, given the likely severe buffeting that would have been caused by the extreme flying it makes it much less likely that poorly skilled pilots would have been able to hit the building.

It is evidence that Boeings plane flew at well above design parameters for a short period of time - and this simply means Boeing builds good aircraft that are overengineered (i.e. will do what they say they will do and then some)

I applaud John Lear for actually submitting this to a real court - lets hope that in the course of the proceedings some truth wll eventually come out and perhaps the issues surrounding "impossible speed" will get discussed by qualified people and the matter settled.

[thematrix]

A complete reversal of the truth


no - actually

bollocks - I have repeatedly (as have other posters here) pointed out why your evidence is "shaky" at best and very very far from solid - your typical response is to ignore us or insult us and keep repeating the same old same old. If anyone is avoiding discussion here it is you.

is pretty accurate I think.

If you'd care to post links to threads and posts you have made where you have not insulted people, ignored what they post, and haven't just repeated your baseless claims in order to prove that:

A complete reversal of the truth


isn't just another baseless claim, then I am all ears.

[christophera]

The evidence is the plane doing the impossible


That is where you should have posted evidence and explanation and if you didn't, ......... well, that is not good. You are maintaining the distraction.

[christophera]

The evidence is the plane doing the impossible

Perhaps I don't remember showing me a plane doing anything impossible unless it was fake video.

Otherwise what planes did in NYC was SEEN by many, many people.

[christophera]

But showing the illogic of NPT may just make those posting such nonsense feel ashamed and perhaps realize that they really are playing into the perps psyops. At least the ones that are sincere truth seekers.

[christophera]

Yes, that is the case I don't you showing me a plane doing anything impossible unless it was fake video.

Otherwise what planes did in NYC was SEEN by many, many people and I've posted video of people from 9-11 before and you can see there is no doubt in their expression. Here it is again.

WTC1 Impact etc - YouTube

They have absolutely no doubt of anything they say about the planes. Peopl emaking statements 5 years later. Sorry, acting is too easy/

[acebaker]

http://www.acebaker.com/9-11/HealingColumns.gif

We know that at some point in time, an airplane-shaped hole appeared in the side of the tower. Here is a series of frames from the Ghostplane video. In the second-to-the-last frame, the wings of the airplane have already passed through the wall of the building. Yet we cannot see any damage to the wall under the right wing.

Is it possible that that airplane-shaped hole is already present, but the video quality is too poor to see it? No. The last frame in the sequence is from the same video, after an edit, and when the camera was zoomed out even more. If anything, the picture quality would be a little worse than in the previous frames. Smoke now obscures part of the right side of the opening, but clearly we can see the gaping hole in the wall.

There is more than enough resolution in the pictures to see whether or not columns have broken away to reveal the dark interior of the building. Therefore, the columns were broken some time after the image of the wing appeared to pass through the wall. Therefore the “wings” of the “airplane” did not break the columns. Something else did.

[mynameis]

http://www.acebaker.com/9-11/HealingColumns.gif

We know that at some point in time, an airplane-shaped hole appeared in the side of the tower. Here is a series of frames from the Ghostplane video. In the second-to-the-last frame, the wings of the airplane have already passed through the wall of the building. Yet we cannot see any damage to the wall under the right wing.

Is it possible that that airplane-shaped hole is already present, but the video quality is too poor to see it? No. The last frame in the sequence is from the same video, after an edit, and when the camera was zoomed out even more. If anything, the picture quality would be a little worse than in the previous frames. Smoke now obscures part of the right side of the opening, but clearly we can see the gaping hole in the wall.

There is more than enough resolution in the pictures to see whether or not columns have broken away to reveal the dark interior of the building. Therefore, the columns were broken some time after the image of the wing appeared to pass through the wall. Therefore the “wings” of the “airplane” did not break the columns. Something else did.

The plane's own weight did according to the laws of physics. As for you saying it is impossible do you have a degree in engineering or physics or your qualification merely eyesight?

The nose out From two differing angles. And video to show how this is half-baked this conjecture. Your gif is edited to show the hole, showing nothing of the explosion and the impact of the plane, as it crashes. You are being deceptive in your submitted gif image.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=eI8u-I0GWs4
http://i128.photobucket.com/albums/p177/chrisfarb/plane.jpg

[thematrix]

http://www.acebaker.com/9-11/HealingColumns.gif

We know that at some point in time, an airplane-shaped hole appeared in the side of the tower. Here is a series of frames from the Ghostplane video. In the second-to-the-last frame, the wings of the airplane have already passed through the wall of the building. Yet we cannot see any damage to the wall under the right wing.

Is it possible that that airplane-shaped hole is already present, but the video quality is too poor to see it? No. The last frame in the sequence is from the same video, after an edit, and when the camera was zoomed out even more. If anything, the picture quality would be a little worse than in the previous frames. Smoke now obscures part of the right side of the opening, but clearly we can see the gaping hole in the wall.

There is more than enough resolution in the pictures to see whether or not columns have broken away to reveal the dark interior of the building. Therefore, the columns were broken some time after the image of the wing appeared to pass through the wall. Therefore the “wings” of the “airplane” did not break the columns. Something else did.

I can't see the series of photos to which you refer. I tried copy pasting the link that showed up when I hit the reply button into a new browser window - but it keeps saying "network timeout"

Possibly a result of the internet connection here being shite.

Anyhow you present the argument above that because we cannot see the hole that is allegedly made by the right wing then the wing did not make that hole. I believe that to be a "false dichotomy" argument.

You imply that the aircraft was not the cause of the hole - and that a n other agent was the cause (presumably preplanted devices)

Consider the following:

i) the imapct of the aircraft although powerful at the wings was not sufficient to break te columns - it did however severely weaken and stress them to the point that a few seconds after impact when the fireball erupted the blast from that explosion finished the job and blew the weakened columns into the street creating the "airplane shaped hole" - don't forget that the fuel is mostly held in the wings - and any explosive blast wll by nature seek the path of least resistance.

ii) the impact was indeed powerful enough to sever the columns - however they appear not to be so because the columns are also in the process ot tearing the wings apart on impact. We do not see the "dark interior" as a cloud of fuel vapour obscures our view momentarily and the resolution/frame rate of the video we are trying to analyse is not sufficient to detect the difference between the columns/windows of the tower, and the cloud of vapour/debris that is created momentarily before it all ignites and goes up in a huge fireball.

iii) the impact of the plane is *so* powerful that it really cuts through the columns in such a way that it appears to "melt" into the building facade on impact - by some random chance the exact point at which the wing contacts the building was weaker point and didn't have any floors in it (it was just window/column) Lets not forget the buidlings designers state that a plane impact (and they are referring to a plane impact that was thought to have been much slower) would punch through the "screen netting" the "intense grid" - which is exactly what we see.

Thats three plausible alternative explanations that would explain the anomalies you note in the video you looked at, all of which involve the aircraft impact and/or subsequent fuel explosion as the agent for causing the hole we see later. Have you considered and then ruled out any of these possible explanations? If so why have you ruled them out?

[lightgiver]

I wonder why this one did not collapse,and it burnt for hours:confused::rolleyes:

http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=a2vP5NlOLVY

[thematrix]

I wonder why this one did not collapse,and it burnt for hours:confused::rolleyes:

You might want to get your eyes tested - they seem to roll about a lot :)

Part of the Madrid tower DID collapse. The part that was supported only by steel structure.

The bit of the tower that did not collapse was held up by steel AND a concrete core.

The Madrid Tower actually gives weight to the hypothesis that the towers collapsed naturally as a result of impact damage and fires weakening the steel support structure enough so it cold no longer support the weight of the tower above the impact zone.

Had the towers had a concrete core - it's very likely that they would not have collapsed completely *if* the collapses were the result of solely the plane impacts and fires.

[mynameis]

That is where you should have posted evidence and explanation and if you didn't, ......... well, that is not good. You are maintaining the distraction.

Banoyes can't reply christophera, he's on warning and has run away from the forum instead of continuing to post messages.

[dave52]

The plane's own weight did according to the laws of physics.

So the planes own weight healed the building behind it...?

[mynameis]

So the planes own weight healed the building behind it...?

If you call a hole and large explosion created during the crash healing, then I would guess so. Seeing as though I don't call that healing, I suppose you're just acting cynical.

[dave52]

So you don't see the healing behind the wing - oh well. I guess that's the end of the debate then. You see white - I see black.

[mynameis]

So you don't see the healing behind the wing - oh well. I guess that's the end of the debate then. You see white - I see black.

Keep your eyes focused on the side of the building, you'll see gray concrete from the impact, which is only after the plane has hit the building and hasn't exploded or gone completely through at about frame 25. You're right you do see black, take off your blindfold to watch the video.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=J0Qu6eyyr4c

[thematrix]

Ace:

Good News!

my internet connection is working better and I got to lok at the "series of images" you posted earlier.

re the 2nd last frame where the planes wing appears to be half in - half out of the tower...

this is a GIF image. GIF is a lossy compression algorithm. It does't record the colour value of every pixel inevery frame, it makes pixels that appear very similar in colour in original images the same colour in the compressed image to save on space.

The human eye can detect differences in shade for about 32000 colours - video images use many times more than that - if you have a picture of this in original broadcast quality then we *might* have something to talk about - even then we need to know what camera filmed this sequence using what contrast/saturation etc etc settings and what processing and compression (if any) was made by the camera itself when the original imageswere recorded - and what processing if any was made from the time of recording until production of the original broadcast quality footage.

It's very likely this anomaly is a result of compression, pixel bleed, and all sorts of other artifacts and limitations such a camera would have when attempting to capture a fast moving object against a similarly coloured backdrop.