Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
bill smith said:
Here's a hyperlink so that you can have a look at the plane apparently going through the building.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5075880&postcount=965
Click to expand...


You mean like this? I dont see a plane exiting the building
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnyC_zr4igg

just a debris cloud
debrisout.jpg
 
Deep, Good job. Every once in a while, you show some potential to be a real life normal person. (Read-Leave the "truth" movement)

I won't give up on you.
 
bill smith said:
Dave the readers are going to think you are being evasive if you will not answer the question directly. I will rephrase it so that it is difficult for you to muddy the waters and avoid giving said straightforward answer.

In the clip I showed a plane is seen to hit the building and it looks not unlike a pencil being stuck through the building with the point emerging on the other side. Now that might be debris exiting as you say, but all I want you to do is to confirm for the readers is that the actual footage itself is the authentic footage broadcast by FOX on the day of 9/11.

Readers will have to use their own judgement about whether Dave tries to fudge this answer and furthermore to ask yourelves why he is being so evavive about such a simple and yet vitally important question.
Click to expand...
Bill who are you trying to convince with this nonsense?

Flight 175 slammed into WTC 2 killing all those onboard. This appalling event was filmed and broadcast live to the entire planet. Nobody and I mean nobody, other than a tiny minority of extremely stupid people, questions this.

Are you one of these people?
 
Last edited:
triforcharity said:
Bill, I believe it to be authentic. Here is the problem with the nose coming out of the other side.

#1-We all know that the planes nose is not that strong, and wouldn't have survived.
#2- If the nose of the plane came out of the other side, where did it go after that?? If it survived going through all that steel and concrete, why didn't it survive the fireball on the other side?? Why didn't a huge nose piece either faall to the street or continue on its path??
Click to expand...


"The nose of the plane appears to exit the other side of the tower" is a no-planer claim. bill smith, for the moment, is attempting to argue that the plane in his video was digitally added to the video, in real-time. The nose of the plane coming out the opposite side of the tower is supposedly an editing error which exposes the whole coverup.

Of course, any all-powerful, nefarious organization with a collective intelligence greater than that of a turd would realize this exactly why you don't go faking video in real-time. You can't fix any screwups.

Also, there's the fact than many witnesses at the time would go, "Hmm... I don't remember seeing a plane hit the second tower, and I was looking right at it when that huge explosion went off."
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
I can tell you here and now with no fear of contradiction that the footage of the plane apparently going through the building is the authentic footage as broadcast on 9/11.
Click to expand...

Then why, exactly, were you asking me whether it was the authentic footage, unless you were trying to lay some kind of trap?

Dave
 
LashL said:
I know that a link to the archive of original television news coverage from 9/11/01 has been posted here in the CT sub-forum several times in the past, but I cannot readily locate it at the moment, so I thought I would just ask here in the general discussion thread if someone would be so kind as to provide the link (again) if you happen to have it handy.

Thanks in advance.

Cheers,
Lash
Click to expand...

When you do find that archive Councelor you may notice one very interesting thing. All the channels show their authentic footage as broadcast on the day of 9/11 in the spirit of the true and accurate historical record.--All except FOX that is who have removed the sequence of the plane flying through the building and subtituted entirely other non-live-broadcasted footage from the other side of the Towers though with the same live commentary. I don't know what you will make of that, if anything.

The 9/11 TV archive courtesy of deep44. Look for FOX at 9:02 or thereabouts.
http://www.archive.org/details/sept_11_tv_archive

This hyperlink contains a clip that shows the real footage that FOX bruadcast on 9/11 of the plane going through the building.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5075880&postcount=965
 
Last edited:
So Bill, if the planes nose flew all the way through the building UNHURT, where did it go after that?? Did it blow up?? I think not, as the columns inside would have done more damage than the fireball.

Now, how could a plane fly all the way through and punch out the other side, if one traveling just 5 MPH, as YOU claimed, would be damaged extensively.

What are you trying to say here Billy?? I am slightly confused. Please, help me understand.

BTW, there was no intact plane coming out the other side.
 
triforcharity said:
What are you trying to say here Billy?? I am slightly confused. Please, help me understand.
Click to expand...

You weren't here for the great Ace Baker debacle, were you? Bill believes the following:

No planes flew into the towers on 9/11. The impact damage was faked using explosives. The conspirators wanted people to believe planes were flowin into the towers, so they faked video footage of this happening. They did this in real time, using pre-recorded footage of an airliner flying across a blank sky. The fakery required an operator to stop the pre-recorded footage at exactly the right time so that the plane wouldn't appear to fly through the towers, but he screwed up on the footage from chopper 5; however, on the chopper 7 footage, the operator got it just right, so one set shows the plane coming out the other side but the other doesn't.

Here's where it gets a bit complicated.

The conspirators noticed the problem in time to interrupt the chopper 7 footage, which was broadcast live and showed what they wanted it to show, just as it got to the point that the nose would have emerged. However, they didn't notice in time to fix the chopper 5 footage, which showed the nose emerging and was blacked out just afterwards. They could have fixed this by cutting off the chopper 5 footage a second or two earlier, because the chopper 5 feed wasn't live at the time. However, instead of repeatedly broadcasting the live footage that showed what they did want everyone to see and suppressing or editing the delayed footage that showed what they didn't want everyone to see, they chose to broadcast the footage that showed what they didn't want everyone to see, suppress the footage that showed what they didn't want anyone to see, and then alter every other piece of video in existence that showed what they did want everyone to see so that it showed what they didn't want anyone to see.

But it was all OK, because Ace Baker was the only person in the world clever enough to figure all that out, and bill smith's the only person in the world clever enough to realise that Ace Baker was right all along.

Dave
 
Dave you are making a transparent attempt to discredit me by putting words in my mouth.This is not the kind of behaviour I would expect from an internationally known physicist. If you want to be useful please address the points I made in the attached post also seen above.

You may now understand why I wanted your confirmation that the footage of the plane apparently flying through the building is the original FOX footage that was broadcast on 9/11.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5083708&postcount=1006
 
Last edited:
Dave Rogers said:
Please present your evidence that the footage at www.archive.org is not what was shown on 9/11.

Dave
Click to expand...

We are looking for the Truth here Dave, not trying to win some juvenile battle.

The Truth is that the video of the plane apparently flying through the Tower is the uthentic footage that FOX broadcast on 9/11.I saw it myself and several other posters here have already confirmed it in recent posts.

The footage that FOX have in their archive is not from the original live broadcast. That has been excised and substituted with non-broadcasted footage as you can see by looking in the archive link and selecting the FOX sequence that shows the impact on the south tower at about 9;02 on 9/11.

In short FOX have removed the authentic shot of the plane flying through the Tower and substituted it with other footage that still purports to the the FOX broadcast on 9/11.
 
Last edited:
Dave Rogers said:
Then you'll be able to present your evidence that your claim is true. Please do so.

Dave
Click to expand...

Do the work Dave. Consult the links. I'm sure others will. All the proof needed can be seen there in in a few short minutes.

I do not intend to do the debunker two-step with you on this. You are disappointing me greatly. Others may wonder about your commitment to the Truth too. I regret to say that their fears may very well be justified.
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
Do the work Dave. Consult the links. I'm sure others will. All the proof needed can be seen there in in a few short minutes.
Click to expand...

The links show two pieces of video that are different. Please provide your evidence that the second was actually broadcast live on FOX on 9/11, and that the first has been substituted. If you don't, then according to the RedIbis criterion it's a proven lie.

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
The links show two pieces of video that are different. Please provide your evidence that the second was actually broadcast live on FOX on 9/11, and that the first has been substituted. If you don't, then according to the RedIbis criterion it's a proven lie.

Dave
Click to expand...

The plane flying through the building is the authentic footage Dave. You know it, i know it and so do the posters who have confirmed it here in recent posts. I am interested in the fact that you are tying to deny something that is quite well known.

Self evidently the FOX footage now on their archive is a substitution. See if you an persuade your felow debunkers to withdraw their assrtions that the plane apparently flying through the building is FOX's original authentic broadcast .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom