No Planers - Suicide To 9/11 Discussion

Discussion in '9/11' started by Adam Fitzgerald, Jan 1, 2019.

You are viewing posts in the Conspiracy Theory forum. PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening.

  1. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I wasnt there, neither was I privy to the site, it was a closed door investigation, closed to the public that is, makes it much easier to tamper with the evidence.
    [​IMG]
    If you are asking if there are any alternatives that can be used to fake people like yourself out and make believers out of you sure, there are lots of ways, easiest is c4.


    Yeh I know, they are broken in places the wings could not have possibly cut through, that is why I call them the invincible planes that broke all the laws of physics
     
  2. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,268
    Likes Received:
    845
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You don't believe the no-plane theory, do you?
     
  3. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So you expect me to believe the impossible just to agree with you? Sorry.
    You need to study plane design and strengths of materials and physics and several years experience etc etc
    Until then you have nothing to offer here.
     
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2021
  4. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,268
    Likes Received:
    845
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You're being a little vague. Either planes hit the towers, or they didn't. Do you believe planes hit the towers?
     
  5. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I dont see any planes, do you?

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2021
  6. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,694
    Likes Received:
    11,760
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Planes hit the towers, but they were drones. Planes hit the towers, but they were NOT AA11 and UA175

    Too many people saw the planes hit the towers, and while there were few pictures of the North Tower strike, there were many pictures of the South Tower strike.

    Planes hit the towers, but they were not the planes of the OCT. They were drones.
     
  7. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,268
    Likes Received:
    845
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What exactly is your argument?

    18 Views of 'Plane Impact' in South Tower | 9/11 World Trade Center [HD DOWNLOAD]



    Yeah. That's pretty clear.

    Was the 9/11 Attack the 2001 Version of "Operation Northwoods"?
     
  8. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    WTC1?
    only a very fertile imagination on lsd would believe a fuzz blob is clear, or even evidence for that matter, in fact as evidence its laughable, but if you think you or anyone else is brilliant enough to prove a fuzz blob is clear and evidentiary be my guest.

    So apparently someone inserted a plane for wtc 2 in your video because I dont see any plane, what evidence do you have your clip is not edited? Oh and dont tell me you have more than one view, it will only demonstrate lack of knowledge.
     
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2021
  9. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    scot point out the plane for us that you would show a judge as exhibit A in court

    [​IMG]

    if you look close enough long enough I am sure you can see atta sticking his tongue out at us. See it?
     
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2021
  10. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,694
    Likes Received:
    11,760
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What is never discussed anymore is the story of the North Tower. It was once public information, for it was some of the first stuff I read in 2005 when I began to investigate the events of the day.

    NYPD received maybe a dozen phone calls from citizens regarding the first strike. Few photos, but several phone calls.

    The interesting point was that all those callers, almost to a man, described the airplane as having been a smaller airplane. Not an airliner, but a "commuter" or a "corporate" type aircraft.

    That information contradicts the doctored video of the Naudet brothers.
     
  11. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There is nothing there but vivid imaginations. The most rigged court on the planet could not declare the N bros clip a plane, just these crazy oct supporters and on a scale from 1 to 10 they are -1 with what they provide in so far as constructive debate, simply trolls peddling the the narrative.
     
    Eleuthera likes this.
  12. ProVox

    ProVox Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2019
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Why on earth do some people make something so simple …. so complicated.

    Simple fact: On 9/11 we all saw two aircraft crash into two high rise buildings, there followed fires in both and lots of dense smoke and later both collapsed.

    We also saw the Pentagon with a hole in the face again on fire and belching smoke. I didn’t see an aircraft hit it but that is what we were told. Eye witness accounts are not facts.

    We saw a hole in the ground in Pennsylvania which we were told was where an aircraft crashed but we didn’t see an aircraft.

    All fact ….. I have no argument with the facts.

    Then a couple of years later I became aware of another building that caught fire and collapsed, on the same 9/11, on the same WTC complex, but aircraft impact was never claimed and it apparently collapsed due to just ‘normal’ office fires and with no significant damage..

    Now this WTC 7 is the one I have concentrated on as it raises questions. How does a building that was not struck by an aircraft manage to collapse due to normal office fires that it was designed to withstand?

    Forget all the other scenarios they are all complex WTC 7 is not!. WTC 7 is a mystery that defies logic, common sense and the laws of physics! THAT is the one to concentrate on! Stick to just facts and work within the Universal Laws of Physics and it is possible to come to a level of probability of which theory is the more likely. THEN have a discussion based on known facts and the Laws of Physics.

    My take is ......... it didn't collapse due to office fires alone and that is the most improbable scenario..
     
    Eleuthera and Bob0627 like this.
  13. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You can add the destruction of the twin towers to "a mystery that defies logic, common sense and the laws of physics". There is no possible way the twin towers naturally collapsed due to planes, fire and damage, totally, symmetrically and in seconds with no discernible hesitation, the same issues apply.
     
    Eleuthera likes this.
  14. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,694
    Likes Received:
    11,760
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Remember what sleight of hand is.

    You "saw" 2 aircraft strike the towers, and you were told they were certain airplanes, but according to the facts, they were actually drone aircraft.
     
  15. ProVox

    ProVox Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2019
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    8
    I agree and there is even factual evidence that is irrefutable, that there was a significant seismic event about 10 seconds before WTC 1 collapsed.

    But it is contentious and needs a lot of additional information to explain why it collapsed as it did. It could have been the impact, the effects of which were delayed but then became significant during the fire, it could have been steel failure due to the weakening of the steel. There are so many 'could-be's' it pays to eliminate anything that can have multiple explanations. That is why I choose WTC 7 as the ideal event to study as there were no planes, no damage, no serious fires, no significant combustible materials that were involved in the fire ...... it is an ordinary office fire situation that was allowed for in the fire calculations and the way office fires spread over time is a known science ...... and yet it collapsed in a very similar fashion to WTC1 and WTC2 ..... but you can look at actual events without many of the contentious points that are open to interpretation as they are with WTC1 and WTC2..

    Achieve a high probability for any scenario and you will have identified the most likely time line of events. The claim it was due to office fires is a no go from the start as that would cause a progressive asymmetrical collapse and that was not what the FACTS show..
     
    Kokomojojo likes this.
  16. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,473
    Likes Received:
    1,503
    Trophy Points:
    113
    what facts?
     
  17. ProVox

    ProVox Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2019
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    8
    I disagree with the claim they were drones! They may well have been bog-standard airliners under remote control and remote control is so much easier to apply than most people think.

    An aircraft on the ground can be configured as being in a flight configuration just by plugging in another computer into a 'maintenance' port on the systems built into the aircraft control systems.. Simple example: How do you think they test the undercarriage whilst the aircraft is on the ground because there are interlocks that prevent a pilot hauling up the gear by mistake. They use their maintenance computer plugged into the maintenance socket to override the aircrafts safety systems.

    The end result applied to an aircraft in flight makes it an aircraft under remote control ..... not a drone. Now that is a possible scenario and with all the war games going on that day they could have ended up with a military pilot flying what he though was a simulator ..... without realising he was actually controlling a real aero plane. That is just pure hypothesis on my part as it would need experts to work it out and but although I have a pilots license, I am no aeronautical/computer expert..
     
  18. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That I agree with and the same is true for WTC7.

    I disagree with all the above, there are not many "could-be's" at all. The manner in which the twin towers were destroyed (I won't even characterize it as "collapses") eliminates all the above possibilities and leaves only 1 possibility. There is no possible natural mechanism/event that can cause a steel frame high rise to be totally destroyed in such a manner other than a controlled demolition. Nothing on earth can duplicate what a controlled demolition does other than a controlled demolition.

    It is correct to choose WTC7 first for some of the reasons you listed however you missed another crucial reason. That the "collapse" of WTC7 was "investigated" by NIST and there's a detailed report in support of NIST's hypothesis. The same is not true for the twin towers. For the twin towers NIST stopped at the collapse initiation hypothesis and admitted in a footnote that they did not investigate the manner of the "collapse" itself. So their report on WTC7 can be analyzed in detail from "collapse" initiation to the final result. That is not true with the twin towers.
     
    Kokomojojo and ProVox like this.
  19. Adam Fitzgerald

    Adam Fitzgerald Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2018
    Messages:
    101
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    I haven't bothered with this forum in a year due to the fact of the many trolls and no planers that inhibit it, which i block on sight. But it seems we still have people who simply just don't comprehend the basic evidence against their position. Which is why they havent been able to do anything with said false information in their favor.
     
  20. Adam Fitzgerald

    Adam Fitzgerald Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2018
    Messages:
    101
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, people did see a plane crash into the Pentagon. We also had over one thousands federal and state investigators who involved with the search and rescue after wards, who located plane debris and human remains belonging to American Airlines Flight 77.

    As for Shanksville, residents from Somerset County did see a commercial airliner crash into the ground. In fact, most of this plane was recovered in small pieces, they also managed to find all of passengers and crews remains as well.

    Now those are facts.
     
  21. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm not a troll or a "no planer" but Adam Fitzgerald puts everyone who disagrees with him and his devotion to the official conspiracy theory on ignore, as he did with me. He just can't handle those who disagree with the official fairy tale.

    Yes that is a fact.
     
  22. ProVox

    ProVox Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2019
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Adam Fitzgerald:
    "Yes, people did see a plane crash into the Pentagon. We also had over one thousands federal and state investigators who involved with the search and rescue after wards, who located plane debris and human remains belonging to American Airlines Flight 77."

    People saw ‘something’ crash into the pentagon. That is fact!

    That it was a Boeing 757(?) is not fact it is eye witness opinion. Whatever it was they saw was apparently travelling at 880fps just feet above the ground, climbed over a ‘hump’ in the roadway, dropped to almost ground level, knocked over some street lamps and crashed into the ground floor but managed to avoid the rather large cable reels and contractors sheds. That is fact and you can see that result time and time again ..... without eye witness accounts.

    I doubt these eye witnesses even had time to say WTF! It was a flash in time ...... they all saw different things which is why eye witness accounts are not facts. The same comment applies to the ‘thousands federal and state investigators’ .... it depends what they were tasked to look for and who gave them those instructions.

    "As for Shanksville, residents from Somerset County did see a commercial airliner crash into the ground. In fact, most of this plane was recovered in small pieces, they also managed to find all of passengers and crews remains as well."

    Same comment as above ...... there were also those that claimed they saw a missile but of course, in your scenario, they have to be wrong!

    "Now those are facts."

    No they are predominantly opinions based on maybe a single fact ..... something happened but it depends on who you talk to as to what actually happened.

    I come back to WTC7 every time! A ‘normal’ office fire, which is a relatively common event and about which loads of research and investigation documents already exist. The only thing that was different is that WTC7 collapsed in a way no other high rise office block has ever collapsed in all of recorded history, due solely to office fires! But on that day WTC7 collapsed in an almost identical fashion to two other buildings both of which had been struck by a passenger jets travelling at speed, also for the first time in history. That is one hell of a coincidence!

    If you need to create a higher probability that what the Government has presented as an explanation for events on 9/11 is not true ..... then WTC7 is the mystery to solve.
     
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2021
  23. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,694
    Likes Received:
    11,760
    Trophy Points:
    113
    For you and Shinebox, the facts are too many to describe in one post.

    The engine that came off the south tower drone was an engine NOT used on a stock 767. It was an engine basically from a 747 that had been used on about 25 aircraft that were part of group modified in Israel as candidates for tanker replacements for KC10 and KC135. Dov Zakheim had an interest in that company, and he was the comptroller for the Pentagon during that time period.

    Further, the photos taken by many clearly showed wing root fairings inconsistent with a stock 767. They WOULD be consistent with an airframe modified for the tanker role. They WOULD be consistent with the external plumbing necessary for the tanker role.
     
  24. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Even the cheapest video camera of the day would have shot those plane videos tack sharp, they are desktop creations.
     
  25. Adam Fitzgerald

    Adam Fitzgerald Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2018
    Messages:
    101
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male

    You are wrong. They saw a commercial aircraft belonging to an American Airlines plane. The debris recovered belonged to Flight 77. The human remains of passengers and crew were also found, and this evidence was used to prosecute Zacarias Moussaoui in 2006..

    As for Shanksville, the residents all stated to reporters that they saw a boeing airliner crash into the field. Again, the debris recovered belonged to flight 93. including both black boxes.

    https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2011/09/06/eyewitness-reflects-on-flight-93-crash/
     

Share This Page