Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > 9/11 & 7/7

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 20-09-2011, 11:17 PM   #1
anyhoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,611
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default A Challenge: Planers vs No Planers

It appears that some people here are strongly divided into one of two camps:

1. Real planes were used in the 9-11 deception.

2. Real planes were not used in the 9-11 deception.

Here is a challenge for both sides:

List up to ten of the best reasons/evidence that support your position and post it. Make it clear. No rambling. Summarize your reasons as concisely and logically as possible.

Also, no name calling in this thread, please. Just debate the evidence and take the negative emotion out of it.

Let us all look at the reasons/evidence you post and debate it honestly among ourselves using logic and reason.

I am undecided on this, as I am sure a lot of people are, but with all the name calling and all the long, rambling posts its hard for a lot of us to know. So, who is up for this challenge? Or do you all want to just keep calling each other retards?
__________________
Lies are weapons that they use against us. Belief in those lies are the chains they use to bind us. This includes Fear. Knowledge is the key to unlocking those chains and is also a shield that makes their weapons useless.

Last edited by anyhoo; 20-09-2011 at 11:19 PM.
anyhoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2011, 12:10 AM   #2
white zombie
Inactive
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,202
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Pro - plane

Videos of planes hitting

Eyewitnesses of planes

Plane shaped holes in the towers

Audio of planes hitting

Debris falling from the plane shaped holes in the towers

Videos of people being frightened when they heard and saw the 2nd plane coming

(thats all for now)

-------

My own questions for no planers -

Have holograms that exist outside in fresh air and are totally realistic -been demonstrated anywhere in the world or even proven to exist?
white zombie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2011, 12:13 AM   #3
stannrodd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 2,301
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Pointless exercise .. you won't get logic and reason from the No Plane brigade ..
stannrodd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2011, 12:13 AM   #4
anthonyc31
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 89
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

No planes hit the WTC. It was all digital manipulation on TV, video and photos.

- First, here are 3 videos that prove no planes hit the WTC:
1. Where did this FRAUD come from ?

2. No real Planes @ 911

3. NOSED OUT
- There is absolutely no evidence of a SINGLE plane part in this photo

by anthonyc31, on Flickr

- jet fuel cannot melt the steel to form those cuts in the above photo


- if the heat was "so hot" as to actually melt the steel, why is the lady standing there?

- the various videos of "planes" do not actually correspond with each other

- Frame-by-frame analysis
- Part 1 of 3 - calculations show that a plane "should" be in this video frame, but it is clearly not and this video eventually shows a "plane" hitting WTC 2. It is impossible.
by anthonyc31, on Flickr

- Part 2 of 3 - more calculations for the above video proving that no plane existed
by anthonyc31, on Flickr

- Part 3 of 3 - more frame-by-frame analysis proving that no "plane" hit WTC 2
by anthonyc31, on Flickr


- Video angles:
- Part 1 of 3 - analysis of 3 different videos showing a "plane" hitting WTC 2 at different floors
by anthonyc31, on Flickr

- Part 2 of 3 - more support for above
by anthonyc31, on Flickr

- Part 3 of 3 - more support for above
by anthonyc31, on Flickr

Last edited by anthonyc31; 21-09-2011 at 12:23 AM.
anthonyc31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2011, 12:17 AM   #5
anthonyc31
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 89
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stannrodd View Post
Pointless exercise .. you won't get logic and reason from the No Plane brigade ..
LOL ... no, that's right, you'll just get OVERWHELMING HARD-HITTING EVIDENCE that proves beyond a shadow of doubt that no planes hit the WTC.

i read some of your other posts ... we already know what your job is here.
anthonyc31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2011, 12:22 AM   #6
stannrodd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 2,301
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyc31
i read some of your other posts ... we already know what your job is here.
Yeah and what's that .. ? I suppose I'm a paid poster LOL

BTW I posted a video which shows the exhaust vortex in the fireball at WTC2 so your video 2 is a fail

Last edited by stannrodd; 21-09-2011 at 12:29 AM.
stannrodd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2011, 12:27 AM   #7
anthonyc31
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 89
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stannrodd View Post
Yeah and what's that .. ? I suppose I'm a paid poster LOL
no need to suppose ... you are 100% most definitely not here to discuss anything meaningful.

whether you actually get paid to do it is a different discussion.
anthonyc31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2011, 12:31 AM   #8
stannrodd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 2,301
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyc31 View Post
no need to suppose ... you are 100% most definitely not here to discuss anything meaningful.

whether you actually get paid to do it is a different discussion.
It would seem to me that the only meaningful thing for you is No Plane Theory.
stannrodd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2011, 12:38 AM   #9
stannrodd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 2,301
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stannrodd
BTW I posted a video which shows the exhaust vortex in the fireball at WTC2 so your video 2 is a fail
You must have missed this ... I just can't find it right now .. it's old age getting to me.

Found it


Oh and thank you for the compliments arsehole ..:-))

Last edited by stannrodd; 21-09-2011 at 01:47 AM. Reason: add video link
stannrodd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2011, 01:03 AM   #10
anyhoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,611
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stannrodd View Post
Pointless exercise .. you won't get logic and reason from the No Plane brigade ..
Give it a chance, Stannrodd. Please.

And didn't I say no name calling? Just stop calling each other fucktards and focus only on the evidence. Please.
__________________
Lies are weapons that they use against us. Belief in those lies are the chains they use to bind us. This includes Fear. Knowledge is the key to unlocking those chains and is also a shield that makes their weapons useless.

Last edited by anyhoo; 21-09-2011 at 01:05 AM.
anyhoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2011, 01:26 AM   #11
white zombie
Inactive
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,202
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyc31 View Post





wtc-woman-in-tower-circle by anthonyc31, on Flickr

- There is absolutely no evidence of a SINGLE plane part in this photo
Why would there be any piece of a plane on the outside of the building? It went into the building with great force. Any loose pieces if any would have dropped to the ground. They wouldnt be super-glued to the side of the building for our photographic curiosity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyc31 View Post
- jet fuel cannot melt the steel to form those cuts in the above photo
Why cant the plane be responsible for making the hole? Why would the fuel enter the building before the plane?


Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyc31 View Post
- if the heat was "so hot" as to actually melt the steel, why is the lady standing there?
They meant it melted the steel inside the building, not the outside where there was no sustained fire. Not that I fully believe that either, but for different reasons than you.

Now answer my question

- Is there any evidence for the existence of any hologram that works outside -in fresh air - and looks totally realistic - ANYWHERE in the world or is the hologram theory based in imagination only?

Last edited by white zombie; 21-09-2011 at 01:27 AM.
white zombie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2011, 01:36 AM   #12
stannrodd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 2,301
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anyhoo View Post
Give it a chance, Stannrodd. Please.

And didn't I say no name calling? Just stop calling each other fucktards and focus only on the evidence. Please.
Errm .. I do believe it was a No Planer who started the abuse from which I refrained initially. This is typical of a No Planer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyc31
fuckball disinfo agents
Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyc31
you're a comical fuckball disinfo agent
Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyc31
psssst bozo .... scroll up .... see those thingies and words ... that's called "evidence" .... most people (scumbag disinfo agents excluded!) would say that "evidence" is actually meaningful information.

ah, you're soooo cute in trying to spare with me by posting your BS commentary ... at least it's funny ..... i can't blast you to bits just yet ... keep posting your utterly useless comments ....
But under some provocation, I responded by thanking him for the compliments and referred to him as an arsehole.

I sincerely apologize to all good arseholes for this.
stannrodd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2011, 01:40 AM   #13
anyhoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,611
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by white zombie View Post
Pro - plane

Videos of planes hitting

Eyewitnesses of planes

Plane shaped holes in the towers

Audio of planes hitting

Debris falling from the plane shaped holes in the towers

Videos of people being frightened when they heard and saw the 2nd plane coming

(thats all for now)

-------

My own questions for no planers -

Have holograms that exist outside in fresh air and are totally realistic -been demonstrated anywhere in the world or even proven to exist?
First of all, I'm not taking sides so please don't accuse me of that. I am just focusing on the evidence presented. I will address what has been presented in this post. Others, feel free to do the same.

1. It is true we do have videos of planes hitting the buildings, but some or all of those videos could have been faked.

2. It is true that we do have apparent eye witnesses of planes. Some could be planted shills (like the Harley guy), but its very doubtful that all the apparent witnesses would be shills. If there would have been no planes, at least one eye witness would have come forward very forcefully by now to say that they saw an explosion but no plane. There may be witnesses like that, but I have not heard of them.

3. It is true that there are plane shaped holes in the towers. It is hard to dispute this. Some of said that shape charges were used to blow out the holes in the approximate shape of the planes, but I don't find this has a lot of credibility. It does not sound correct to me. It sounds like someone was reaching to come up with this explanation.

4. I have heard audio of planes hitting, but like the video evidence this could be faked/fabricated. In fact, everything you see on the news could be fabricated. I would trust news footage less than eye witness testimony.

5. I have not seen or heard of debris falling from the plane shaped holes in the towers. Do you have a video link for this? From the footage I have seen, the planes appear to punch right through the outer shell of the building and no debris falls down.

6. Do you have a link of a video that shows people acting frightened when they saw the second plane coming? I would like to examine it.

Finally, let me venture an answer to your last question. No, to my knowledge, our current technology does not allow for holograms that are so realistic that they cannot be distinguished from reality. In the ten years since 9-11, I cannot think of a single example of a realistic hologram being used that actually fooled people.

See the tone I took in answering this? I just gave my opinion of each one and focused on the evidence presented. Can others do the same?
__________________
Lies are weapons that they use against us. Belief in those lies are the chains they use to bind us. This includes Fear. Knowledge is the key to unlocking those chains and is also a shield that makes their weapons useless.
anyhoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2011, 02:10 AM   #14
anyhoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,611
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyc31 View Post
No planes hit the WTC. It was all digital manipulation on TV, video and photos.

- First, here are 3 videos that prove no planes hit the WTC:
1. Where did this FRAUD come from ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEoievoxces

2. No real Planes @ 911
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xlj1mVD2-HM

3. NOSED OUT
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5-xcvv_fRQ
- There is absolutely no evidence of a SINGLE plane part in this photo


wtc-woman-in-tower-circle by anthonyc31, on Flickr

- jet fuel cannot melt the steel to form those cuts in the above photo


- if the heat was "so hot" as to actually melt the steel, why is the lady standing there?

- the various videos of "planes" do not actually correspond with each other

- Frame-by-frame analysis
- Part 1 of 3 - calculations show that a plane "should" be in this video frame, but it is clearly not and this video eventually shows a "plane" hitting WTC 2. It is impossible.

WTC2 - F175 should be in view but is NOT! by anthonyc31, on Flickr

- Part 2 of 3 - more calculations for the above video proving that no plane existed

WTC2 - F175 should be in view but is NOT! (Closer) by anthonyc31, on Flickr

- Part 3 of 3 - more frame-by-frame analysis proving that no "plane" hit WTC 2

F175 to WTC2 - Frame-by-Frame Analysis by anthonyc31, on Flickr


- Video angles:
- Part 1 of 3 - analysis of 3 different videos showing a "plane" hitting WTC 2 at different floors

(1of3) WTC2 and Flight 175 - Compare 3 Different Camera Angles of SAME Event by anthonyc31, on Flickr

- Part 2 of 3 - more support for above

(2of3) WTC2 and Flight 175 - Compare 3 Different Camera Angles of SAME Event by anthonyc31, on Flickr

- Part 3 of 3 - more support for above

(3of3) WTC2 and Flight 175 - Compare 3 Different Camera Angles of SAME Event by anthonyc31, on Flickr
Again not taking sides, just examining the evidence presented, here is my feedback:

Video 1 appears to be compelling evidence of a non-existant plane added to video footage. Question of planers: Do you believe this video to be authentic (in other words, unaltered video of a plane flying into the second tower)? If so, how do you explain that the plane is not visible until the camera zooms in on the towers?

Video 2 is unconvincing. It makes the assumption we would have seen one or more swirling vortexes in the flames shooting out the other side of the building. There could have been planes and no vortexes. Remember, these flames we are seeing is (supposedly) of the jet fuel exploding out the other side of the building. No vortexes would apply to it because there was no jet exhaust to swirl them.

Video 3 is the most compelling evidence of a fake plane. How do planers explain the nose of this plane going in and one side of the building and coming out the other side of the building perfectly intact, in the same shape it was in originally? If a real plane had gone through the building, the nose would have been completely destroyed and would not have kept its same shape. However, a fake plane, whose nose was not actually damaged by going through a physical structure would behave just like this. Planers, please explain how this could be, if you believe this video footage to be of a real plane.
__________________
Lies are weapons that they use against us. Belief in those lies are the chains they use to bind us. This includes Fear. Knowledge is the key to unlocking those chains and is also a shield that makes their weapons useless.
anyhoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2011, 02:25 AM   #15
anyhoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,611
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by white zombie View Post
Why would there be any piece of a plane on the outside of the building? It went into the building with great force. Any loose pieces if any would have dropped to the ground. They wouldnt be super-glued to the side of the building for our photographic curiosity.



Why cant the plane be responsible for making the hole? Why would the fuel enter the building before the plane?




They meant it melted the steel inside the building, not the outside where there was no sustained fire. Not that I fully believe that either, but for different reasons than you.

Now answer my question

- Is there any evidence for the existence of any hologram that works outside -in fresh air - and looks totally realistic - ANYWHERE in the world or is the hologram theory based in imagination only?
1. I agree there would not necessarily be any plane wreckage visible from the outside of the building even if a real plane had crashed through. This is making a false assumption that wreckage would be visible.

2. Assuming there was an actual plane, did pieces of it fall to the ground, or did the entire plane punch through the exterior of the building and go into the interior of the building? From all the videos I have seen, the latter is true. The entire plane appears to go inside of the building and no debris falls down. I am talking about where the plane entered, not where the fireball exited.

3. I have an explanation for the straight line damage and the lady standing there. I believe the outside of the building was segmented. In other words, it was built out of rectangular segments that were connected together. If a real plane punched through, it would make sense that it would take out the entire rectangular segment and push it inside of the building with the force of the entry. In that case we would expect to see straight lines like this, which is the boundary of one segment. We see the straight lines of the bottom segment where it joined to the missing top rectangular segment. Also, you assume that heat destroyed the segment. What it was not heat but just the force of the plane causing the entire rectangular segment to come loose and to be forced inside the building? In that case the columns would not be melted and the woman could stand in the hole.
__________________
Lies are weapons that they use against us. Belief in those lies are the chains they use to bind us. This includes Fear. Knowledge is the key to unlocking those chains and is also a shield that makes their weapons useless.
anyhoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2011, 02:32 AM   #16
skanny
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: G.C.H.Q Cheltenham
Posts: 1,296
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyc31 View Post
No planes hit the WTC. It was all digital manipulation on TV, video and photos.

- First, here are 3 videos that prove no planes hit the WTC:
1. Where did this FRAUD come from ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEoievoxces

2. No real Planes @ 911
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xlj1mVD2-HM

3. NOSED OUT
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5-xcvv_fRQ
- There is absolutely no evidence of a SINGLE plane part in this photo


wtc-woman-in-tower-circle by anthonyc31, on Flickr

- jet fuel cannot melt the steel to form those cuts in the above photo


- if the heat was "so hot" as to actually melt the steel, why is the lady standing there?

- the various videos of "planes" do not actually correspond with each other

- Frame-by-frame analysis
- Part 1 of 3 - calculations show that a plane "should" be in this video frame, but it is clearly not and this video eventually shows a "plane" hitting WTC 2. It is impossible.

WTC2 - F175 should be in view but is NOT! by anthonyc31, on Flickr

- Part 2 of 3 - more calculations for the above video proving that no plane existed

WTC2 - F175 should be in view but is NOT! (Closer) by anthonyc31, on Flickr

- Part 3 of 3 - more frame-by-frame analysis proving that no "plane" hit WTC 2

F175 to WTC2 - Frame-by-Frame Analysis by anthonyc31, on Flickr


- Video angles:
- Part 1 of 3 - analysis of 3 different videos showing a "plane" hitting WTC 2 at different floors

(1of3) WTC2 and Flight 175 - Compare 3 Different Camera Angles of SAME Event by anthonyc31, on Flickr

- Part 2 of 3 - more support for above

(2of3) WTC2 and Flight 175 - Compare 3 Different Camera Angles of SAME Event by anthonyc31, on Flickr

- Part 3 of 3 - more support for above

(3of3) WTC2 and Flight 175 - Compare 3 Different Camera Angles of SAME Event by anthonyc31, on Flickr
SPAM ffs!

why all the need for the constant spamming of the same old tired material you claim is hard clear cut evidence of no planes, i've lost count of all the threads that are no planer themed and all with almost the exact same tired "content".

i do love how the spam always has lots of red marker on it though, thats a really nice touch that is, cos we all know that makes it so much more convincing and truthful.

*(Itchy urine soaked undercrackers)*

Last edited by skanny; 21-09-2011 at 02:34 AM.
skanny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2011, 02:46 AM   #17
white zombie
Inactive
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,202
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anyhoo View Post

5. I have not seen or heard of debris falling from the plane shaped holes in the towers. Do you have a video link for this? From the footage I have seen, the planes appear to punch right through the outer shell of the building and no debris falls down.

6. Do you have a link of a video that shows people acting frightened when they saw the second plane coming? I would like to examine it.
I'll do my best to pull the vids from the billion 911 vids on utube (but not tonight too tired). I used to have a lot of em saved in my old account before it was banned.

The debris was building debris from what I remember. And before I forget - theres a vid debunking that nose of the plane vid. I may find it and write a synopsis.
white zombie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2011, 04:48 AM   #18
stannrodd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 2,301
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

@ anthonyc31,

Someone has fudged the comparison of the three camera angles.

What did you do to correct for the differing aspect ratios of the vids. All three must have the same aspect ratio or the width to height calculation will result in differing values for height from the top down to the impact site if you are using the width of the tower as the non variable standard.

Also the width of the tower must be observed from the same horizontal angle in all three screen captures for it to be a valued observation.

No lies now.
stannrodd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2011, 05:03 AM   #19
stannrodd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 2,301
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anyhoo
5. I have not seen or heard of debris falling from the plane shaped holes in the towers. Do you have a video link for this? From the footage I have seen, the planes appear to punch right through the outer shell of the building and no debris falls down.
This was taken 15 seconds after the first plane impact at WTC1.

Clearly debris has fallen while smoke has risen. The wind has carried the debris dust to the left. The Naudet footage shows the debris shower and the movement of dust. Possible vortex phenomena there too.


Last edited by stannrodd; 21-09-2011 at 05:25 AM.
stannrodd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2011, 06:25 AM   #20
wispy
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,968
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyc31 View Post
No planes hit the WTC. It was all digital manipulation on TV, video and photos.


- There is absolutely no evidence of a SINGLE plane part in this photo


wtc-woman-in-tower-circle by anthonyc31, on Flickr

- jet fuel cannot melt the steel to form those cuts in the above photo


- if the heat was "so hot" as to actually melt the steel, why is the lady standing there?
Thanks for the evidence of super armour plated steel columns bent inwards by a plane hitting them.
wispy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:02 AM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.