• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Double Tree Video Released?

The latest spin:

[qimg]http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r195/imgstacke/wherestree.jpg[/qimg]

Because nobody could have cut down a tree in five years...

Wow, that Killtown guy just never fails to disappoint, does he?

I might add that the "Big Ass Tree" is comparable in size to the cars parked in front of it... perhaps five meters branch diameter, though it's kinda hard to see just what's in that frame. Certainly not what I'd call a large tree from my own experience. Definitely no big deal to remove.

This is only further proof that the poor lad has never even experienced the real world. If he wasn't so toxic, I would deeply pity him.
 
The latest spin:

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r195/imgstacke/wherestree.jpg

Because nobody could have cut down a tree in five years...
I was able to enhance the image. The results were quite surprising!

wherestree_enhanced.jpg


edit: This proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that MI5 was involved: https://www.mi5.gov.uk/output/Page493.html
 
Last edited:
Wow, that Killtown guy just never fails to disappoint, does he?

I might add that the "Big Ass Tree" is comparable in size to the cars parked in front of it... perhaps five meters branch diameter, though it's kinda hard to see just what's in that frame. Certainly not what I'd call a large tree from my own experience. Definitely no big deal to remove.

This is only further proof that the poor lad has never even experienced the real world. If he wasn't so toxic, I would deeply pity him.

Killtown has quite some difficulties interpreting and judging scale, size and distance from pictures. But atleast he can now start harrassing the Double Tree management, instead of Val McClatchey.
 
I bet Killtown loved the game "wheres waldo". He is the biggest nitpick I have ever seen, and what he picks at is freakin useless. So what, as was said, Trees are cut down all the time, or hit by motor vehicles, or they wither and die.

A better question, is "Where is the Flyover Jet we were promised???"

TAM
 
I bet Killtown loved the game "wheres waldo". He is the biggest nitpick I have ever seen, and what he picks at is freakin useless. So what, as was said, Trees are cut down all the time, or hit by motor vehicles, or they wither and die.

A better question, is "Where is the Flyover Jet we were promised???"

TAM

Oh well, as I said in my AA77 thread, posting that picture is a good way to evade the fact that no plane can be seen flying over the Pentagon.

My! I'm shocked! How are we going to debunk that?
 
gumboot said:
The "scramble Vs intercept" is often brought up in response to the "many intercepts" figure, but it is a very misleading response.

The 67 in the months prior to 9/11 (I think it was 6 months, not a year) should be considered intercepts, giving CTers the benefit of the doubt.

However...

NORAD's area of responsibility is the Air Defence Identification Zone - or ADIZ. This is a "buffer" zone located over water at the edges of the USA.

You can see the Continental US ADIZ here.

It is defined by Federal Aviation Regulation Part 99 section 43:



Intercepts inside the ADIZ are, and always have been, routine. There is standard proceedure for these intercepts.

However, the 9/11 attacks did not involve aircraft operating inside the ADIZ. They were domestic flights over CONUS (Continential United States) airspace. Prior to 9/11 there was NO standard intercept proceedure for flights inside CONUS. Standard hijacking proceedure was to notify the FAA and hand over control to the FBI. As a domestic crime, only the FBI had the authority to request military support.

So the question that should be asked is:

Did NORAD perform any successful intercepts inside CONUS Airspace prior to 9/11?

The answer is yes. In the decade prior to 9/11 NORAD was involved in ONE intercept.

This was October 25th, 1999. The aircraft was N47BA - a Learjet35 owned by Payne Stewart.

The NTSB report on this incident is here.

So how well did NORAD do on this occasion?

Well, first off, some basic comparisons:

1) N47BA did not deviate from its intended flightplan.
2) The transponder onboard N47BA remained on at all times throughout the intercept.

Neither of the above is true of the 9/11 flights. This make intercept many magnitudes more difficult.

So then, how well did NORAD do?

The first intercept aircraft - a test pilot from the 40th Flight Test Squadron at Eglin AFB, Florida, reached N47BA 81 minutes after communication was lost.

So let's compare that to the flights of 9/11, and total flight duration of those aircraft:

FLIGHT HIJACKING CRASH DURATION
AA11 0813 0846 33 minutes
UA175 0847 0903 16 minutes
AA77 0856 0937 41 minutes
UA93 0928 1003 35 minutes

So the intercept of N47BA - an aircraft with transponder functioning and in straight level flight - took almost TWICE AS LONG as the longest flight duration on 9/11 - that of AA77.

The facts speak for themselves. A successful intercept of any of the 9/11 flights was impossible.

-Gumboot

ETA.

It is worth noting that the times I gave are from the moment of hijacking. Of more relevance is the "window of opportunity" - the time between when NORAD were notified of a hijacking and when that flight crashed. On 9/11 the longest window of opportunity that NORAD would receive was 9 minutes for AA11. The N47BA intercept took 9 times as long.
Oh yeah? Well, I bet Superman would've been able to intercept all four! On an off day!

Thus 9/11 was an inside job.
 
Is there a way that one could access records of traffic accidents to see if the BAT was taken out by a drunk driver or maybe a semi sliding in the snow? In five years on a major roadway, I'd frankly be surprised if the tree WASN'T knocked down. (Rule 8) happens.
 
Our old mate Russell Pickering says:

I agree that it seems VERY reasonable to assume there is an image, still or video that should be clear. If they would give us an original analogue image from the security camera that hasn't been reduced in half twice we might see it.

The deal everybody has to decide on is why don't they want us to see it? It isn't what we were told or they don't want it resolved. Right now I believe it is the latter. The Pentagon is way too useful for them in their distraction.

When you wonder what something is, then just look what it does (before space beams and crap).

1) What divides the 9/11 investigation the most?

2) What provides the greatest ridicule of 9/11 researchers?

3) What consumes the energy of 9/11 researchers?

4) What theory was so effective at the Pentagon that they have now moved it to the WTC late in the game?

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=1341

1) the woowoo

2) the woowoo

3) bickering and internet porn

4) hmmmmm what theory did russell once believe applied to the pentagon, despite mountains of evidence to the contrary, and which he has now abandoned in favour of another theory which is contrary to common sense?

Russell, why did you once believe the 'no plane' fantasy at the pentagon?
 
I figured the CT dorks would only chimp scream if the video clearly showed a plane, but they are screaming "fake!!" anyways, even though there isnt a plane? I'm :confused:
Does that make sense to anyone?
 
I figured the CT dorks would only chimp scream if the video clearly showed a plane, but they are screaming "fake!!" anyways, even though there isnt a plane? I'm :confused:
Does that make sense to anyone?

Sadly yes, they are so predictable. They will always have some tripe they cling to as scripture! Funny/ Pathetic, take your pick!
 
Who actually thinks the FBI spent 5 years photoshopping a tree into every frame of a video that already doesn't show anything?

Do you think if the tree was absent you could see through the elevated highway?
 
I figured the CT dorks would only chimp scream if the video clearly showed a plane, but they are screaming "fake!!" anyways, even though there isnt a plane? I'm :confused:
Does that make sense to anyone?


I think this is just evidence that the entire CT mindset is orientated, not towards finding out "the truth" but towards finding all and any errors or anomolies in the "official version".

-Gumboot
 
Earlier in the thread, debunk911myths posted this pic

600px-Doubletree_armynavy2.jpg


Which also shows the absence of the tree. Can you tell us when this picture was taken?
 
Dazed, I think it was just a few months back. Go to Kates' web page, it may say there, or e-mail her.
 
Perhaps the point he's making is that the NWO deliberately planted a tree in that spot years in advance of the attacks, knowing that it would be necessary to obscure the view of the security camera. Now that the tree has done its work, it, like all blown government agents, is surplus to requirements and has thus been eliminated.

The NWO is ruthless!
 
Perhaps the point he's making is that the NWO deliberately planted a tree in that spot years in advance of the attacks, knowing that it would be necessary to obscure the view of the security camera. Now that the tree has done its work, it, like all blown government agents, is surplus to requirements and has thus been eliminated.

The NWO is ruthless!

The budget has been tight after losing the 2.3 zillion dollars, and the tree was costing us about 60 cents/day to water and keep pruned, so it was axed - literally. I was a big opponent to the tree from the beginning. If I had my way, there would've been a big billboard installed in its place for the advertising revenue and subliminal mind control possibilities.
 

Back
Top Bottom