Quick question, if you’re even checking back to answer: is “your part” in exposing it simply to post threads on message boards all over the internet and then like, never stick around to debate it?
That, they may be doing as some sort of crude googlebombing, mentioned above by tomndebb – make their version appear in so many places that anyone trying to look up info on 9/11 will have a high likelihood of running into theirs.
I remember reading a scifi story back in the early 1980s that had the government using TV as a mind control device. It was so effective that people didn’t notice NYC had been nuked and they were in Cleveland.
Well then, they’re wasting their time here.
This is the same guy that was claiming the towers were ‘pulverised’ by orbital energy weapons, now he’s saying they were destroyed by missiles that were overlaid by CGI planes in all versions of the footage and the memories of eyewitnesses?
This shows CT nuts for what they really are - it’s a case of ‘anything - anything at all, just as long as it isn’t reality’.
I’ve never seen that particular angle before. After all this time, its still so odd looking to see the building just swallow the plane like its flying into a cloud.
No. The “passengers,” who were all paid agents, boarded one set of planes at their various airports. These planes actually landed at a military air base, from which duplicate radio-controlled airliners were launched to be crashed into the Towers and the Pentagon. The “passengers” were given the dual incentive to remain silent by receiving large sums of money and being told that their lives and the lives of their families will be forfeit should they ever come forward with the truth.
It makes perfect sense if you smoke enough dope and drink enough cough syrup.
Heck yes, a mate used to pass around the drunken story that an English soldier in Braveheart whose throat was slit was actually a terminally ill actor who wanted to go out with a high profile scene, the passengers were all civil servants who wanted to go out with a bang.
If you had watched the videos it would be obvious that the “tv fakery” is covering up missiles hitting the towers instead of airplanes.
Why would it take everyone? Wouldn’t it take just a few select people with power in the organization to get access to the video and help “them” cover it up. For a cover up to work it would seem the fewer that know about the more successful it would be. The media reported on what was seen on their video feeds which these videos claim were digitally touched up.
Like I said before for a coverup to happen the fewer the better. The early reports before the second tower hit were all over the place. Some people said they saw a small plane, some a passenger plane, and some a missile. Most people probably didn’t get a good look as it was moving very fast. Now if you tune to the TV and everyone is saying it was a plane, and then you see the video shown on the news your memory is going to change. Now if you interviewed everyone that was in New York on 9/11 of course they are going to say they remember seeing a plane, because people are going to “remember” what they think happened.
That is because it is not from a live feed, so that would give time to edit the video without the need to cut to black.
Why would they have to? Obviously they don’t know, but are trying to get to the truth. I am sure if they knew they would love to make a video to tell you about it 
Look I am not saying the 9/11 is a coverup, but at least I watched the freaking videos this thread is about whereas everyone else posting has not. I don’t see the point in posting in this thread if you have no intention of watching the videos.
Even if you don’t believe these 9/11 CT videos you must admit there is a definite motive for the US government or some other super secret society that runs the world to make an event like 9/11 happen. First off 9/11 basically lead to our invasion of Iraq. Without 9/11 it would have been very hard for the US to invade Iraq without other world powers stepping in and stopping us. The war in Iraq has been great for defense contractors like Halliburton where our vice president was Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer until becoming Bush’s running mate. Iraq also gives us access to oil reserves that until now have been vastly under used. It also allowed for the passing of the patriot act.
What happened to the airplanes then? We KNOW there were 3 missing…where did they go? Why missiles? What proof for missiles when hundreds (if not thousands) SAW airplanes?
:rolleyes: It would take thousands (if not more) people ‘in on it’. Let see…you have to get the folks at the airline in on it (those missing planes you know), the FAA (who tracked the ‘fictitious’ planes when they went off the air), the passengers and crew of those missing planes, all the evil gubberment types who needed to coordinate this, all the eye witnesses in New York who actually SAY they saw airplanes instead of missiles (or were these stealth missiles DISGUISED as airplanes?), all the investigation folks and rescue workers who saw airplane parts (or the thousands of little gnomes who put the aircraft parts all over the scene when no one was looking)…etc etc. It would be a cast of thousands if not hundreds of thousands to pull something like this off in the real world. In the fantasy world of the CT’er though maybe it could be done with 2 or 3 (or whatever).
Exactly how many do YOU think it would reasonably take? For shits and giggles why don’t you lay out a proposal of how many and exactly what it would take to have such a cover up…and exactly why the gubberment would go to such elaborate lengths when, well, they could have just gotten some schlubs with box cutters to hijack the airplanes and crash them into the towers while PRETENDING to be AQ operatives…or something. Not that THIS makes much sense either, but at least you wouldn’t need thousands of folks in on it…just a few hundred over at CIA or something.
BTW, out of curiosity…what type of ‘missile’ is supposed to have been used? Why didn’t it explode like a missile (instead, it seemed to curiously burn like, well, an airplane hitting a building)? I’ve seen, say, a tomahawk hit a building…and its rather, er, distinctive when it does (all that high explosive and such). So, what type of missile are we talking about here exactly? One full of jet fuel or something? Also…well, where exactly are the pieces? Again, (unfortunately for you), I’ve actually seen how forensics can put together a good percentage of the missile body AFTER they are used on targets like a building (there were several examples of this in Iraq in fact…and one where they put parts of the bomb used in an attempt on a building Saddam was suspected of being in at the time)…so, assuming you are going to say the investigators weren’t in on the cover up, where is the physical evidence of a missile strike? Those folks went over that site with a fine tooth comb (and found, curiously enough, aircraft parts)…so, where is your physical evidence?
-XT
You can absolutely here the Klingon theme music play as the towers turn on their Romulon cloaking device.
Wasn’t there a movie where a plane disappeared and it actually got transported into the future? Maybe that’s what happened.
…on 9/16…
Well, you’ve got one thing right: a cover up needs as few people as possible who are “in the know” in order to succeed. The problem with this particular conspiracy theory to work is that it would take thousands of people “in the know” to pull it off, spread across at least half a dozen competing news corporations, all with no overt government affiliation.
The first place where you go off the rails here is when you say it would only take a select few “in the organization” to pull it off. What organization are you referring to? NBC? CBS? ABC? Reuters? Associated Press? Your conspiracy would have to infiltrate all of these organizations, and literally hundreds of smaller ones, and alter all the footage being shot by these independent news agencies on the fly, before anyone working in the agencies are aware that their footage is being edited. And since we’re talking about live coverage of the single most important historic event to happen on American soil in the last one hundred and fifty years, that’s a pretty fucking small window of opportunity. No one is going to just leave this footage lying around for someone to monkey with.
Which is another angle at which this theory falls apart like a 747 running into a skyscraper. Generating a computer image at that level of sophistication, which could be seamlessly dropped over an image of a missile from multiple angles, would take an entire team of programmers, and even then it would likely be impossible, as they’d have to generate the imagery on the fly, because there’s no way to accurate predict the precise course the missile will take, and exactly which angle the missile will be filmed from by all the hundreds of cameramen working the street at that time. If such a feat were at all possible (which I highly doubt) it would take hundreds of programmers working on the best equipment imaginable to get it ready in time to be slipped into the broadcast in that magic window between the film being shot, and the film being broadcast.
Literally tens of thousands of people saw the second impact. Are you seriously suggesting that every single one of them, who really saw a missile hit the second tower, were duped into saying it was a plane because they saw it on TV?
Because it demonstrates a gigantic, gaping hole in the logic of their theory, that makes every single other thing they say about it impossible to be real. If you get arrested for murder, and at the trial your defence lawyer shows a picture of you five hundred miles away from the site of the murder, do you think the prosecutor is just going to say, “I don’t have to explain why cjh404 was in two places at the same time,” and expect anyone to believe him? We have a fact that four airplanes full of people disappeared on 9/11. We have an entire country full of eyewitnesses who saw two of these planes crash into the WTC. Any theory that seeks to argue that those planes never hit the WTC, is first going to have to deal with the question of what really happened to those planes before the theory can be taken with even the smallest grain of credibility.
Some claims are too stupid to need investigating. If I told you that I was the Emperor of the Sovereign Nation of San Francisco, would you think, “He’s clearly a loon or a liar,” or would you think, “Well, maybe San Francisco is an independent monarchy. Who can say for sure?” The idea that anything other than the two hijacked jetliners hit the WTC is pure idiocy. It’s not an idea that needs to be researched in order to be dismissed. It shouldn’t even be an idea that needs to be debunked, but tragically, here you are, trying to present it as if it weren’t batshit-crazy.
The US government is a super secret society that runs the world? Funny, you’d think they’d get less press than they do, what with being super secret. Also, you’d think they’d have had better luck getting support for invading Iraq. What with them ruling the world, and everything, you think they’d have swung some more heavy hitters than the UK and Poland.
Millenium, starring Kris Kristofferson. But in that movie, they had to put the planes back before anyone realized they were missing. Because even screenwriters for third-rate sci-fi movies realize they have to answer the question, “What the hell happened to the planes?” if they want to be taken seriously.
I did watch the 1st video (not my first mistake in life).
I now believe that what was hidden was actually Godzilla fire-breathing the 2 buildings, only he could pack that kind of wallop. If only we hadn’t killed King Kong 
The sad thing is that the energy people are putting into this 9/11 nonsense is energy that they could actually be using to educate themselves on the real, actual bad things that this Administration has done. Furthermore, it helps defenders of the Administration to paint their opponents as loons by focusing on the people who put out these theories rather than on the intelligent people who are rightfully disgusted by all the crap this Administration has pulled.
That can work if you have a few or even several witnesses, but not thousands! I mean, I am not even particularly well-connected in New York and even I have a good friend who saw live the second plane hit the building. And, what about all the amateur videos? Who doctored all that footage? This is just silly!
Sort of. You may be thinking of the TV movie adaptation of Stephen King’s The Langoliers.
Actually, I think Miller got it right. The plane in The Langoliers went into the past, not the future.
Edited to add: The paragraph where Miller talks about Millenium cracks me up. Something about the dry tone of “Because even screenwriters for third-rate sci-fi movies realize they have to answer the question, “What the hell happened to the planes?” if they want to be taken seriously.”
Millenium! That’s it. (Langoliers is close though.)
I saw the trailer for that when I was a kid, but I never saw it, and then tracked it down when I was older. And it was so terribly bad! Like something the Sci-Fi Channel would make if they existed back then.
Miller has addressed this pretty well, but since it was a response to myu post, I’m going to pile on, anyway.
As you and Miller have both noted, the fewer who knowm, the better–hence my observation regarding Abu Ghraib. Now, what sort of numbers are we talking about? Well, we start with the pilot and photographer in the helicopter of the CT’s own selected video who identify an airplane when they should have been identifying a missile. Then we move on to the persons holding cameras of the three separate views of a Boeing aircraft plunging into WTC to which I have already linked, then add all the people to whom they talked and all the people surrounding them on the streets who would have seen the same thing. (Here is a link to three more series of photos so we are now up to seven separate sets of photographers/cameras with all the people near them who have to be silenced about seeing a “missile”). Are we supposing that the government populated all of Lower Manhattan with agents who would keep their mouths shut that they saw a missile instead of the airplane that shows up on sevgen (or more) videos? (What did the government do with the tens of thousands of people who were supposed to be in Lower Manhattan before being replaced by agents who would dutifully report that the missile they saw was actually a Boeing 767?)
As Miller noted, we do not yet have the technology to replace multiple images of the same object from multiple perspectives on a previously unknown trajectory.* We absolutely do not have the technology to do that on the fly in seventeen seconds. It would require an army of programmers many months to approximate that effort. (It is also intersting that the section of WTC 2 into which the plane crashed had a marred facade about as wide as the wingspan of a Boeing 767, something no missile has. And, of course, if it was a missile, then the other CT loons claiming that Flight 175 was replaced by a different airplane (based on imagined changes to the fuselage of the plane in the photographs) must be hallucinating.)
- Before some CT loon comes up with “They would have known the trajectory because they fired the missile.” let me point out that even with the camera directed smart bombs we have, there is enough variation in atmosphere and other aspects of flight that the answer is still “No.”