Lest we forget: 911 was an inside job.

[SPF]

I love having to do remedial research for others.



It's greatly disputed, just not on TV.

Shrewd, I find the no plane theory interesting. There are two parts of it that I tend to think however, make it unreasonable.

1) There were 265 people spread across all the planes that were supposedly hijacked. These are all documented as real people with real families. You can look them up, you can go to their homes, you can talk to their widows. People that had communities, neighbors, churches, jobs, etc... These people were real. Therefore, the fact that they are now all gone has to be accounted for. The planes they were getting on were real. They have to be accounted for. As far as I can tell, the only explanation would be that after the planes were taken off that they were somehow diverted by the military to a secret location where they were all murdered by our government. I find that extremely hard to believe.

2) All the testimonies from the YouTube video come from people who could have easily, very easily simply not seen the plane. The gentleman that the video focused on even said that he looked up after the explosion - there is a good chance that for the 6 second in which the plane would have been in view that he wasn't looking up.

I watched in real time as the second plane hit. This means that there were people involved at every single news agency that somehow was, in virtual real time, editing video footage. There was almost no delay between me seeing the plane hit the tower and the people on site yelling. I don't think it's realistic to believe that all the news agencies that were filming it that showed the plane going in were somehow altered in real time.

3) And as a bonus, for every 1 video where an eyewitness said he "heard" an explosion and then saw it, there are a dozen who say they did in fact see the plane. Isn't it more likely that the people that didn't see the plane didn't see the plane because they either looked up as it was exploding or weren't looking at the side where the plane initially went in?

 

[Kate30]

Dogs in space.

 

[Danthemailman]

I've heard the conspiracy theories. Even the one using the $20 bill.

 

[SPF]

 

[Shrewd Manager]

These are all documented as real people with real families. You can look them up, you can go to their homes, you can talk to their widows. People that had communities, neighbors, churches, jobs, etc... These people were real.

Not so sure about that. Often hard to spot the difference between crisis actors and real victims. My memory's a bit vague on the investigations many did on this subject. What are you basing the claim on?

fter the planes were taken off that they were somehow diverted by the military to a secret location where they were all murdered by our government. I find that extremely hard to believe.

I agree, but it's not out of the question. I tend to support the no-planes plus assembled-cast theory.

2) All the testimonies from the YouTube video come from people who could have easily, very easily simply not seen the plane. The gentleman that the video focused on even said that he looked up after the explosion - there is a good chance that for the 6 second in which the plane would have been in view that he wasn't looking up.

That's just a very small sample. There are many others.

I watched in real time as the second plane hit. This means that there were people involved at every single news agency that somehow was, in virtual real time, editing video footage. There was almost no delay between me seeing the plane hit the tower and the people on site yelling. I don't think it's realistic to believe that all the news agencies that were filming it that showed the plane going in were somehow altered in real time.

The doco to start with if you're looking for an explanation of this is September Clues by Simon Shack: SeptemberClues.info | The Central Role of the News Media on 9/11. It's long but the 'gold standard' on the no-planes media collusion side imho.

3) And as a bonus, for every 1 video where an eyewitness said he "heard" an explosion and then saw it, there are a dozen who say they did in fact see the plane. Isn't it more likely that the people that didn't see the plane didn't see the plane because they either looked up as it was exploding or weren't looking at the side where the plane initially went in?

Sure eyewitnesses are just one piece of the evidence. But the totality of physical and video evidence militates against the idea of plane collisions. Particularly I suggest the entry of the entire aircraft into a steel-frame heavily reinforced structure. As one expert put it, like a small hollow-tipped bullet penetrating tank armour. There's also plenty of evidence of video fakery, as the Shack doco shows.

 

[Shrewd Manager]

I've heard the conspiracy theories. Even the one using the $20 bill.

Using different denominations:

Skip to around 1:20.

 

[Shrewd Manager]

From an engineering perspective I always thought the collapse of the towers looked weird.
But if it was an inside job then who did it? A lot of people suggest that George Bush did it to rally support for his Iraq invasion. But that makes no sense to me. The USA doesn't need the support of the public to go to war, they never did.

(((Cui bono?)))

 

[JacksBratt]

Its not deflection. I know that you detest 'real' truth my old friend.

The real truth is that you dismissed a post because it was from YouTube... meanwhile, YouTube has changed since the sitcom of "Friends" stopped shooting new episodes... and... is now a solid source of information on many topics..

You then turned it on to something totally unrelated about me and my personal views on a totally different topic.. That is called... ad hominem... and shows lack of tact.

I could hear the ricochet as you started typing your deflection from your misplaced blame.

 

[Shrewd Manager]

This is covered in the Shack doco. The plane can be shown to be a video object, a glorified cartoon, cgi.

 

[usexpat97]

From an engineering perspective I always thought the collapse of the towers looked weird.
But if it was an inside job then who did it? A lot of people suggest that George Bush did it to rally support for his Iraq invasion. But that makes no sense to me. The USA doesn't need the support of the public to go to war, they never did.

Israel. With the U.S. being a strong military power, other less-than-savory countries have sought to infiltrate the U.S.' power structure, so as to make themselves powerful. Russia, China, and Israel are all doing it. Israel staged this attack to rally the American public solidly behind them and against their enemies. The key is to make Americans believe it was Middle Eastern terrorists infiltrating them, and that Middle Eastern terrorists did it. The public can be really stupid.

Now, combine that with Christians' perception of Israel--that it's this wonderful, God-ordained, magical fulfillment of prophecy, and that's how you get things like Bush elected and the wool pulled over their eyes to that degree. Pride is another big problem: the sobering reality is, people think the U.S. is so strong, when in fact the U.S. indeed has been infiltrated--quite successfully, in fact. Yet people just want to believe we are "winning" the war on terror. You don't even know what the war on terror is.

 

[Shrewd Manager]

Israel.

 

[Christ is Lord]

It still amazes me that some people buy some of these theories.

 

[lasthero]

I love having to do remedial research for others.

Judging from where the man in the video is standing, I actually don't think he would've been able to see the plane's approach. Regardless, there is plenty of amatuer footage of the plane hitting, along with eyewitness testimony.

Live 2nd Plane Eyewitness

Eyewitness accounts of attack
This one shows it from 43 different angles - are they all fake?

Is the insinuation that every single news station in the world is in on this, to some degree?

It's greatly disputed, just not on TV.

If you mean the internet, then everything is disputed.

 

[JacksBratt]

Is the insinuation that every single news station in the world is in on this, to some degree?

Actually, in reality.. there would have only been a few actual video's of the planes. Think now.... you would have had to be there, with a video camera, ready at that particular time..

Then... these videos would be sold or given to the news casts...

Once you wrap your head around this fact, it's not hard to see how easy it would be to fake the plane crashes...
It's not like 50 news companies knew it was coming and filmed it like a sport event or rocket launch.

However, that's how people are convinced.... By asking "so every tv station is in on it"? When in fact.. they would have, as always, purchased the feed from whom ever took the video...

SO... not that hard to believe, or, for your CIA or FBI or whatever... to fabricate.

 

[lasthero]

Actually, in reality.. there would have only been a few actual video's of the planes. Think now.... you would have had to be there, with a video camera, ready at that particular time..

Only for the first one. When the second hit, you can bet there were plenty of cameras aimed at the building. And there is footage of the first one hitting.

Then... these videos would be sold or given to the news casts...

Once you wrap your head around this fact, it's not hard to see how easy it would be to fake the plane crashes...
It's not like 50 news companies knew it was coming and filmed it like a sport event or rocket launch.

By the time the second one hit, just about every station with the capability was watching the towers live.

However, that's how people are convinced.... By asking "so every tv station is in on it"? When in fact.. they would have, as always, purchased the feed from whom ever took the video...

There’s plenty of live feed from amateur cameras.

And what is the live footage. I remember the day perfectly. I watched the second plane hit on live television. What are you saying that I saw exactly?

 

[JacksBratt]

Only for the first one. When the second hit, you can bet there were plenty of cameras aimed at the building. And there is footage of the first one hitting.



By the time the second one hit, just about every station with the capability was watching the towers live.



There’s plenty of live feed from amateur cameras.

And what is the live footage. I remember the day perfectly. I watched the second plane hit on live television. What are you saying that I saw exactly?

Funny you should mention that.

It has been commented as to the lack of amateur video of this event. There should be reams of them. There was surprisingly little.

 

[lasthero]

Funny you should mention that.

It has been commented as to the lack of amateur video of this event. There should be reams of them. There was surprisingly little.

This is hard for people to remember, but there was a time, not long ago, when recording devices were expensive and relatively rare. Keep in mind, in 2001, VHS tapes were still in fairly common usage. Most people didn't have recording equipment back then, and even if they did, they would have it at home. The work day had started when the planes hit. There's also no telling how much footage is out there that simply hasn't been uploaded to the internet for public consumption. Depending on the format it was recorded on, getting it to the internet can be a pain that not everyone is going through.

That being said, there's still plenty of amatuer footage out there, and you don't have to look too hard for it. I'd say even one piece of footage showing the plane kind of shoots down the idea that there was no plane, and you definitely have that.

To add on, I was thinking - from the perspective of someone planning this, how would it make sense to bomb the WTC and blame it on a plane when you didn't even have planes? Wouldn't it make more sense to just say it was a bomb planted by terrorists? The WTC has been bombed before, so it's hardly that farfetched. Why add the wrinkle of the planes when it only causes problems? And why detonate one bomb almost twenty minutes after the other? At that point, everyone's going to be looking at the building in one of the most populated cities in the world, which just makes it harder to blame on the planes.

 

[Lost4words]

This is covered in the Shack doco. The plane can be shown to be a video object, a glorified cartoon, cgi.

Very sad that you actually believe that no planes hit the buildings. Sad for all those that lost their lives.

 

[Lost4words]

Actually, in reality.. there would have only been a few actual video's of the planes. Think now.... you would have had to be there, with a video camera, ready at that particular time..

Then... these videos would be sold or given to the news casts...

Once you wrap your head around this fact, it's not hard to see how easy it would be to fake the plane crashes...
It's not like 50 news companies knew it was coming and filmed it like a sport event or rocket launch.

However, that's how people are convinced.... By asking "so every tv station is in on it"? When in fact.. they would have, as always, purchased the feed from whom ever took the video...

SO... not that hard to believe, or, for your CIA or FBI or whatever... to fabricate.

You actually believe that? Really?

 

[Shrewd Manager]

Very sad that you actually believe that no planes hit the buildings. Sad for all those that lost their lives.

Why do you insist in commenting from ignorance? The resources have been identified here. Why not go review them and contribute something of substance? We get you're a sceptic, but empty denials only serve to clutter the thread.