Not another 911 thread

TalkieWalkie

alastair wrote: »

So what have we learned?

oh look, it's a picture of a wheel.

I guess the official story was correct.

My name is URL

The whole no-plane idea is a bit nuts imho.. I know people who were in New York at the time and witnessed the second plane hitting.. unless they collectively imagined it then I couldn't possibly question it

Even the majority of 9/11 'truthers' despise the idea of there being no planes involved

alastair

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

Diogenie to the rescue. He stays quiet until a video camera question arises. The whole world knows by now you know about video cameras lmfao. But it stops there.

Have we moved on from the visible invisble plane then?

King Mob

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

very few eyewitnesses stated they saw a plane crash into the building. They saw a small plane, they saw an explosion.
Some planted folk shouted "a plane crashed into the building".
Other folk copied them, then everyone was shouting it...
People convinced themselves they saw it happening. Liars on the new backed it up etc etc
It's a clever trick, very clever

And no doubt you have no problem believing a missile hit the pentagon cause people said "It was like a missile."

I take it you're ignoring the fact your video nonsense has been blown out of the water?

TalkieWalkie

My name is URL wrote: »

The whole no-plane idea is a bit nuts imho.. I know people who were in New York at the time and witnessed the second plane hitting.. unless they collectively imagined it then I couldn't possibly question it

Even the majority of 9/11 'truthers' despise the idea of there being no planes involved

Yeah, it's a pretty out there theory.

But when I look at video evidence that shows no plane hitting the building when it exploded. I wonder

alastair

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

oh look, it's a picture of a wheel.

I guess the official story was correct.

So - it's off a hotdog cart, or another element in the grand conspiracy - someone planted it here while the 'faked screamers' were doing their thing?

alastair

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

Yeah, it's a pretty out there theory.

But when I look at video evidence that shows no plane hitting the building when it exploded. I wonder

Well if you insist on not seeing a visible plane in a video you claim shows none, there's not a lot can be done to your 'theory' Damn your lying eyes!

King Mob

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

Yeah, it's a pretty out there theory.

But when I look at video evidence that shows no plane hitting the building when it exploded. I wonder

But the videos you posted all show a plane hitting the building.

All the other videos all show the same thing.

The nearest you have is one video with really bad compression which when shown in higher resolution show the plane.

This is just sad.

TalkieWalkie

King Mob wrote: »

And no doubt you have no problem believing a missile hit the pentagon cause people said "It was like a missile."

I take it you're ignoring the fact your video nonsense has been blown out of the water?

it has ?


If you can explain to me how the impact of a large jet left a 16 foot hole in the pentagon, I would happily reconsider my view on it.

alastair

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

it has ?


If you can explain to me how the impact of a large jet left a 16 foot hole in the pentagon, I would happily reconsider my view on it.

I take you have moved on then. You're welcome.

King Mob

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

it has ?


If you can explain to me how the impact of a large jet left a 16 foot hole in the pentagon, I would happily reconsider my view on it.

Well yea. You main point has been totally refuted and shown to be completely ridiculous.

And considering you are now reverting the usual toofer tactic of throwing out red herrings and nonsequiters when backed into a corner....

TalkieWalkie

alastair wrote: »

Check out the trickery:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyqo4oh-AzU

Ha ha, ya gotta laugh

Good acting

alastair

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

Ha ha, ya gotta laugh

Good acting

Laugh it up tinfoil boy - I know who I'm laughing at.

TalkieWalkie

King Mob wrote: »

Well yea. You main point has been totally refuted and shown to be completely ridiculous.

And considering you are now reverting the usual toofer tactic of throwing out red herrings and nonsequiters when backed into a corner....

I showed 2 clips. 1 has a plane, the other doesnt.

your man said those clips are not on archive.org

I found them both on archive.org

They are exactly as I stated.

How does that blow my theory out of the water..?

Actually, forget it. You don't seem to cave a clue what is going on here.
Dont talk to me again.

thecommander

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

Ha ha, ya gotta laugh

You do?

TalkieWalkie

alastair wrote: »

Laugh it up tinfoil boy - I know who I'm laughing at.

alistair (chuckle). I am delighted you know who your laughing at. You should celebrate or something

TalkieWalkie

thecommander wrote: »

You do?

I do

King Mob

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

I showed 2 clips. 1 has a plane, the other doesnt.

your man said those clips are not on archive.org

I found them both on archive.org

They are exactly as I stated.

How does that blow my theory out of the water..?

That's not quite what happened
But when you did finally point out the clips on archive.org, they both clearly show a plane.

You can't show a single other example of no plane hitting.
And now you have to rely on stuff like "the sky is blue in this one."

So yea, blow out of the water.

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

Actually, forget it. You don't seem to cave a clue what is going on here.
Dont talk to me again.

Yea, we wouldn't want you to start questioning your beliefs or anything.
Sorry for asking hard questions...

nullzero

Am I alone in thinking this thread has run its course?

alastair

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

alistair (chuckle). I am delighted you know who your laughing at. You should celebrate or something

Beats laughing at a bunch of people being flown into a building. But maybe that's just me.

humanji

nullzero wrote: »

Am I alone in thinking this thread has run its course?

Definitely not. But I'm leaving it open for the moment. I want everyone to read what they type before posting it. If it's insulting, condescending or generally not adding anything then don't bother with it. I don't want to have to start handing out bans to everyone, but I will if it keeps up.

TalkieWalkie

alastair wrote: »

Beats laughing at a bunch of people being flown into a building. But maybe that's just me.

now im confused. was it people being flown into a building or just you ?

alastair

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

I showed 2 clips. 1 has a plane, the other doesnt.

your man said those clips are not on archive.org

I found them both on archive.org

No you didn't. They are better quality and show the plane. Your cruddy youtube videos are clearly not the same as those on archive.org - and are indeed from unknown sources.

TalkieWalkie

alastair wrote: »

No you didn't. They are better quality and show the plane. Your cruddy youtube videos are clearly not the same as those on archive.org - and are indeed from unknown sources.

1 shows a plane, the other does not.
Those cruddy youtube video's are not mine, aside from the quality, they are exactly the same as the ones on archive.org.

alastair

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

1 shows a plane, the other does not.
Those cruddy youtube video's are not mine, aside from the quality, they are exactly the same as the ones on archive.org.

'Aside from the quality' you might be actually be able to see the plane that's evident to the rest of us. It's the little things that matter.

alastair

nullzero wrote: »

Am I alone in thinking this thread has run its course?

If you mean that the original post has been shown to be baseless rubbish - sure. But that's been the case from the get-go.

TalkieWalkie

alastair wrote: »

'Aside from the quality' you might be actually be able to see the plane that's evident to the rest of us. It's the little things that matter.

Do you really mean that or is it just the first thing that came to mind ? "It's the little things that matter", it's not very fair on big things, it's prejudice.

alastair

I've a new graphic representation of the 9/11 secret technology ball - cleverly overlaid against itself to show it's form before impact and after - note the identical structure:

My name is URL

alastair wrote: »

If you mean that the original post has been shown to be baseless rubbish - sure. But that's been the case from the get-go.

Why do you even bother with this forum? I'm genuinely interested to know. I mean most people who don't have an interest in the subject matter would give this place a wide berth, and know what the term 'conspiracy theory' means when it's used as a description of what a forum is about. ie.. likely to contain a lot of BS to put it simply.. most people wouldn't bother

You expend just as much energy here as the theorists, who very few people are likely to take seriously anyway for the most part. Is it solely to change the minds of theorists or what?

Are there any theories which you think could contain an ounce of truth or is it the term itself which you find objectionable?

TalkieWalkie

CNN are big supporters of the "no plane" theory

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHWHHid0Pmo