Why they didn't use planes

It has taken less than 10 years to pry open the can of worms enshrouding the pathetic 9/11 scam. The central role of the major newsmedia corporations to pull off this sordid "terror" simulation has now been comprehensively exposed. Before joining this forum, please get familiar with the research at: http://www.septemberclues.info

Re: Why they didn't use planes

Unread postby Equinox on Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:21 am

reel.deal wrote:so... regarding the no plane/no missile/no drone/no nothing at the NYC WTC on 9/11...
none of us will ever know, for sure; thats the bottom line.
so if i'm at 25/75, Simons at 50/50, maybe, everyone else 100/0 % 'no nothing'...
why so 100% 'no nothing' at the WTC ? to extend the same principle surely
then applies to the Pentagon aswell, no ?



I always have been 50/50 on the missile. Actually I'm 50/50 on pretty much anything may have gone down At the WTC complex that morning.
That' s right we will never know for sure. Its good enough just sharing our theories on it what might be feasible. Each and every one of the views in regards to the Missile/ EMP/HERF/ Smoke Obscurants/ No Projectile/ Evacuated Area I have read on this forum all seem quite feasible.




reel.deal wrote:WTC '93... 9/11 prelude... truck bomb softened up foundations, then just plastered them over... ;)
some guy is doing zoomed-in 9/11 details gifs & vids on youtube, will find link later...
i liked this one, of the chopper... something very 'classic 9/11' about it,...
Image

made a remix: "9/11 NO SMOKING"

Image
Image



I always think the helicopter shots are the most artificial featuring shots...
And these long shots of the “smoking WTC” have these big odd protruding divided clusters of CGI smoke. I'm sure clone tool was used , And easily and soon enough can be be detected.
Do they realistically look like real life smoke trail to you?
Image


And these helicopters shade and detail for a bright blue clear morning in September. Look so artificial.
Image

Image
Equinox
Banned
 
Posts: 549
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 8:45 am

Re: Why they didn't use planes

Unread postby Heiwa on Tue Nov 22, 2011 11:20 am

reel.deal wrote:Pentagon looks like a missile hit, to me...
:huh:

OT of course but much easier to plant a bomb in the wall during 'reinforcement' (sic) works! :rolleyes:
Heiwa
Banned
 
Posts: 1062
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 6:20 pm

Re: Why they didn't use planes

Unread postby simonshack on Tue Nov 22, 2011 1:20 pm

*

Thanks for making this gif from September Clues, Equinox.
Image

For those who may wonder, I captured those images from a Lockheed Martin demonstration-video of their JASSM AGM 158 precision missile.

Looks like someone else (Youtube user 'kernzyp') is nurturing the very same idea...
"WHAT REALLY HIT THE TWIN TOWERS ON 9/11?? The AGM-158 JASSM MISSILE EASILY MISTAKEN"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuThDJmleU4
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6730
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: Why they didn't use planes

Unread postby Heiwa on Tue Nov 22, 2011 1:50 pm

When the perps' IT experts produced the CGI of 'plane impacting tower' to be broadcast 'live on TV' they evidently copied pasted existing 'plane' or why not a missile that looks like plane into the CGI layers.
That the perps would purchase a real missile and then launch it someway and hit the tower for people to watch seems ... far-fetched or unnatural. :blink:
Heiwa
Banned
 
Posts: 1062
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 6:20 pm

Re: Why they didn't use planes

Unread postby reel.deal on Tue Nov 22, 2011 2:19 pm

Equinox wrote:I always have been 50/50 on the missile. Actually I'm 50/50 on pretty much anything may have gone down At the WTC complex that morning.
That' s right we will never know for sure. Its good enough just sharing our theories on it what might be feasible. Each and every one of the views in regards to the Missile/ EMP/HERF/ Smoke Obscurants/ No Projectile/ Evacuated Area I have read on this forum all seem quite feasible.

true.
Heiwa wrote:
reel.deal wrote:Pentagon looks like a missile hit, to me...
:huh:

OT of course but much easier to plant a bomb in the wall during 'reinforcement' (sic) works! :rolleyes:

true.

Image
true, true. havent really studied Pentagon, you're right, looks like demo explosives.
...to 'penetrate 3 rings of buildings' & leave an 'exit hole' ?
some photoshop ? & a sledgehammer... ? uh, maybe... ?

ok then, No Missiles it is then !
no missile at Pentagon... or at NYC WTC.

guess that makes every last single NYC area 9/11 eyewitness a 'basket case',
all hypnotised cobras in trance to the tune of their spontaneous combustin' WTC fakir...

all kid themselves, all bullshit each other ? ok...
zero integrity, sincerity ? Fine...

...yo bro, wtf was that just hit the other tower ?
was that another plane ? ...another missile ?

wasnt anything, just exploded all by itself.
did you see it ? i must have missed it !
it made no sound ! how can that be ?
wasnt anything, just exploded all by itself.

...nah, nah; radio saying it was a 2nd plane, or missile...
no. you didnt see nutin', no-one saw shit, 'cept the TV...
we sitting here watching that shit, none of us saw nutin'.
wait, it was a 2nd 747... we never seen or heard it, no-one did,
but it happened, yr minds playing tricks on ya...

...so, we sittin' here, watch it explode, now its a 747 crash ?
yep. its demolition day, bankrolled by PNAC, blamed on Islam.
anyone asks, you saw the plane, right ?
...oh ok, cool... wtf ?

no plane/no missile/no drone/no nothing ?
just bombs ?
so be it...

but nothing in the sky ? why ?...
i give in !
:P

Re: Why they didn't use planes/missiles/drones/anything; all a mirage, no real eyewitness saw anything, all NYC 100% self-deluded liars with
tricked-out hypnotised minds who BS themselves, their friends & family & need better glasses & should have gone indoors to watch on TV...
if they maybe did, or believe, or think, or say - they saw 'somethin' 'in the sky'...

ok...
:huh: :blink: :wacko: :unsure:
^_^
reel.deal
DELETED THEIR OWN POSTS :(
 
Posts: 1294
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 12:42 am

Re: Why they didn't use planes

Unread postby reel.deal on Tue Nov 22, 2011 2:27 pm

Heiwa wrote:When the perps' IT experts produced the CGI of 'plane impacting tower' to be broadcast 'live on TV' they evidently copied pasted existing 'plane' or why not a missile that looks like plane into the CGI layers.
That the perps would purchase a real missile and then launch it someway and hit the tower for people to watch seems ... far-fetched or unnatural. :blink:


THE INVISIBLE EMPORER, & HIS INVISIBLE 'NO' CLOTHES ?
:blink:
:unsure:
reel.deal
DELETED THEIR OWN POSTS :(
 
Posts: 1294
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 12:42 am

Re: Why they didn't use planes

Unread postby reel.deal on Tue Nov 22, 2011 6:23 pm

INTERLUDE... 9/11 360.
Image

Did 9/11 really dare send nothing into WTC-2 ?
with practically everyone in a 5 mile radius stood outside, watching it 'live' ?
not a cloud in the sky, WTC-1 smoking, choppers buzzing round,
visibility up to 10 miles or more...
and then... 'nothing' ?!?
no-one saw anything ?
no 2nd strike ?!?
nada, zilch ?

:wacko:

:o
reel.deal
DELETED THEIR OWN POSTS :(
 
Posts: 1294
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 12:42 am

Re: Why they didn't use planes

Unread postby Heiwa on Tue Nov 22, 2011 6:39 pm

reel.deal wrote:INTERLUDE... 9/11 360.


[i]Did 9/11 really dare send nothing into WTC-2 ?
with practically everyone in a 5 mile radius stood outside, watching it 'live' ?


Why not? With so much fake footage available!
:rolleyes:
Heiwa
Banned
 
Posts: 1062
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 6:20 pm

Re: Why they didn't use planes

Unread postby reel.deal on Tue Nov 22, 2011 7:14 pm

should get a NYC 9/11 lie-detector sponsorship rolling, for everyone who saw the 'plane'...
TAKE THE "9/11 PLANE-WITNESS CHALLENGE"... WIN !!! A MISSILE !!!
:P

$10 bucks a shot, that should raise, roughly, $ 50,000,000.99c, a cool half 'Bill'...
;)
reel.deal
DELETED THEIR OWN POSTS :(
 
Posts: 1294
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 12:42 am

Re: Why they didn't use planes

Unread postby HonestlyNow on Tue Nov 22, 2011 10:47 pm

reel.deal wrote:should get a NYC 9/11 lie-detector sponsorship rolling, for everyone who saw the 'plane'...


"Consider the source"
"Evaluate the reliability of an information source"

How can we do that in this case? We already know not to trust the news sources, but how do we locate and evaluate any other supposed witnesses?
HonestlyNow
Member
 
Posts: 441
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:15 pm

Re: Why they didn't use planes

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Tue Nov 22, 2011 10:53 pm

I remember I once proposed to Simon we go to New York and start taking polls, knowing what we know about the fake video, in order to best construct a thorough questionnaire of residents.

We were told by Simon's guest at the time not to attempt such questionnaires as people were already sick of them. That guest turned out to be quite a nuisance on the board and he claimed to know a vicsim that he looked like!

I'd say it's high time we tried to do a documentary of this nature ... actually going around asking people.

We should actually start by asking them if they believe man landed on the moon and go from there.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5059
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Why they didn't use planes

Unread postby lux on Tue Nov 22, 2011 11:24 pm

Trouble is anyone who has watched TV has "seen a plane," including those who were there. Television has been shown to provide false memories.

Questionnaires would have to be carefully worded (I worked in market research).

I would also add a question asking if at any time it seemed that the news footage or photographs they saw did not match what they actually saw that day and, if so, ask for details.
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: Why they didn't use planes

Unread postby HonestlyNow on Tue Nov 22, 2011 11:37 pm

lux wrote:Trouble is anyone who has watched TV has "seen a plane," including those who were there. Television has been shown to provide false memories.

I know I still chuckle to myself in disbelief when I recall talking to my neighbor about all this and she emphatically said "Of coarse it happened! I was there!"
(No, she wasn't there -- she was hundreds of miles away -- she saw it on TV)
She also "knew" people died because she saw the funerals (on TV).
HonestlyNow
Member
 
Posts: 441
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:15 pm

Re: Why they didn't use planes

Unread postby lux on Tue Nov 22, 2011 11:47 pm

^ Yes, TV-implanted false memory is, I think, a major factor in the ignorance of the masses. They are walking around in a false world, pretending it's real.

I think they know "down deep" that it's not real but they pretend it is. It's a game they play with themselves and they expect everyone else to do the same. They can get quite annoyed with you if you don't play along. :lol:
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: Why they didn't use planes

Unread postby reel.deal on Tue Nov 22, 2011 11:58 pm

hey, Nu Yoiker, you here 9/11 ?
...Shit, yeah, it was kray-zee ! un-fricken-believable !
seen it with your own eyes ?
...Hell yeah, like it was yesterday, playin' over & over in my head.
wanna win a missile ? put this on yr finger... cool.
you see the plane ?

...Yeah! beep beep beep I... beep beep beep seen... beep beep beep it... beep beep beep slam...
...beep beep beep ...yo, wtf, asshole ? fuck this shit ! you want me kill you ?
B)

er, questionaire needs some more work on it... all gone a bit 'curb your enthusiasm' Larry & Susie...

:P
reel.deal
DELETED THEIR OWN POSTS :(
 
Posts: 1294
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 12:42 am

PreviousNext

Return to SEPTEMBER CLUES: the 9/11 psyop exposed: the media aired a "Made-for-TV Hollywood movie"

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest