Sphairon: By the way, for all of those who think "the movement" is actively trying to distance itself from conspiracy themes. Here are a few headlines of the last 7 days from LewRockwell.com:"Rampant Inflation, Bank Runs, Empty Grocery Shelves Suburban survivalists prepare for government crimes.""Another Federal False Flag Coming soon, to a city near you. Article by Michael Gaddy""Modern Survivalism Everything you do should improve your position in life, even if nothing goes wrong. Article by Jack Spirko."The mere fact that LRC is advocating survivalism (just think of all the bad connotations of that word!) and connecting false flag terrorism with the US government would be enough to make most MSM anchors faint. What do you want more?
By the way, for all of those who think "the movement" is actively trying to distance itself from conspiracy themes. Here are a few headlines of the last 7 days from LewRockwell.com:"Rampant Inflation, Bank Runs, Empty Grocery Shelves Suburban survivalists prepare for government crimes.""Another Federal False Flag Coming soon, to a city near you. Article by Michael Gaddy""Modern Survivalism Everything you do should improve your position in life, even if nothing goes wrong. Article by Jack Spirko."The mere fact that LRC is advocating survivalism (just think of all the bad connotations of that word!) and connecting false flag terrorism with the US government would be enough to make most MSM anchors faint. What do you want more?
Very true. However, I still find it a little "curious" that none of Rockwell's listed writers who touch on the subject in general [ a short list that now appears to include M. Gaddy] ever get near the provable fact [by their very own film archives-e.g : ] of media fakery of all 4 events on 911- that is- no planes hit either tower [and none hit the Pentagon or buried itself in the ground in PA.]
This , despite the fact that they even have one writer on board who is an expert on that broad "no-plane " theory outlined above.
Mr. Gaddy talks about false flag operations but seems entirely unaware of perhaps the most flagrant and most recent example right under his nose. Curiouser and curiouser!
For more information about onebornfree, please see profile.[ i.e. click on forum name "onebornfree"].
onebornfreedotblogspotdotcom: Very true. However, I still find it a little "curious" that none of Rockwell's listed writers who touch on the subject in general [ a short list that now appears to include M. Gaddy] ever get near the provable fact [by their very own film archives-e.g : ] of media fakery of all 4 events on 911- that is- no planes hit either tower [and none hit the Pentagon or buried itself in the ground in PA.] This , despite the fact that they even have one writer on board who is an expert on that broad "no-plane " theory outlined above. Mr. Gaddy talks about false flag operations but seems entirely unaware of perhaps the most flagrant and most recent example right under his nose. Curiouser and curiouser!
ROFLMAO! Yes sure the dozens of media organizations covering the second plane hitting live and all the eye witnesses were faked. What a conspiracy! 911 Truthers need to get clue.
"Anarchism misunderstands the real nature of man. It would be practicable only in a world of angels and saints" - Ludwig von Mises
Poptech: ROFLMAO! Yes sure the dozens of media organizations covering the second plane hitting live and all the eye witnesses were faked. What a conspiracy! 911 Truthers need to get clue.
Thank you for your thoughtful insights.
Like many here and elsewhere, what you are not aware of is :
[1] there were no live broadcasts of planes hitting towers that morning, all "live" broadcasts were on a 17 second time lag.
[2] All major networks [Fox, CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC] shared the same source video feed.
For a detailed analysis of the networks actual broadcasts that morning please see here.
If you would like links to similar analysis of the supposed "amateur" 911 videos, let me know.
What you _should _ be aware of, but also like many here, seem prepared to ignore [only] in the case of 911, is that witness testimonies are routinely discarded in any "normal" police investigation for reasons of unreliability etc.
To go ahead and swallow hook line and sinker unsubstantiated, unverifiable "witness" testimony in this one instance is perhaps not the best way to proceed, in this case, or in any other, don't you think?
Yes of course they all shared the same source video feed which is why they had different videos because they were all obviously faked just like this one.
Please I really want more worthless analysis by people who have no idea what they are talking about.
Yeah I just swallowed it all, My sister who saw the planes hit was obvious part of a government conspiracy. You guys need mental help.
Poptech: Yes of course they all shared the same source video feed which is why they had different videos because they were all obviously faked just like this one. Please I really want more worthless analysis by people who have no idea what they are talking about. Yeah I just swallowed it all, My sister who saw the planes hit was obvious part of a government conspiracy. You guys need mental help.
The likelyhood of a rational and well orchestated serect plot is next to zero.
The likelyhood that this is a stand alone complex storm is near 100%.
The fact that your theory is very complex is likely to cast more doubt than to affirm your prediction. It is more likely to be wrong. Occam's Razor.
Institutional analysis far easier explain why certain events happen in such a way that implicate the destruction of liberty.
http://libregamewiki.org - The world's only encyclopedia on free(as in freedom) gaming.
OK , you need more "worthless analysis", so here it is [and once again, thank you for your thoughtful input] :
You are very much mistaken, - the CNN footage you linked to in your post was never shown live and was not even originally filmed by CNN.
It was actually shot by an "amateur" videographer named Michael Hezarkhani and then submitted to CNN for viewing at a later time. [first shown that afternoon/early evening, I believe.]
CNN's Original "Live" Footage
In the original "live"[ i.e with 17 second time delay] CNN footage of the second hit shown here at the beginning of "September Clues", although a plane like object enters the picture, the actual supposed 2nd. strike is completely obscured by the North tower due to the camera angle.
CNN's Subsequent Footage
However, in subsequent replays [ie 6 mins after Fox showed it] CNN used exactly the same footage as Fox, with the addition of a CNN banner to obscure most of what is known as the "nose out" sequence.
The original Fox "live" shot is analyzed from the 3.50sec mark onward in the above link. The CNN replay of that footage [i.e. 6 mins later] can be seen in the same link above, from the 8.30sec. minute mark onward.
CNN Broadcast and Michael Hezarkhani's Video
And of course, later that day, the footage you linked to that as I mentioned, was actually shot by "amateur" Michael Hezarkhani, was also broadcast.
....................................
N.B. all footage used in "September Clues" was taken, unaltered [except where stated], directly from appropriate network archives.
Excuse me for asking, but what the hell is a "stand alone complex!"
Curius Dentatus: Excuse me for asking, but what the hell is a "stand alone complex!"
It is an idea that refer to the emergant behaviors of indiviuals that arise during an event seemly planned by somebody or something with causes extending back years. That is "stand alone complex".
I just lifted the ideas from a cyberpunk anime. It make me sound smart :)
I don't believe congressmen are actually sinister or intelligent enough to pull off such an overwhelming conspricy without getting caught. It would be far more difficult to fake the 9/11 plane attack rather than actually carry it out.
onebornfreedotblogspotdotcom:OK , you need more "worthless analysis"
I said no I don't need more worthless analysis from delusional people such as yourself. Real planes hit the buildings, every major news network covered it and tens of thousands of people saw it with their own eyes, including family and friends of mine. It is absolutely insane people such as yourself keep pushing lies.
September Clues - Busted! (Video) (28min)
Debunking “September Clues” - A Point-By-Point-Analysis (PDF)
What a waste of time to look this stuff up, it is so bad that 911 Truthers want nothing to do with no-planers, LMAO!
onebornfreedotblogspotdotcom: In the original "live"[ i.e with 17 second time delay] CNN footage of the second hit shown here at the beginning of "September Clues", although a plane like object enters the picture, the actual supposed 2nd. strike is completely obscured by the North tower due to the camera angle.
I watched the September Clues. It was very odd how the videos lined up and the TV videos shifted and buildings moved.
I honestly can't say one way or another. I really can't. What I have always taken away from 9/11 truth finders is the questioning of the State. Maybe one can make an argument that it isn't good to question the State on something that potentially is true: 9/11 happened, terrorists did it, Osama and gang, etc.... But what might be taken away from a 9/11 venture into what really happened is the process of questioning the State does happen. Even if one concludes 9/11 was not a hoax, even to bring up 9/11 somebody may cross paths with somebody else that is questioning the State and how it may have deceived people. I'm not really taking a position on 9/11. What I'm saying is, isn't the questioning of the State helpful? I'm really looking at that last question of mine here in a very sterile way. Cause as many may not think 9/11 was a hoax, the questioning of the State by some due to 9/11 is spreading a meme about questioning the State. I really don't mind questioning the State in various ways. I really desire people to question the State. Is it wrong to question the State on a personal level, to bring a hesitation about the State, even if the questioning is about something the State had nothing to do with?
Is this making any sense?
wilderness:Is this making any sense?
Absolutely. Tom Woods talked about it at the C4L Seattle Conference. Keep demanding answers from the state, keep challenging the state. He wasn't talking about 9/11. There is more than one way to cook a goose.
liberty student: wilderness:Is this making any sense? Absolutely. Tom Woods talked about it at the C4L Seattle Conference. Keep demanding answers from the state, keep challenging the state. He wasn't talking about 9/11. There is more than one way to cook a goose.
For instance, say 9/11 happened the way the State says it happened. The way I see it therefore is the 9/11 truthers are creating one heck of an entertaining fictional story that questions the State. Any good fiction that questions the State is a good fiction that I like. Question the State - just do it. Spread hesitations around and make people question the State even if it is for a moment, even if it is hearing somebody else question the State. At least the questioning is happening. I like the questioning of the State. I want people to wake up.
wilderness: liberty student: wilderness:Is this making any sense? Absolutely. Tom Woods talked about it at the C4L Seattle Conference. Keep demanding answers from the state, keep challenging the state. He wasn't talking about 9/11. There is more than one way to cook a goose. For instance, say 9/11 happened the way the State says it happened. The way I see it therefore is the 9/11 truthers are creating one heck of an entertaining fictional story that questions the State. Any good fiction that questions the State is a good fiction that I like. Question the State - just do it. Spread hesitations around and make people question the State even if it is for a moment, even if it is hearing somebody else question the State. At least the questioning is happening. I like the questioning of the State. I want people to wake up.
Questioning the State is a noble trait however I don't think inventing Sorelian myths will sustain themselves. Just an off comment about the subject
'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael
911 Truthers are fabricating lies and creating misinformation either intentionally or through ignorance. This helps no one and wastes everyone's time.
Laughing Man: Questioning the State is a noble trait however I don't think inventing Sorelian myths will sustain themselves. Just an off comment about the subject
true, they may not sustain themselves. But doesn't this mean the defenders of a true State action, such as 9/11 happening the way the State said it did, doesn't this mean those defending the State in this instance are not lulled into taking everything for granted about the State. That they have to rise up every once and awhile and think things through to defend their position. Thinking isn't all that bad, even if it is somebody defending the State in this event cause they are faced with people that are questioning the State. Not just a little political move like this politician laughed about poor people but it's a huge step to be faced with people questioning the State at large and total - even if the story is a fiction. Am I still making sense? I'm trying to get the words out.
wilderness:Am I still making sense? I'm trying to get the words out.
Hmmm...no
Poptech: 911 Truthers are fabricating lies and creating misinformation either intentionally or through ignorance. This helps no one and wastes everyone's time.
Do you think it only strengthens the resolve of the State and the public at large? Or does it create an unsettled hint in the air as to why Americans could be actually questioning the State - thereby wake people up that there is this questioning of the State going on. How much happens in the U.S. or Europe that actually questions the State and then even to hear absurd lies about 9/11 being fabricated by Truthers wouldn't that be a bit unsettling for the average citizen? I mean for somebody to even question the State - even if it is a lie/fiction.
? maybe
Laughing Man: wilderness:Am I still making sense? I'm trying to get the words out. Hmmm...no
lol, ok
wilderness:Do you think it only strengthens the resolve of the State and the public at large?
I think it creates massive ignorance.
I believe that once you go beyond fact you lose all credibility. Questioning is fine, being skeptical is fine but drawing wild delusional conclusions not based on fact is ignorant.
Best Videos Debunking the Truthers...
9/11: The Conspiracy Files (Video) (60min) (BBC, 2007) 9/11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction (Video) (90min) (History Channel, 2007)9/11 Conspiracy Theories (Video) (9min) (Penn & Teller: Bullshit!, 2005)Screw 9/11 Mysteries - Clunkity Clunk Edition (Video) (2hr 35min)Screw Loose Change - Not Freakin' Again edition (Video) (2hr 58min)September Clues - Busted! (Video) (28min)
Poptech: wilderness:Do you think it only strengthens the resolve of the State and the public at large? I think it creates massive ignorance. I believe that once you go beyond fact you lose all credibility. Questioning is fine, being skeptical is fine but drawing wild delusional conclusions not based on fact is ignorant.
Fair enough. I really can't argue against that. But I'm wondering if it creates wonder in the general population or are people not really fazed by the State being questioned. People probably aren't fazed by it they usually point the finger at the current President and then move on in their life. I guess it may not create a certain wonder in people as to why would anybody question the State even if based on delusional conclusions. I guess in this day and age this kind of questioning of the State could seem more like a Hollywood movie and people would just be entertained and not take the questioning too seriously. Obviously the questioning of 9/11 isn't going to rock the State's boat and tip it over. I'm just pushing for any questioning anywhere. I mean could it be quite possible that as much as the questioning of the State turns into numerous different ways by a diverse amount of people - some people questioning it this way, some that way, and others even another way I mean soon people may find themselves surrounded by people questioning the State even if some are lies. But it's that questioning that would be important if that ever happened cause now theirs numerous people in all their different ways, some lies, some not, questioning the State.
maybe?
Poptech:911 Truthers are fabricating lies and creating misinformation either intentionally or through ignorance. This helps no one and wastes everyone's time.
I don't think the claims of thermite/thermate and the chemical analysis done by Neils Harrit hurts anyone. I think maintaining that the official story is correct causes a couple problems.
1. It reinforces that the state adequately investigated it. (Which even the commission heads now say it was blocked and contrived)
2. It doesn't call the state to task if the official story is wrong.
3. It undermines everyone who speaks out against the state (self censorship)
I don't think people should go march or whatever for 9/11 tomorrow, and personally I don't really give a damn because I am way more pissed off that American soldiers sexually abuse women and children, but I think if the chemical analysis is genuine, than that definitely opens everything up.
To claim otherwise is just being intellectually dishonest and that hurts libertarianism.
It's like a member here who went off over Bilderberg a week or so ago. The friggin meeting summaries are posted on Wikileaks. Anyone can read them. It's not a conspiracy, it's out in plain sight. How important it is? I'll leave that to others to determine. But it sure is real, and anyone who claims otherwise is making excuses for the state.
Regarding 9/11, if tens of thousands of people saw it with their own eyes, I wonder why there are only a handful of vids and stills of it?
It was like Oklahoma City on steroids, certainly fishy with lots of bellyfeel.
No such thing as a bad question, thankfully there is only one truth that we may be fortunate enough to reveal while we're still breathing. To accept a lie would be far worse than questioning a truth.
Had a teacher that believed in leprechauns because no one could prove that they didn't exist. While we keep chasing ghosts in caves and shoving light bulbs up muslim arses, I wonder what's next in the puppet master's script? Does O-Bomb-A have a clue? See y'all in the joycamp.
We are the soldiers for righteousnessAnd we are not sent here by the politicians you drink with - L. Dube, rip
bbnet:Regarding 9/11, if tens of thousands of people saw it with their own eyes, I wonder why there are only a handful of vids and stills of it?
Um maybe because not everyone owns a video camera let alone a regular one nor do they carry them around everywhere they go (especially if going to work). Camera phones were not being sold in north america yet either. The thousands of people who all saw the planes hit first hand were obviously part of a mass government conspiracy.
Poptech: onebornfreedotblogspotdotcom:OK , you need more "worthless analysis" I said no I don't need more worthless analysis from delusional people such as yourself. Real planes hit the buildings, every major news network covered it and tens of thousands of people saw it with their own eyes, including family and friends of mine. It is absolutely insane people such as yourself keep pushing lies. September Clues - Busted! (Video) (28min) Debunking “September Clues” - A Point-By-Point-Analysis (PDF) What a waste of time to look this stuff up, it is so bad that 911 Truthers want nothing to do with no-planers, LMAO!
So predictable- I've been waiting for the epithets to crank up, and for you to cough up Anthony Lawsons lame debunking attempt of "September Clues" at the same time. The tactics never vary.
A Diversion
Of course, in attempting such an epithet laden diversion , you completely fail to address the point I actually responded to in your previous post which was your attempt to pass off M Herzakhani's fake video as original, live CNN footage that was shown "live", "as it happened" , when of course, no such live airing ever occurred on CNN or anywhere else.
Nice try. Better luck next time. [Will i get a retraction/ apology? I'm not holding my breath- the practiced epithet wielder is too busy thinking up new epithets to hurl.]
Oh well, onwards and upwards!
N.B. nothing below is an attempt to persuade _yourself_ that the 911 footage was mostly faked, you are simply way to far "gone" for that [an "Austrian" who believes his government- how about that! ] - however others who are unsure might possibly be open minded enough to fairly consider the simple points I raise below.
The Central 9/11 Issue - Simple High School Physics
And since _you_ brought it up, not me, I'll stick with the subject of the [faked] Herzakhani/CNN video- simply because it is a pretty good example [although not the clearest] of the type of video fakery that was used that day and also because it confronts us all [including yourself] with the central issue which must be addressed by all who look for truth in this whole shabby affair, which is this :
the fact that this "real" video depicts a hollow, aluminum skinned 120 ton "plane" with a plastic nose cone gliding effortlessly into and through a 500,000, steel and concrete tower , without any parts shearing off at impact and dropping to the ground, and without the plane slowing down, to the degree that even the wings and wingtips on each side each cut straight through a half dozen solid steel girders,[ each over a foot square] leaving an almost perfect, "cookie cutter" plane shaped hole in its wake.
Quite a plane!
if you, or anyone else, seriously believes that this event as depicted was/is possible in the real world then i would suggest that it is you who is delusional, not myself.
Why No Plane/ Engine Wake?
A second clue to that video being fake is the fact that any plane purportedly traveling at 500+mph would leave an enormously turbulent wake in its trail- particularly from the two engines.
This wake [or twin wake] would cause a massive distortion in the shape of the explosion and the smoke/flames subsequently produced, on the impact side, and the "ghost "of the wake would then be seen in the smoke /fumes etc.emanating from that side of the tower.
Of course, because the video was faked, no such "ghost" wake exists in it- a small detail overlooked by the faker.
In summary, that whole event, as depicted, is scientifically impossible, as anyone with even a cursory knowledge of high school level physics [ i. Newton's 3rd law of motion], must conclude, if they are honest with themselves.
Forget Everything Except Basic Physics!
I urge anyone [i.e. not you] who is trying to seriously consider the possibility of media involvement in perpetrating the 911 fraud to simply forget everything else , and to focus only on the physics of the event supposedly depicted in the "live" videos of the second hit such as this one . Basic physics, it really is that simple
And no, basic physics means that thousands of witnesses [ including your sister] did _not_ witness a plane gliding effortlessly into and through a 500,000 ton steel and concrete building in one piece either.
its funny you lecturing his sister on what she saw....
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
onebornfreedotblogspotdotcom, oh yes lets start with the basics...
Please prove the videos in September Clues were original live video and completely unedited / undoctored.
Oh and linking to other youtube videos or truther websites is not proof.
onebornfreedotblogspotdotcom:And no, thousands of witnesses [ including your sister] did _not_ witness a plane gliding effortlessly into and through a 500,000 ton steel and concrete building in one piece either.
Oh yes of course they were all mass hallucinating and you living no where near NYC and after watching nonsensical videos and reading bogus information online can prove it!
Poptech: onebornfreedotblogspotdotcom, oh yes lets start with the basics... Please prove the videos in September Clues were original live video and completely unedited / undoctored. Oh and linking to other youtube or truther websites is not proof.
Oh and linking to other youtube or truther websites is not proof.
What, no epithets?:-)
OK, what would _you_ consider to be proof that the original network footage had not been altered in September Clues [besides the obvious stuff where the author uses heightened contrast to make a point, of which he informs the viewer in advance each time] ?
Why would I bother providing it for _you_? [ie. what's my incentive, how would I profit, as you see it?]
...and to reverse your question/demand somewhat, please prove that the Hezarkhani/CNN video and others like it was not faked- _without_ resorting to basic high school physics.
onebornfreedotblogspotdotcom:OK, what would _you_ consider to be proof that the original network footage had not been altered in September Clues [besides the obvious stuff where the author uses heightened contrast to make a point, of which he informs the viewer in advance each time] ?
Come on master of 911 Truth - Prove it!
This should be soooooooooo easy for you. Unlike you I don't believe random nonsense on the Internet.
Poptech: onebornfreedotblogspotdotcom:OK, what would _you_ consider to be proof that the original network footage had not been altered in September Clues [besides the obvious stuff where the author uses heightened contrast to make a point, of which he informs the viewer in advance each time] ? Please prove the videos in September Clues were original live video and completely unedited / undoctored. Come on master of 911 Truth - Prove it! This should be soooooooooo easy for you.
This should be soooooooooo easy for you.
As my previous answer tried to subtly [perhaps too subtly] imply - it is impossible for me to prove anything to you here, or probably anywhere else if the truth be known.
Regarding supposed image manipulation by the author of "September Clues" the best solution I can offer is for you to go to the original on line achives yourself and check them against "September Clues" -a task I am not at all convinced you are interested in.
Nonetheless, here is the link to the same archives used by the maker of September Clues: http://www.archive.org/details/sept_11_tv_archive
Fox's Altered Archives
You need to be aware that because of movies like September Clues , the Fox archive has been altered to mostly hide the "nose out" sequence in which the nose of Fl 175 was seen to emerge , in one piece, on the opposite side of WTC2 than which it supposedly entered - a physically impossible event.
Thankfully other sites were early on dedicated to mirroring all of the original TV archives, including the Fox broadcasts. Here is a mirror site with all original Fox footage: http://www.911conspiracy.tv/9-11_TV_archive.html
The Fox"Nose Out"Sequence
As well as being included in the mirror site above, it can be seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5-xcvv_fRQ
where a close analysis of the original Fox "live" broadcast feed [i.e on 17 sec. delay] , including the impossible "nose out" is undertaken.
Unlike you I don't believe random nonsense on the Internet."
Ah, but you do- the fake CNN/ Herzakhani video you linked to is proof of that- I guess one man's "random nonsense" is another man's truth.
The Essential Difference Between Us- Common Sense Physics
The only thing that separates our conflicting versions of truth in this case as i see it is common sense vis a vis a knowledge of basic high school science , including knowledge of a fundamental law of physics.
In the real world, planes do not disappear into 500,000 ton steel and concrete buildings without slowing down and leaving "cookie cutter" shaped holes like something out of a "Roadrunner" cartoon, to mark their passage.[ and with no visible jet stream wake- to boot!]
So you can spend hours comparing original archive footage to "September Clues" to prove it was, or was not manipulated in "September Clues" to your own satisfaction[or not!]- or you can use a short cut to enlightenment and "get a clue" instead about basic principles of physics - your choice.
bbnet: No such thing as a bad question, thankfully there is only one truth that we may be fortunate enough to reveal while we're still breathing. To accept a lie would be far worse than questioning a truth.
That's what I mean. Isn't a 9/11 debate good cause it's a debate questioning the State with people on one side who think the State is in the clear on this one and on the other people who really think the State had a hand in it - I think this is what I meant.
I can only think of Vietnam as being the last time the State was questioned so much with Ron P. the most foreseeable potential rival to the Vietnam era questioning.
onebornfreedotblogspotdotcom:That is, briefly: that no planes crashed in to WTC1, WTC2,
Ummm....
Yeah, I have a problem with this, I saw it...
There were defintiely planes that hit those towers...
But feel free to believe what you will....
It sounds like the ocean, smells like fresh mountain air, and tastes like the union of peanut butter and chocolate. ~Liberty Student
Harry Felker: onebornfreedotblogspotdotcom:That is, briefly: that no planes crashed in to WTC1, WTC2, Ummm.... Yeah, I have a problem with this, I saw it... There were defintiely planes that hit those towers... But feel free to believe what you will....
You witnessed what exactly, flight 11 disappearing whole inside WTC1, or flight 175 disappearing in one piece inside WTC2, or you saw both events live, in person, on the street, as they happened?
onebornfreedotblogspotdotcom:You witnessed what exactly, flight 11 disappearing whole inside WTC1, or flight 175 disappearing in one piece inside WTC2, or you saw both events as they happened?
I saw the first plane hit, it fly towards the Tower, out of the corner of my eye, my boss, who was with me, got my attention and I saw the fireball....
Then we stopped work and watched...
Sorry, but it was not a trick of camera, in RL it happened...
This is not to say that I think there was no government issue there, but the premise there was never a plane crash is false, at least I can say from the tower standpoint...
Harry Felker: onebornfreedotblogspotdotcom:You witnessed what exactly, flight 11 disappearing whole inside WTC1, or flight 175 disappearing in one piece inside WTC2, or you saw both events as they happened? I saw the first plane hit, it fly towards the Tower, out of the corner of my eye, my boss, who was with me, got my attention and I saw the fireball.... Then we stopped work and watched... Sorry, but it was not a trick of camera, in RL it happened... This is not to say that I think there was no government issue there, but the premise there was never a plane crash is false, at least I can say from the tower standpoint...
In your first post to this thread you used the word "planes" plural ["There were defintiely planes that hit those towers..."] ,implying you saw both events- yet already we are down to one plane, correct?
In any case, if you saw the plane out of the corner of your eye, why would you take your eyes off it only to have your boss later draw your attention to the fireball? That does not make sense, at least the way you explain it.
In the Naudet video, the fireball is instantaneous, are you sure you actually saw the plane hit and cause the fireball, or did you see a plane just in the vicinity - and then later, when your boss drew your attention to it, the fireball causing you to assume that the plane you saw caused it?
And exactly where were you and your boss standing when you saw all of this happen?
onebornfreedotblogspotdotcom: As my previous answer tried to subtly [perhaps too subtly] imply - it is impossible for me to prove anything to you here, or probably anywhere else if the truth be known. Regarding supposed image manipulation by the author of "September Clues" the best solution I can offer is for you to go to the original on line achives yourself and check them against "September Clues" -a task I am not at all convinced you are interested in. Nonetheless, here is the link to the same archives used by the maker of September Clues: http://www.archive.org/details/sept_11_tv_archive
You fail - you are unable to prove the very basics of your claim. The archives do not show that video but they do show a plane crashing into Tower 2 over and over again live.
onebornfreedotblogspotdotcom:Fox's Altered Archives You need to be aware that because of movies like September Clues , the Fox archive has been altered to mostly hide the "nose out" sequence in which the nose of Fl 175 was seen to emerge , in one piece, on the opposite side of WTC2 than which it supposedly entered - a physically impossible event.
How do we know you are not from the government here to dispense misinformation? Prove you are not.
I like how the conspiracy people want physics and nature to behave like they imagine they should. Reminds me of...
Aside from being a skeptic on 911 and other complex conspiracies, I'm also a person that is willing to leave the problem of 911 alone for the simple fact that it has no bearing on the nature of the State. It's already true and obvious that the State is fundamentally corrupt, 911 being a true conspiracy or not will not validate or invalidate that truth. As such, arguing over 911 or other conspiracies are more for diversion/deflection of the real issue of apparent injustices being done everyday in the light of "law and order."
<rant>
Call me a dick for stating this, but does it really matter that the State added another 3000 people to its already hefty deathtoll? Why aren't you bitching about Waco? Why aren't you crying foul on the War on Drugs? Why aren't you calling out Obama for not prosecuting the Bush Administration for the unneeded deaths in Iraq (of civillians and American soldiers)? Why is 911 more special than these other events, which we have all the obvious facts to back up the willfully negligent manner of the State and its agents in?
Do you have some mental woody for the twin towers that you don't even get a gush of blood in your conspiratorial nether regions over in the other events done in the name of reinforcing the State? Sorry, I'm just completely baffled by the obssession over 911 and other vague conspiracies. Maybe I'm just dumb, or maybe I prefer to deal with the substatiated facts, either way I want to know if you (the original poster) are willing to see reason that 911 in the big picture of dealing with the State amounts to *nothing*? If not, then please don't bother replying to my posts as you're proven not to be part of the solution of expanding liberty for yourself or anyone else.
</rant>
"The power of liberty going forward is in decentralization. Not in leaders, but in decentralized activism. In a market process." -- liberty student
Hey OneBornFree, why dont you do some real investigation instead of watchin low-res videos? I propose something: Check a list of the passengers that were in one of the planes, search for his/her family and go have a conversation with them, Im sure they will be very happy to know that their relative was in a non-existante air plane and must be alive somewhere (probably over the rainbow)
PT: "You fail - you are unable to prove the very basics of your claim. The archives do not show that video but they do show a plane crashing into Tower 2 over and over again live."
So now I stand accused of failing to prove something i clearly stated that I could not prove? My my, whatever next!
So to repeat myself : " - it is impossible for me to prove anything to you here, or probably anywhere else if the truth be known."
PT "How do we know you are not from the government here to dispense misinformation? Prove you are not."
And when I say I cannot are you going to come back and tell me that I failed to prove something that I have already stated I cannot , again?
And please enlighten me, exactly how would I know that _you_ are not from the government? Truth is I don't and you cannot prove otherwise. A pointless argument , right?
Which is why I also previously stated - to repeat myself [again!] :
"The only thing that separates our conflicting versions of truth in this case as i see it is common sense vis a vis a knowledge of basic high school science , including knowledge of a fundamental law of physics.
***************************************************
N.B. Mr [or Mrs] "PopTech" - You "Win"! This is My Last Response To You - DON'T BOTHER REPLYING!
Its "been real", but frankly given your demonstrated lack of reading comprehension skills I find our interactions both frustrating and pointless to date and I will not reply to any more of your posts here- thank you and good luck with the reading comprehension courses.
P.S. I strongly suspect that your lack of reading comprehension and general lack of attention to detail is the major factor in your continued belief in the official 911 story- believing in anything else is simply beyond your demonstrated capabilities.