NO PLANERS EXPOSED----->INSIDE+WeAreChangeColorado

[semicollegiate]

They can't fake videos of the pentagon because the engines would be grinding into the lawn and the nose would be rotating down into the ground and the tail would have broke off and flown over the top of the building.

[Voskhod3]

here's what I think:

1. There is plenty of evidence for planes hitting the WTC.

2. There is plenty of evidence for TV fakery.

Conclusion: 1 and 2 are most probably true. There were planes AND the images were doctored. IS THAT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?

Why would they doctor the TV images?

And "2" is bogus because they is no evidence for TV fakery. None.

[semicollegiate]

Would it be easier to fool people on the second plane?  Every one had the idea in their head-- plane hit wtc-- probably with a mental picture starting to form.  Peolple want to know-- what does that look like-- and so they are given the answer.

People don't look up.  And when they do they are dissoriented.

The planes are irrelavant to the complete destruction of all the items in the buildings.  You can have the high stuff fall, nothing  pushes against it as hard as it pushes down.  Or you can have stuff pulverized,  something below pushes back as hard as the falling thing.  If the floors below push up hard enough to pulverize the falling floor, then they would not collapse.

Each tower weighed 500,000 tons.  They were completely powdered.  Explosives could be in the mix, thermite looks useful, but something turned the towers into dust--not just rubble chunks.


Figure 17. This photo was taken was take around noon on 9/11/01, showing the height of WTC6 compared to the "rubble pile" of WTC1 which is appears in the foreground. Where did the building go?

[Voskhod3]

Would it be easier to fool people on the second plane? 

Don't be ridiculous.

Many of the public recorded it with video and camera.

Not one has come forward to say "they messed with my images".

Not a single one.

Now go away with your no-plane crap.

[semicollegiate]

The planes are irrelavant.

[Infokrieger]

Now go away with your no-plane crap.

For once I agree with you.

Anyway, I said there is EVIDENCE, not PROOF for TV fakery. Evidence is something you look at, something you can examine and come to conclusions about.. Proof is different. When I prove something to you, the debate is over. I can't prove TV fakery. Never said I could. And even if I could, that would not mean there were no planes.

Because there were planes. They hit the towers on 9/11. That is pretty damn obvious to me.

[semicollegiate]

Planes crashing into the WTC on 911 are most likely.  Probably just like they say.  Maybe remote controlled airliners full of who knows what.  Could have crashed the real passenger flights into the Atlantic Ocean.  But the planes don't really matter. 

There is 500,000 tons concrete and steel to account for and I don't see it.


Figure 16. The height of the towers is compared to the height of WTC6 and the "rubble pile" shown in Figure 17.



Figure 17. This photo was taken was take around noon on 9/11/01, showing the height of WTC6 compared to the "rubble pile" of WTC1 which is appears in the foreground. Where did the building go?

[Voskhod3]

Anyway, I said there is EVIDENCE, not PROOF for TV fakery.

For example?

[DAVIDENGLAND]

Planes crashing into the WTC on 911 are most likely.  Probably just like they say.  Maybe remote controlled airliners full of who knows what.  Could have crashed the real passenger flights into the Atlantic Ocean.  But the planes don't really matter. 

There is 500,000 tons concrete and steel to account for and I don't see it.


Figure 16. The height of the towers is compared to the height of WTC6 and the "rubble pile" shown in Figure 17.



Figure 17. This photo was taken was take around noon on 9/11/01, showing the height of WTC6 compared to the "rubble pile" of WTC1 which is appears in the foreground. Where did the building go?

Yeah I made a similar post a while ago. I totally agree with you on this.

What? There was a carpet of dust for miles around. Also 110 floors collapsed down on top of one another and left a HOLE where there should have been a rather larger pile of rubble.

Look - this collapses -



And leaves this -



See no rubble just a small corner section of the steel outer cage, paper and dust.

[White Rose Sophie]

Yeah I made a similar post a while ago. I totally agree with you on this.

Hmmm.  I had never really thought about this actually.  And once you DO think about it, it is indeed most perplexing.  WHERE did it go?

[grapecrusher1]

Those buildings were obliterated with explosives.  We know this-- right?.   Those massive pyroclastic clouds we all saw moved a good portion of what should have been found at the base of the towers in the scenario of a pancaked collapse.  Parts of the downtown core were a couple feet deep in pulverized materials those clouds travelled over the water.  Think of the 300 pieces of bone found on the deutsche bank building and 1.5 ton beams being tossed 600 feet.
I dont know why this is so difficult to believe?  but I am sure some of you here have plenty of ideas.

[DAVIDENGLAND]

Those buildings were obliterated with explosives.  We know this-- right?.   Those massive pyroclastic clouds we all saw moved a good portion of what should have been found at the base of the towers in the scenario of a pancaked collapse.  Parts of the downtown core were a couple feet deep in pulverized materials those clouds travelled over the water.  Think of the 300 pieces of bone found on the deutsche bank building and 1.5 ton beams being tossed 600 feet.
I dont know why this is so difficult to believe?  but I am sure some of you here have plenty of ideas.

Yep those fragments of bones were tiny and also the paper survived because it is denser than concrete.

[DAVIDENGLAND]

Also there a video of ground zero taken a couple of hours after the towers fell and in it you can see down into the floors which were below ground level. Totally impossible if you go with the official story.

[Raftel]

Hey guys, what is the best video for debunking the "no-planes" theories?
Because the "no-planes" theory got some good points.

I just watched this guy saying "no plane hit the pentagon"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0iry3fiHU4

and also watched this interesting video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AfTyOyKEEQ

And why these guys are so scared to talk?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0nl_ZY3D04





 

[Protean]

I am starting to believe more and more that 911 - WTC/Pentagon was much like JFK/Dealey Plaza in Dallas. What really happened, regarding the so-called commercial airplanes hitting the towers story that was pushed on network TV, as opposed to what some eye witnesses reported seeing were two different things.

In Dallas, Dealey Plaza, the day JFK was killed, the people there heard shots coming from the grassy knoll and ran up the hillside trying to locate the shooter--they were later told--they did not hear a shot from the grassy knoll and that The Texas School Book Depository was where the shots came from and Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone assassin--folks, haven't we been through this before?

The release of this info, originating from American Airlines, that AA Flights 11 (North Tower) and 77 (Pentagon) DID NOT FLY ON 911.

That means if you want to hold on to the 911 commercial jet plane theory (North Tower and Pentagon)--then you need to provide some new flight numbers.

(article)
http://www.disinfo.com/content/story.php?title=American-Airlines-Exposes-Bushs-Big-Lie-Flights-11-77-Did-Not-Fly-on-9/11-1

American Airlines Exposes Bush's Big Lie: Flights 11 and 77 Did Not Fly on 9/11

American Airlines itself is the source for information that AA Flights 11 (North Tower) and 77 (Pentagon) did not fly on 911. These flights are critical to the the government's crumbling cover up! Without those flights, Bush and his murderous co-conspirators will have to revise the big lie. They will have to concoct yet another cover story from the ground up! A cover up is on the brink of collapse when those guilty of capital crimes and high treason either turn on one another or are forced to revise the lie!

Already several demonstrable lies (many referenced in previous EC articles) are probable cause to begin a Federal Grand Jury investigation of George W. Bush's role in 911. Bush should be compelled by subpoena and Federal Marshals to testify under oath before an independent Federal Grand Jury. The AA revelations demand it!

WikiScanner discovered that American Airlines changed their Wikipedia entry to state that Flights 11 and 77 never flew on 9/11.

Original entry was:

Two American Airlines aircraft were hijacked and crashed during the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack: American Airlines Flight 77 (a Boeing 757) and American Airlines Flight 11 (a Boeing 767).

New entry is:

Two American Airlines aircraft were hijacked and crashed during the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack: Flight 77 (a Boeing 757) and Flight 11 (a Boeing 767). Although these flights were daily departures before and a month after September 11, 2001. Neither flight 11 nor 77 were scheduled on September 11, 2001. The records kept by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (www.bts.gov/gis/) do not list either flight that day.

A Google search of the IP address that made the change - 144.9.8.21 - is located at American Airlines.

Why the change American airlines? Did the flights actually operate or did we just imagine all of that?

--LiveLeak

911 did not happen as we have been told. That AA claims that the two aircraft that are absolutely essential to the Bush administration's official theory were not, in fact, scheduled for flight and were, in fact, not in the air that day, is a big hole from which Bush may not escape.

According to Wikiscaner Americans Airliners changed their Wikipedia entry which now states that 'Flights 11 and 77 never flew on 9/11'.

Two American Airlines aircraft were hijacked and crashed during the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack: Flight 77 (a Boeing 757) and Flight 11 (a Boeing 767). Although these flights were daily departures before and a month after September 11, 2001. Neither flight 11 nor 77 were scheduled on September 11, 2001. The records kept by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (www.bts.gov/gis/) do not list either flight that day.

The entry had stated:

Two American Airlines aircraft were hijacked and crashed during the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack: American Airlines Flight 77 (a Boeing 757) and American Airlines Flight 11 (a Boeing 767).

A Google search of the IP address - 144.9.8.21 - confirmed that the 'change' was made at American Airlines.

User talk: 144.9.8.21

This IP address is registered to American Airlines

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

My WHOIS lookup of the above IP address returned the following:

WHOIS - 144.9.8.21

Location: United States [City: Ft. Worth, Texas]


OrgName: American Airlines Incorporated
OrgID: AMERIC-112
Address: P.O.Box 619616
Address: MD 5308
City: DFW Airport
StateProv: TX
PostalCode: 75261
Country: US

NetRange: 144.9.0.0 - 144.9.255.255
CIDR: 144.9.0.0/16
NetName: AANET
NetHandle: NET-144-9-0-0-1
Parent: NET-144-0-0-0-0
NetType: Direct Assignment
NameServer: DNS-P1.SABRE.COM
NameServer: DNS-P2.SABRE.COM
NameServer: DNS-P3.SABRE.COM
NameServer: DNS-P4.SABRE.COM
Comment:
RegDate: 1990-10-31
Updated: 2002-06-27

RTechHandle: OG60-ARIN
RTechName: Gelbrich, Orf
RTechPhone: +1-817-931-3145
RTechEmail: ************@aa.com

OrgTechHandle: ZW72-ARIN
OrgTechName: WARIS, ZISHAN
OrgTechPhone: +1-817-967-1242
OrgTechEmail: ************@aa.com

# ARIN WHOIS database, last updated 2008-06-29 19:10
# Enter ? for additional hints on searching ARIN's WHOIS database.

If neither flight was in the air as American Airlines itself has so stated, then numerous 'official versions' of the 'official conspiracy theory' are all a pack of malicious lies. That includes almost every statement made by Bush. These lies are especially pernicious because they have the effect of covering up the truth, protecting the guilty and obstructing justice. These lies are an insult to the families of everyone who died as a result of the event and the subsequent cover up. These lies aggravate the crimes of mass murder, terrorism and high treason for which the penalty must surely be death.

The official story is familiar by now.

At 8:20, Flight 11 stopped transmitting its transponder signal, and veered northward and departed dramatically from the westward heading of its planned route. The controllers concluded that the plane had probably been hijacked. 4 5 At 8:24, the following transmission was reportedly received from Flight 11: We have some planes. Just stay quiet and you'll be okay .. we are returning to the airport.

..Nobody move. Everything will be okay. If you try to make any moves, you'll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet. Nobody move please we are going back to the airport .. don't try to make any stupid moves. 6

Neither of the pilots pressed the distress call button. At 8:28 controllers reportedly watched the plane make a 100-degree turn toward the south. 7 Presumably, Flight 11 continued south along the Hudson River until it reached the World Trade Center, though documentation of this is sparse given the lack of public information.

According to NORAD's September 18 timeline, the FAA did not notify NORAD of the signs that Flight 11 was hijacked until 8:40, 25 minutes after the first signs of trouble. 8

--Flight 11, The First Jet Commandeered on September 11th, 911 Research

But --if Flight 11 did not fly that day, that's all a deliberate, criminal lie! If neither Flight 11 or 77 was in the air that day, then nothing in the 'official statements' with regard to the Twin Towers of the WTC can is true.

This information is not compatible with previous EC articles in which it was revealed that NTSB data placed Flight 77 at an altitude of 273, some 200 feet ABOVE the Pentagon at the time of impact, give or take a couple of seconds or less! Moreover, it's trajectory was such that those 'eyewitnesses' who claimed to have seen it could not possibly have done so. Neither scenario is good news for Bush. Both support the statement that absolutely no wreckage traceable to a 757 was ever found at the Pentagon. Moreover, photos of an engine rotor appear to depict a Rolls-Royce engine that is used in the Global Hawk, a payload carrying missile that was, in fact, flown from the US to Australia completely by remote control. It is certainly a much better candidate for what Rumsfeld called '...the missile that struck this building' than a 757. Here's what you need to know about the Pentagon.

* No wreckage traceable to a 757 was ever recovered.
* Only ONE engine rotor (seen in photos) was recovered! This rotor is about one third the diameter of a 757 rotor.
* A 757 has two rotors, each of which are nearly three times the size of the SINGLE rotor located at the Pentagon
* Engine rotors are made of a Steel/Titanium alloy to withstand high temps inside jet engines.
* Flight 77 could not have crashed into the Pentagon

The time has come to consign Bush's official conspiracy theory to the dust bin of history. The theory is not even a good cover story, surviving for as long as it did because millions of good Americans wanted to believe it. Millions of otherwise good Americans did not wish to believe the very, very worst about an administration that had claimed to represent and defend our interests. Millions of Americans chose to believe that the government was still responsible to us, that the government was still the defender of Democracy as we are always taught in school.

Recognizing lies for what they are is a part of the process of growing up! America, it is time to grow up! It is time to confront this heinous pack of lies! It is time to insist that the Obama administration begin a REAL investigation. It is time to insist that a Federal Grand Jury investigate every count of high treason, mass murder and domestic terrorism that was perpetrated upon the people of the US by the Bush administration, collaborators in the Pentagon, K-Street, the Congress and the leadership of the Republican party, Marvin Bush's 'Securacom', Larry Silverstein, General Myers, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and, of course, George W. Bush who was, at the time,m the 'Commander-in-Chief' and ultimately responsible for the orders given the US military to 'stand down'.

By Donald Rumsfeld's own admission, he was unaware of any threats to the Pentagon -- the building where he was located during the September 11th attacks -- until an aircraft crashed into the side of it, and he ran out "into the smoke" to see if it might be a "A bomb? I had no idea." (ABC News This Week, Interview 9/16/01).

Well, that's a pretty tall tale by any standard. The New York Times reported that by 8:13am, the FAA was aware of the first hijacking out of Boston. The Pentagon explosion, which Donald Rumsfeld claimed he had "no idea," did not occur until approximately 9:37am, nearly an hour and a half later, this after two of the tallest buildings in the world were devastated. Note that a plane hijacked out of Boston can reach Washington D.C. as easily as it can reach New York City.

It was widely reported that Pentagon personnel were indeed aware of the threats to their security, and they took security measures on that morning. But not the "Secretary of Defense." Why should the man charged with defending the United States of America concern himself with hijacked aircraft?

There is a set of procedures for responding to hijackings. In particular, these procedures were changed on June 1, 2001 while Rumsfeld was in power as our Secretary of Defense, in a document called: "CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF INSTRUCTION, J-3 CJCSI 3610.01A"

[Lin Kuei]

The “Concordia Foundation” numbers among its surrogates Nico Haupt,” a man who exhibits *prima facie *schizophrenic behavior. Allegations of COINTELPRO surrounding Haupt have, in the past, seemed to be justified. WeAreChange recently had two unprovoked incidents with Haupt, where he assaulted the groups members, only to be ignored by onlooking NYPD.

I find it strange that Josh Harris, the internet entrepreneur who invested in activities for the Gelatin 'art students' group, involved in the suspicious 'B-Thing' project (Info here) in WTC1, also invested in, and was invovlved with Nico Haupt.

To others involved in the project, it seemed reasonable that the appearance of ''The B-Thing'' meant secrecy was no longer necessary. Josh Harris, the Internet entrepreneur once known for holding extravagant art parties, explained that Leo Koenig, the 24-year-old art dealer who represents Gelatin, got him involved.

The night before the B-Thing, Mr. Harris said, he rented a top-floor suite at the Millennium Hilton, across the street from the Gelatin studio, and invited people to what guests described as a night of decadence. Near dawn, he and several others took cameras and boarded a helicopter, communicating with Gelatin via cell phone.

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/08/18/nyregion/balcony-scene-unseen-atop-world-episode-trade-center-assumes-mythic-qualities.html

Then this story which describes Haupt coming to America and meeting Harris:

In a back room that looks like an abandoned garbage-collection area, German artist Nico Haupt lurks in the dimness. A cheap electric fan wafts air from a defunct freight-elevator shaft to the desk where Haupt creates computer videos.

Haupt ran the first RealAudio server in Germany, and staged the kind of publicity-seeking art events that Harris finds irresistible: a stunt, for instance, that called for 6 million unemployed people to jump in the ocean simultaneously, causing it to flood the home of former chancellor Helmut Kohl. "Only 200 people came," Haupt says. "But there were thousands from the press!"

Hoping to work at Pseudo, Haupt flew to New York and met Harris at one of his many parties. "He talked to me only one sentence," says Haupt. "He said, 'Move in.'" To Haupt, this seemed normal enough. "My profession is always to work with eccentric people, because I myself am also eccentric."

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.11/luvvy_pr.html

Haupt has admitted many of his crazy public displays are some kind of art or acting... Like this video of him going mental on a subway train http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVn4dWT1Vrc

[Rogue Penguin]

TOWERS TURNED TO DUST

Stop demonising the "NO PLANERS", they are on the same side as you, looking for a best fit senario for a global mind f**k event.

WAKE UP PEOPLE

[Mike Philbin]

THERE WERE PLANES, two of them caught on MULTIPLE CAMERAS.



There, I've said it.

As far as the WTC TURNED TO DUST, I like this (and I really like the illustrative 'where did 500,000 tonnes of steel go? i.e. not in the f**king basement!") as it's got the WHITE DOOMSDAY PLANE that could have housed the SKYLASER all over it and here's John Hutchison jellifying a  2" by 2" by 7" block of SOLID IRON to black dust with RESONANCE ALONE.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjWE0K8zPGY&feature=player_embedded
nanothermite - I also LOVE this idea - it's a repaint job as terrorism - Israeli art student disinfo. Lovely game the NWO play.

[changedname]

In this video it appears that they are showing some type of missle with the American Airlines logo written on it plus shows fake windows painted on it too! No wings on it yet!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeLcE0sht-M

[Viper]

It's a fakey, anyways do you suppose they'd take the time to mix in an soundtrack for a vid that would be the hottest thing in the known universe?

[EvadingGrid]

In this video it appears that they are showing some type of missle with the American Airlines logo written on it plus shows fake windows painted on it too! No wings on it yet!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeLcE0sht-M

Why are you posting dis-info ?

[changedname]

Disinfo??? Your sure this is disinfo??? U have all the proof needed to prove this is disinfo?? If so share it with me please because I saw this video and to me it sure appeared to be real to me!! So u show me the proof if what you say and maybe I can believe that! So let's have it! Your gonna accuse me then show me your proof!

[agentbluescreen]

In this video it appears that they are showing some type of missle with the American Airlines logo written on it plus shows fake windows painted on it too! No wings on it yet!

Regardless of the faked white light fim clips, the AGM 86d cruise missile depicted with false AA markings is of the exact top-intake (ground hugging) Boeing naval-launch version, not the fixed wing - bottom air-intake Lockheed Martin "air launched" Air Force version of the Tomahawk-Cruise.

The Boeing "naval-launched" version is intended to be shot out of a tube-launcher and thus has articulated folded wings that swing out and deploy shortly after launch so that it can be stored (wings folded beneath it) inside the launch tube. The top ramjet intake prevents it from (stall) sucking itself into the ground (or water) at low launch velocities when it dips slightly after takeoff until wings deploy and sufficient ramjet thrust/airspeed is achieved, and at very, very low ground hugging sea-to-land path altitudes.

This explains the navy gray air cargo pallet on the (Pegasys) JPADS launcher that was air dropped onto the lawn of the Pentagon (and then hurriedly hustled off) early that morning. It was not a fixed wing air launch Air Force (Lockheed-Martin) Tomahawk with AUP warhead, it was the ground hugging, tube-launched Boeing version.

MORE here:
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=164982.msg986178#msg986178

This fake AA-painted "Daniel Chapter 8 Show" missile photo is certainly very damning and yet another major embarrassment for the Pentagon Mafia ZioNAZIs

[agentbluescreen]

Disinfo??? Your sure this is disinfo??? U have all the proof needed to prove this is disinfo?? If so share it with me please because I saw this video and to me it sure appeared to be real to me!! So u show me the proof if what you say and maybe I can believe that! So let's have it! Your gonna accuse me then show me your proof!

Exactly.

Unless or until the zio-communist Pentagon/FBI/CIA Mafias are reorganized and/or disbanded and all this illegally and criminally "classified secret crap" about 9/11 is fully disclosed and made completely public (glasnost) once and for all EVERYTHING EVERYONE CLAIMS TO "KNOW" ABOUT 9/11 SHALL FOREVER REMAIN IN COMPLETE DISPUTE.

When one is never permitted to know the truth all is lies and/or conjecture.

It only serves their goals to have us fight with each other over their obvious lies in the completely lawless absence of verifiable proof with which they deliberately and maliciously continue to torture us.

[jimd3100]

Why are you posting dis-info ?

Yea, why? And I have a another question. Why do you expect us to respond to this BS over and over and over and over and over?
It's 2010 and you no planers still haven't figured out that planes flew into buildings on 9/11 and we are supposed to waste our time entertaining your preposterous nonsense scenarios over and over and over and over? Why? Why should we? And if we do, why should we be "nice" about it?

Disinfo??? Your sure this is disinfo??? U have all the proof needed to prove this is disinfo?? If so share it with me please because I saw this video and to me it sure appeared to be real to me!! So u show me the proof if what you say and maybe I can believe that! So let's have it! Your gonna accuse me then show me your proof!

It's only been done about a thousand times but every time a no planer posts some BS we are supposed to pretend it's really something and "investigate" it. Planes flew into buildings on 9-11 and that would include the pentagon. You are going to see evidence that no planers are lying to you to try and convince you no plane hit the pentagon. If you now have that evidence, why don't you wake up to why pentagon no planers are lying to you? It's because it's a hoax, planes flew into buildings on 9-11.  You are being lied to because the no plane at the pentagon is a BS Hoax. Wake up.

The movie starts off with a lie. An edited clip of Jamie Mcintyre, who never had any doubt that a plane crashed at the pentagon.

MCINTYRE: The Web sites often take statements out of context, such as this exchange from CNN in which I -- myself -- appear to be questioning whether a plane really hit the building: From my close-up inspection, there's no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon. In fact, I was answering a question based on a eyewitness account who thought the American Airlines plane landed short of the Pentagon. I was indicated there was no crash site near the pentagon only at the Pentagon

MCINTYRE: In fact there were thousands of tiny pieces of the plane, and I personally photographed a piece of the fuselage and what appeared to be part of the cockpit.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/05/16/transcript.wed/

Now the Unedited clip that proves McIntyre is telling the truth. He was answering a question on if the plane crashed near, or short of the pentagon, no the plane did not crash near the pentagon, it went in the pentagon. Dishonest no plane liars edited the clip just after the question was asked at the 2:50 mark as the Unedited clip shows....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjlBpChvzD8

After that we hear a sound bite sandwiched with the "creepy music" of someone saying "it was like a cruise missile with wings". Hey, that sounds like a good witness huh? Who was that? That was Mike Walter who used the missile as a METAPHOR. What he actually said was, "I saw this plane, an American Airlines Jet,.......it was like a cruise missile with wings went right into the pentagon". See? Now he's a bad witness who's "in on it". Absolutely pathetic. Hear it and see it yourself here....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PTRsuRao7A

So you all keep falling for this nonsense, and when REAL UNEDITED witnesses are shown to you, and real physical evidence is shown, what do I hear? "Oh, that's fake". Or "Oh that was planted". It's embarrassing.

Then we have a retarded picture of them loading the missile dressed as an American Airlines jet, because people are so f**king stupid, they would fall for that right? No, they wouldn't, it's f**king stupid.  And of coarse you would want to take a pic of it right? No, you wouldn't, that's also f**king stupid. This is how no planers would stoop to anything to get gullible people who desperately want to believe no plane hit the pentagon and need evidence for it, well, that didn't happen so fake evidence will suit some just fine. That is how you destroy a "truth" movement....how about accepting reality or find another 'hobby'.

WOW! Look at that! We caught them red handed!....


No, it's just more lies put out by no planers....before the dishonest edits....


Taken from this website....
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/agm-86c.htm

And as for the incredibly stupid fake video it's been gone over for years now. At this point it's just an embarrassment. It's old boring and embarrassing......

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=49074.0

This fake AA-painted "Daniel Chapter 8 Show" missile photo is certainly very damning and yet another major embarrassment for the Pentagon Mafia ZioNAZIs

And as for agentblankscreen his nonsense is so old and so boring and such a waste of time anyone that believes anything he says on the pentagon deserves to be hoaxed.

[dragnet53]

Yea, why? And I have a another question. Why do you expect us to respond to this BS over and over and over and over and over?
It's 2010 and you no planers still haven't figured out that planes flew into buildings on 9/11 and we are supposed to waste our time entertaining your preposterous nonsense scenarios over and over and over and over? Why? Why should we? And if we do, why should we be "nice" about it?

It's only been done about a thousand times but every time a no planer posts some BS we are supposed to pretend it's really something and "investigate" it. Planes flew into buildings on 9-11 and that would include the pentagon. You are going to see evidence that no planers are lying to you to try and convince you no plane hit the pentagon. If you now have that evidence, why don't you wake up to why pentagon no planers are lying to you? It's because it's a hoax, planes flew into buildings on 9-11.  You are being lied to because the no plane at the pentagon is a BS Hoax. Wake up.

The movie starts off with a lie. An edited clip of Jamie Mcintyre, who never had any doubt that a plane crashed at the pentagon.

MCINTYRE: The Web sites often take statements out of context, such as this exchange from CNN in which I -- myself -- appear to be questioning whether a plane really hit the building: From my close-up inspection, there's no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon. In fact, I was answering a question based on a eyewitness account who thought the American Airlines plane landed short of the Pentagon. I was indicated there was no crash site near the pentagon only at the Pentagon

MCINTYRE: In fact there were thousands of tiny pieces of the plane, and I personally photographed a piece of the fuselage and what appeared to be part of the cockpit.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/05/16/transcript.wed/

Now the Unedited clip that proves McIntyre is telling the truth. He was answering a question on if the plane crashed near, or short of the pentagon, no the plane did not crash near the pentagon, it went in the pentagon. Dishonest no plane liars edited the clip just after the question was asked at the 2:50 mark as the Unedited clip shows....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjlBpChvzD8

After that we hear a sound bite sandwiched with the "creepy music" of someone saying "it was like a cruise missile with wings". Hey, that sounds like a good witness huh? Who was that? That was Mike Walter who used the missile as a METAPHOR. What he actually said was, "I saw this plane, an American Airlines Jet,.......it was like a cruise missile with wings went right into the pentagon". See? Now he's a bad witness who's "in on it". Absolutely pathetic. Hear it and see it yourself here....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PTRsuRao7A

So you all keep falling for this nonsense, and when REAL UNEDITED witnesses are shown to you, and real physical evidence is shown, what do I hear? "Oh, that's fake". Or "Oh that was planted". It's embarrassing.

Then we have a retarded picture of them loading the missile dressed as an American Airlines jet, because people are so f**king stupid, they would fall for that right? No, they wouldn't, it's f**king stupid.  And of coarse you would want to take a pic of it right? No, you wouldn't, that's also f**king stupid. This is how no planers would stoop to anything to get gullible people who desperately want to believe no plane hit the pentagon and need evidence for it, well, that didn't happen so fake evidence will suit some just fine. That is how you destroy a "truth" movement....how about accepting reality or find another 'hobby'.

WOW! Look at that! We caught them red handed!....


No, it's just more lies put out by no planers....before the dishonest edits....


Taken from this website....
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/agm-86c.htm

And as for the incredibly stupid fake video it's been gone over for years now. At this point it's just an embarrassment. It's old boring and embarrassing......

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=49074.0

And as for agentblankscreen his nonsense is so old and so boring and such a waste of time anyone that believes anything he says on the pentagon deserves to be hoaxed.

wow, the low some people will do to get their noggins off. good photoshop editing, but man what the hell are wrong with people now a days? 

[Ruth]

Is it possible, that while there where planes on that day, the footage we got to see from most sources was faked?

No.... why?  Why fake two planes crashing into two buildings in the middle of NY with so many witnesses?  Unless.... you want to confuse, distract and misdirect the 'no 747 aircraft' at the Pentagon.  And oh yes, where was THAT one? 

Seems like an ideal way to do it, doesn't it?  Perhaps this is what COINTELPRO is all about.... confusion, misdirection and distraction.

Its also obvious that two planes by themselves could not bring down 3 buildings at the WTC at the speed of gravity.  There was something more - but what?

[citizenx]

Pre-placed nano-thermite.

No biggie.

They sure weren't brought down by missiles or planes.

Which is not to say the planes were not there.

[Kilika]

You are being lied to because the no plane at the pentagon is a BS Hoax.

I don't know what exactly flew into the Pentagon, but it definately was not the type plane they claim, period. NO WAY it was a Boeing commercial airliner.

What it should say is, "You are being lied to because the Boeing commercial airliner at the pentagon is a BS Hoax".

[phasma]

I think its clear that planes hit the WTC - they had to, there were too many witnesses, additionally, they would not be a hard target to hit.

the pentagon though is another story, I find it impossible to believe that a plane hit that - how could it have? I do not know what hit the pentagon - missle, a pre planted charge that just blew - but i`m satisfied that there was no plane. The cctv there WOULD have caught it. (Do you think I could sneak up to the pentagon and get near to it before I was spotted? I doubt I could, And I`m considerably more stelthy than a several thousand tonne aircraft!

[mr anderson]

The question of "what hit the pentagon" has been the single most divisive issue within the movement, but we can all agree that absolutely nothing could have hit the Pentagon without those in charge allowing it to happen. While we support ongoing research into the event, we urge unity on our common ground; refocusing energy towards demanding accountability and away from endless debate. We urge framing our public presentation of the Pentagon issue around unanimously agreed upon issues such as the absent air defense, the missing 2.3 trillion dollars, the conflicting testimonies, the very low probability of an amateur pilot achieving the manoeuvre seen and the refusal by government agencies to release evidence.

http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=13909#13909

[birther truther tenther]

There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.
There were no commercial planes on 9/11. There were no commercial planes on 9/11.

...see how annoying that is.

[Kilika]

Now your being an ass! Especially with the interjecting of a falsehood with your silly post. The claim is not that there were no commercial airliners on 9/11, it is that no commercial airliner hit the Pentagon. Commercial airliners hit the towers, and apparently one crashed/was shot down in PA.

As Mr. Anderson quoted, the HUGE issue is that all the way up to the White House they knew a plane went off radar in the area of the Pentagon, and the tower planes had already hit, right? And the even claim they scramble fighter jets that so happen to go out to sea instead of inland. Yeah right!

So how the heck can they not have a massive amount of cameras on that plane as it came in? It SHOULD have been like the movie of the week with so much footage, but alas, it doesn't seem to exist. That is unacceptable for supposedly the most powerful military the earth has ever known.

It wasn't a commercial airliner that hit the Pentagon.

[citizenx]

BTT,

Who's saying that?

That would be pretty stupid.

There were obviously planes at WTC.

That's what we call a straw man argument. I haven't seen any true "no planers" around here in a coon's age.

Now the Pentagon is another story, and there whould be room for rational (non-divisive) debate on that one.

It is not immediately obvious that a jetliner necessarily hit the Pentagon on 9/11.  Too many things, for skeptical people, don't add up.

What Lefty is saying is correct, but --

Lefty, you could have left out the name-calling (as your good book suggests).

[Kilika]

I wouldn't go there if I were you citizen. Let it go. God knows my intent. If you want to scold me, and try to remind me of my own beliefs, remember what Jesus called some people. He called people names too as it was true. How is a viper any different than ass?

Thank you for your topical support. Validation that something is true is always nice.

[citizenx]

I've never called anyone on the forum an "ass" or used any direct insult like that.  My record stands clear on that, Lefty.

I am ready to answer for the things I have done before God and man.



"Call not thy brother raba, which means fool..."

If you cannot take correction from me on a point of Christian teaching, that may reflect more on your own stubbornness than my supposed hypocrisy, Lefty.

You could have simply apologized to BTT and left it at that.

You don't help the case by personalizing it.

You were right about everything else.

Beleive it or not, that's friendly advice.

Next time, try more gentle correction yourself, Lefty.

BTW, who is it Jesus called a "generation/brood of vipers"?

[Kilika]

Give me a break citizen. I'm quite sure they can speak for themselves. Your concern is admirable. Simply agree that the post was a disply of him being an ass and be done with it, because it's the truth and i don't make a habit of lying. He's better than that, and I called him on it. So you scold me for scolding him for truly being an ass? Your compassion is duly noted. Thank you.

You haven't shown me scripturally where I sinned against you. What does scripture say? How have I sinned against you?

If you want to be doctrinally correct, how about this one...


"Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers." Ephesians 4:29 (KJB)


Now that says I was not as meek as I could have been. But then our Lord wasn't particularly gentle in making His point to the money changers.


16   All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 
17   That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. 
2 Timothy 3:16,17 (KJB)


That's why I believe Jesus told Simon...


"He saith unto him the third time, Simon, [son] of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep." John 21:17 (KJB)

[citizenx]

Lefty,

I never said you sinned against me.  I'm not even sure you can.

Have a better one.

[jimd3100]

So how the heck can they not have a massive amount of cameras on that plane as it came in? It SHOULD have been like the movie of the week with so much footage, but alas, it doesn't seem to exist. That is unacceptable for supposedly the most powerful military the earth has ever known.

It wasn't a commercial airliner that hit the Pentagon.

So the big mystery for the last 10 years for you is why the military didn't run out with video cameras and wait for a plane to come in to make a movie of it to prove to you a commercial plane hit? 

[Kilika]

What kind of question is that? That's nonsense. Why you being that way? Don't you think it odd that no video proof has been shown, especially since they openly admit they knew the plane was out there? And NOBODY got it on tape? A 757 and nobody got it on film?

Call me ignorant, but I'm not buying it. I'm no sucker, and what they are pushing is a sucker's bet. Can't you at least admit that something is wrong with that picture? How can you explain such a complete security failure?