Video Fakery in the 9/11 Attack

[BigAl]

But if the video really turns out to be staged, the the other amateur videos are also staged. And compare that proof to the proof of hijackers.

If we didn't have a single video or picture of the planes we would still know that 19 Arabs hijacked and crashed 4 jets into the 3 buildings and a corn field.

One fake video or a hundred fake videos do nothing to disprove any of the massive amount of evidence we have for this.

 

[dafydd]

Good points Macgyver. I gave up on Anders after he ignore my suggestion to put his theory together 3 or 4 times, but there is no reason to be mean.

My goal when arriving at JREF was to try and get all the truth people to give their personal theory, but I haven't had much luck.

Mine too,and I have had no luck.Do any of them actually have a theory?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Anders, I understand that you believe there were no planes, therefore all the videos and eyewitness statements must be fake. But does that mean that you believe everyone in New York was in on the conspiracy (including the tourists)?

However many fake videos you believe were shot by conspirators, why are there no videos made non-conspirators? How do you imagine a conspiracy could prevent anyone grabbing a camera and filming after the initial explosion?

 

[twinstead]

I can only assume Anders and others who are no planers have NO idea just how many MORE questions and problems their theory creates than it answers, even if it answers anything, which I don't believe it does. That certainly is not the hallmark of a rational theory.

 

[djlunacee]

The example of the staged amateur video shows that they put a lot of effort into making it look like it really was an amateur video. No computer graphics except the plane.

Really? You do realize there are more than one amatuer videos out there regarding the events of the day, do you not? What you are saying is these amatuers shot film of the twin towers, went home and added the plane later? This is what you would have me believe?

 

[twinstead]

Really? You do realize there are more than one amatuer videos out there regarding the events of the day, do you not? What you are saying is these amatuers shot film of the twin towers, went home and added the plane later? This is what you would have me believe?

I think he's suggesting these amateurs shot film of the twin towers, then brought them to a super secret government video processing lab that added the plane later while still making it appear like it was an amateur video.

And yea, that's even more kooky

 

[AaronMic22]

In defense of Anders...I have been conversing with him for some time on the DI forums. I can conclusively say he is not a troll trying to get a rise out of JREF'ers. (unlike Bill Smith ) So stop with the troll accusations. He does believe in some far out stuff....but he is not totally married to his woo, like other truthers, and is at least willing to concede some points....a trait in truthers rarer than a lunch-time stripper that doesn't have stretch marks.

Many on this this board are suffering from "been there, done that" syndrome...and start attacking every truther on this board in the same way they attack long-term truther members like RedIbis and others.

I understand its fun to make fun of no-planers...but we should be above the juvenile comments...because the evidence is on OUR side.

Right, it's much more mature to sit here and play in the sand with with a box of rocks. When someone like Anders says the things Anders has said, one cannot help but decide that he is either completely insane and a lost cause or a horrific troll.

Alerting that he is a troll isn't to call him names - it's to point out that he is a fraud and a waste of our time. The fact that you've spent so much time talking to him on the DI forums doesn't put you in a great position to decide what is juvenile and what is not.

 

[T.A.M.]

While I expect that something flying hit both towers on 9/11, there is no way that the Naudet video and the "plane" it shows has not been tampered with. Maybe it has just been blurred a bit to make it impossible to identify but it flickers in and out of different frames in the most bizarre way.

Anyone got a heads up as to which street the famous passport was found on?

And your reasoning g for that alleged anomole (withthe naudet footage), is that it is nepharious rather then a glitch in the original footage, or possible avideo compression issue of the low rez version you and others have seen on youtube, right?

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

Are there any "planer" truthers left?

TAM

 

[fitzgibbon]

Ace does well to hold back the tears of laughter there, when expert Steve Wright says the fade to black was caused by the camera's agc.

Do you have an explanation of your own why you don't think it could've been the AGC?

 

[fitzgibbon]

And your reasoning g for that alleged anomole (withthe naudet footage), is that it is nepharious rather then a glitch in the original footage, or possible avideo compression issue of the low rez version you and others have seen on youtube, right?

TAM

Absolutely it's a compression error. These goofballs don't ever ask themselves why it is that professional uploads to YouTube (ie movie trailers, show clips [by the producer or broadcaster], etc.) look so much sharper than the stuff uploaded using YouTube's own compression software. They figure digital=infallible=clean=permanently perfect.

They have no clue

 

[bardamu]

Bardamu, maybe you will answer my questions as you seem to be a No Planer as well.

If the aircraft didn't crash into the towers what happened to them? What happened tothe passengers and crew?

Where are the aircraft now? They existed before the crashes. If they didn't then the manufacturers, parts contract companies, service companies, airlines, all the airports that they flew out of and all the pilots that have flown them since they were new must be in on it.
There is a trail of documentation for these aircraft going right back to their manufacture.

These things are tightly regulated.

Where are they now?
Where are the people that flew on them that day?

If they don't exist how come parts of the aircraft and remains of the passengers and crew were recovered from the sites?

Are all the people claiming to be family, friends and work colleagues of the passengers and crew in on it as well?
__________________

Your questions are irrelevant spam.

 

[fitzgibbon]

Your questions are irrelevant spam.

Not if you're a no-planer, they're not. They're just inconvenient for you.

 

[caniswalensis]

Your questions are irrelevant spam.

Could you explain why these questions are irrelevant?

They seem quite relevant to me.

Those were real planes & people that have been reported as hitting the towers. If they did not hit the towers, then something had to have happened to them, and certain logistics would have to be coordinated to make them disappear. I think it is reasonable to ask for a hypothesis of what happened to them.

regards, canis

 

[T.A.M.]

Your questions are irrelevant spam.

If his questions are irrelevant spam, then the entirety of the truth movements JAQ off is irrelevant spam.

TAM

 

[Bell]

I can only assume Anders and others who are no planers have NO idea just how many MORE questions and problems their theory creates than it answers, even if it answers anything, which I don't believe it does. That certainly is not the hallmark of a rational theory.

Maybe the no-planers can explain what the hell the reason was to NOT use real planes but then pass it off as if real planes hit the towers?

 

[Sabretooth]

Maybe the no-planers can explain what the hell the reason was to NOT use real planes but then pass it off as if real planes hit the towers?

Cuz using giant Stars of David would have been too obvious...?



bad joke! Sorry! I'm going to hell.

 

[Macgyver1968]

Hey...give me a break...I was drunk last night.

I....love..you....man! (thunk) (faceplant)

 

[twinstead]

Cuz using giant Stars of David would have been too obvious...?



bad joke! Sorry! I'm going to hell.

Oh no he di'int!

 

[alienentity]

It's pretty eye-opening to witness the massively-faulty beliefs and resistance to learn displayed by no-planers, isn't it?

One would hope that, given enough information a person would eventually perceive things correctly, but that just isn't the case. But then this trait runs right thru persistent truthers - who seemingly cannot bear to let go of even the most trivial element of the 'Truther Canon' - and then there are many who, like typical Christians, pick and choose ad hoc from the Canon.

Is a 'no planer' really more intellectually corrupt than a Republican who still believes that his party is fiscally responsible, or a Democrat who believes America has a special relationship with God? I leave you to decide that for yourselves.

With the rise in influence of radical media personalities like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, I think now more than ever we need to fight the misperceptions we see around us and actively share the best knowledge we have.
That includes these forums, IMO, and providing rebuttals to no planers, as tedious as it is.