Elmondo,
You are slipping. Your repitition of claims that have been refuted six ways to Sunday does not reflect well upon posting.
In each of the 4 claims you are making, there has been substantial refutation clearly and visibly posted and sourced.
By way of non-exhaustive example:
1--The debunker website you rely on for witnesses is of very poor quality. It contains but two signficant sources of witnesses; PAPD and TASK FORCE statements. Each of those two sources contain, in the aggregate, more NO PLANE accounts than PLANE SPOT accounts.
2--The radar data is hopelessly compromised by the fact that there was no way to distinguish real blips from exercise blips. For instance, we all know that Air traffic controller Pete Zalewski was the one who thought he recognized a foreign, Middle Eastern-sounding voice, but does not make out the specific words that are attributed to the conversation he overheard, namely, the famous “we have some planes” declaration.
Zalewski did however respond saying: “Who’s trying to call me?” Seconds later, in the next transmission, the transmission includes: “Nobody move. Everything will be OK. If you try to make any moves you’ll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet,” according to the 9/11 Commission and mainstream media stallwart MSNBC, 9/9/2006.
But Bill Peacock, the FAA director of air traffic services, (confirmed by the FAA transcript) later says:
“We didn’t know where the transmission came from, what was said and who said it.”
And, David Canoles, the FAA’s manager of air traffic evaluations and investigations, adds:
“The broadcast wasn’t attributed to a flight. Nobody gave a flight number.”
The FAA report that is the source of the radar claims simply says with respect to these claimed transmissions that they came from:
“an unknown origin.”
See: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB165/faa7.pdf
pg. 4/59
Similarly, the radar data itself could not be distinguished, "real" from "exercise."
I have elsewhere said as follows about the matter of the radar and the military exercises:
"The significance of the MILITARY EXERCISES is that they are a means by which the events of 9/11 could actually have been carried out if they were disguised as exercises, but were, in fact "real."
The tapes confirm that the difference between what was "real" and what was "exercise" was not readily discernible."
For purposes of information, the FAA report that is the basis of the radar claims can be found at:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB165/faa7.pdf
As you can see, for instance at pg. 4/59, much of the information was "of unknown origin."
3--The debris issue is one of the weakest and most absurd of all of the claims. Not one single piece of aircraft debris was identified by part number, thus confirming that all claims concerning debris are utterly and completely useless as evidence. Does anyone here have any difficulty understanding the words "utterly and completely useless as evidence?
I hope not.
4--As to video. That is what this thread is about. It is very clear that posters here cannot, will not and certainly have not responded to the many posts that have been put into this thread showing that the shadow thingy does not behave as a jetliner would behave, is eratic and inconsistent from one video to the next, is not seen at all in some and always explodes in the wrong place and at the wrong time and never sounds like a widebody jetliner <1000ft above street level at 550mph.
The video is a clear indicator of 9/11 fraud and deception. And, as we clearly know, the witnesses who were present and accounted for almost uniformly report an explosion and not a plane crash.
That about does it for your post, Elmondo.
Do better, if you can.
Last edited:
