431 replies to this topic

[Hocus]

From all the available evidence it's quite clear to an open mind what really happened on 9/11.
Here's the REAL evidence, make up your own minds. No planes where used and the proof is in the videos below.

- 2001 a fake odyssey

- 9/11 taboo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiNt7YFKyvU - eyewitness see's no second plane

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbYAV5fCGiM - 9/11 amateur

[The New Richard Nixon]

If no Planes hit the towers, then why did everyone see them when they took off from the airports or made plane sounds before they hit the towers?

[Ranyhyn]

So basically, you have one eyewitness who says theres no second plane. And thousands who say there is a second plane. Then you have some videos about perspective and manipulation, but for me to be objective I need to know that he has not tampered with any of it, himself, before releaseing the clip on youtube, therefore I can't really say it's evidence of anything.

Plus, considering the hundreds of passengers that went missing - where did they go? Why are thousands if not tens or even hundreds of thousands of people saying there were planes? Why would someone go through the troubles of digitally manipulating the videos, and doing such a **** job of it, that anyone can dissect them? And on top of this, youtube which is owned by google, which is a huge company, whose executives probably visit bilderberg meetings... let the videos stay, without removing them.

Seems like a house of cards built not only on shaky foundation, but the entire bottom layer is missing.

[TK0001]

I can't believe that 8+ years later, people still can claim this with a straight face.

[Belial]

Great story, great compilations thanks for that

[Hocus]

At all 4 incident sites there is absolutely no evidence of a plane. None, apart from a few small scraps of metal, easily plantable by hand or truck. If a plane hit the pentagon, why not release tapes of it? There are many which would have recorded the event, but instead they were all confiscated and have not been released because the footage will show no plane.

No plane witness -

Another no plane witness (pilot) -

[frenat]

So, you have a plan where 4 planes go missing, people to fill 4 planes go missing, but you don't use those planes even when 3 of them are supposed to crash in heavily populated places where witnesses might be expected to have cameras.  This make sense how?

I disagree that only small scraps of metal were found.  Engines were recovered from both WTC and the Pentagon

[TK0001]

Hocus, on 14 April 2010 - 07:09 PM, said:

At all 4 incident sites there is absolutely no evidence of a plane. None, apart from a few small scraps of metal, easily plantable by hand or truck. If a plane hit the pentagon, why not release tapes of it? There are many which would have recorded the event, but instead they were all confiscated and have not been released because the footage will show no plane.

No plane witness -

Another no plane witness (pilot) -

Explain how the pieces of the plane materialized at the Pentagon seconds after the "explosion".

[Hocus]

frenat, on 14 April 2010 - 07:23 PM, said:

So, you have a plan where 4 planes go missing, people to fill 4 planes go missing, but you don't use those planes even when 3 of them are supposed to crash in heavily populated places where witnesses might be expected to have cameras.  This make sense how?

I disagree that only small scraps of metal were found.  Engines were recovered from both WTC and the Pentagon

So they say engines were discovered. So what? Engines can be planted too. Engines(allegedly)and few tiny scraps don't prove that planes hit any of the 4 sites they claim they did. What about Pennsylvania? Just a small hole in thr ground with no plane to be seen.

The military can eaisly dispose of 4 planes and all it's passengers, to suggest otherwise and that such a thing is impossible, is simply not true.

Edited by Hocus, 14 April 2010 - 07:34 PM.

[TK0001]

Hocus, on 14 April 2010 - 07:33 PM, said:

So they say engines were discovered. So what? Engines can be planted too. Engines(allegedly)and few tiny scraps don't prove that planes hit any of the 4 sites they claim they did. What about Pennsylvania? Just a small hole in thr ground with no plane to be seen.

You really need to (better) research. 95% of Flight 93 was recovered and given back to United Airlines.

[Hocus]

TK0001, on 14 April 2010 - 07:35 PM, said:

You really need to (better) research. 95% of Flight 93 was recovered and given back to United Airlines.

You really need to stop being so gullible. It's all well and good saying this and that was recovered, but there only words. Let's see some evidence. And the FBI could simply release the tapes..but they don't. Why not? If what they claim is on them, acutally is, then it would shut people like me up

[Alien Being]

Hocus, on 14 April 2010 - 06:36 PM, said:

From all the available evidence it's quite clear to an open mind what really happened on 9/11.
Here's the REAL evidence, make up your own minds. No planes where used and the proof is in the videos below.

- 2001 a fake odyssey

- 9/11 taboo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiNt7YFKyvU - eyewitness see's no second plane

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbYAV5fCGiM - 9/11 amateur

I quite cleary saw the second plane hit with my own two eyes. Explain that away.

[Hocus]

Alien Being, on 14 April 2010 - 08:09 PM, said:

I quite cleary saw the second plane hit with my own two eyes. Explain that away.

So did I.

It still doesn't make it possible for a lightweight jet aircraft to penetrate and slice through steel gurders.

[TK0001]

Hocus, on 14 April 2010 - 08:08 PM, said:

You really need to stop being so gullible. It's all well and good saying this and that was recovered, but there only words. Let's see some evidence. And the FBI could simply release the tapes..but they don't. Why not? If what they claim is on them, acutally is, then it would shut people like me up

So if a video of the Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon actually surfaced on youtube tomorrow, you'll suddenly believe actual planes were involved on 9/11? You're asking for "evidence", but I wonder what evidence would actually satisfy you.

For what it's worth, here's a link to photos of actual plane wreckage at the Pentagon.

Pentagon wreckage

[Rhomphaia]

Hocus, on 14 April 2010 - 08:08 PM, said:

You really need to stop being so gullible. It's all well and good saying this and that was recovered, but there only words. Let's see some evidence. And the FBI could simply release the tapes..but they don't. Why not? If what they claim is on them, acutally is, then it would shut people like me up

If those are 'just words', then so are yours. It's all 'just words'.

I hate to break it to you (actually, I love breaking it to people like you, but I must make a pretense of politeness), but you are making the extraordinary claim. You are the ones that need to provide the conclusive evidence. That is the way it is, be it in a court of law or in science.

Note the trick here is 'conclusive' evidence. Not supposition and cherry-picked 'facts' that back up those suppositions.