Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 8910
Results 118 to 121 of 121

Thread: TV Fakery & No Airplane Theory

  1. #118
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    71
    With the clear and overwhelming evidence of drones, it was inevitable that a few eyewitnesses would corroborate the video footage of drones for both towers. Stewart, said he saw something bump into tower 1 before it exploded. That certainly wasn't a plane, because a plane would crash into it, not bump.

    He says, "I'm not sure, if it was a ????? (plane). Of course it wasn't a plane, Stewy, and you gave the truth some of the best early testimony that no planes of any kind were seen for either tower because neither had wings. His subconscious gave every word, but 'plane', leaving no doubt that his conscious state prevented that last word. But, we already know those goofy french kids did not film a plane or really any identifiable object which corrorborates Stewart's verified account.

    Bryant Gumbel: It's 8:52 here in New York, I'm Bryant Gumbel. We understand that there has been a plane crash on the southern tip of Manhattan. You're looking at the WTC. We understand that a plane has crashed into the WTC. We don't know anything more than that. We don't know if it was a commercial aircraft. We don't know if it was a private aircraft. We have no idea how many were on board, or what the extent of the injuries are right now. We are, uh, we have, I understand, an eyewitness on the phone right now. Sir...

    [cuts to commercial briefly]

    BG: ...your name?

    Stewart: Yeah, my name is Stewart.

    BG: Sir, where are you right now?

    S: I'm working at a restaurant in Soho. (northeast of the towers)

    BG: Alright, so tell us what you saw if you would?

    S: I literally, I was waiting a table and I literally saw a -- it seemed to be like the small plane. I just heard a couple of noises. It looked like it bounced off the building and then I heard, uh, I saw a huge like ball of fire on top and then the smoke seemed to simmer down and it just stunned -- you know a lot of smoke was coming out and that's pretty much the extent of what I saw.

    BG: A private aircraft?

    S: I'm not sure, if it was a -- it just seemed like a smaller plane. I don't think it was anything commercial.

    BG: Did you, could you tell us whether or not it was a prop, or a jet .

    S: I honestly don't know. It happened too quickly



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SXIxbhgUDw

    http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../11/bn.01.html
    Now we want to bring in Todd Harris (ph). Todd on the scene, saw what happened.

    Todd, corroborates the Naudet footage, which captured a slow moving blob.

    Todd are you with us?

    TODD HARRIS: Yes, I had a perfect view, and the plane was coming in. I noticed it a second before it hit the building. It looked like it was moving slowly, and it lined itself up to hit the building directly.

    KAGAN: Are you talking about the first plane or the second plane?

    HARRIS: The first plane.

  2. #119
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    71
    WB11's, wackadoodle coverage of a flying bomb and failed computer graphics

    "A lot of ah, uncertainty right now as to what is happening, you can see there are choppers--I believe that could be a police helicopter that is co...oooh."

    She only mentioned choppers being in the area after the drone came into frame. She was stunned and shocked when the tower exploded because what appeared on screen had no wings or propeller, which is the very reason she said it only might be a chopper. She used the smallest aircraft that most people would be familiar that fit closest in size to the unknown flying blob. She could have said it was a green concord, but its unknown status would remain for anyone dealing in reality.

    "We just saw another (long pause because she did not describe a plane) live picture of, duhhh, what I believe, duhhh, was a plane that just hit another plane?" So, it went from an unidentifiable chopper, to, duh, what she knew had to be a plane, because that's what was supposed to happen, but didn't.

    She first described it as what might be a police helicopter and after she realized it caused the explosion, changed her thoughts in that moment. These women literally got trapped in the twilight zone. If it wasn't a helicopter, (no propeller) it certainly could not have been a plane. She simply repeated what it was supposed to be, but the orb was shown at least six more times and was described as a plane or twin engine jet.

    The first computer generated image was first shown only one minute after the last orb. You can see the time change to 9:27. The fake image is so poor that it has no wings and two dots for engines. Notice the bogey move directly east and cgi more left/north.






    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKj0H...8D8AE&index=30
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIyGE...8D8AE&index=34

  3. #120
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    71
    Four flying bombs were captured on film and survived without alteration. The only inconsistency is chopper 4 disappears behind the top of tower 1, while the other three are lower but at the same level. Here they are in this order; NY1, WB11, CBS, and Chopper 4, aka WNBC. Only the CBS bogey did not air live. The Today Show aired the orb but changed camera angles before it could complete its path to explosion.

    The final 14 seconds of approach by the 911 commission was south to north, not west to east. The drone/orb cannot visually be a chopper or plane and its float path would have crashed into the west side of T2, not southeast corner. The drone literally circled the towers just like Matt Lauer said after he saw it.






    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJX2f...ure=plpp_video

  4. #121
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Figueres
    Posts
    11,777
    Good for you. This is unexplained and it is ridiculous it should be so. The vehemency with which conspiracies about this are dismissed by some is amazing. Like so much else in American politics it has become a divided issue, you get the conspiracy debunkers saying it was islamic terrorists, no question, and others saying "we simply don't know the truth".

    Very little that is commonly believed about 9/11 is true, it stems from lies people heard that day on the TV, when no one could possibly have known what was going on, except those with scripts to read from. This is how brainwashing works. Repeat the lies. Compound the lies. Make it inconvenient for people to be able to buy into the truth. Castigate and diminish those who ask questions.

    It is so obvious there is a conspiracy, and it is equally obvious to anyone who cares to think for a second about it that Bin Laden did not plan nor carry out these attacks. The fact people actually think he did is astounding and oh-so worrying. No facts to base it on, simply lies told to them by their idiot box. Terrorists do NOT blow stuff up and then not claim they did it. What the hell is the point? To ruin our lifestyle? HA!

    Please, continue to post anything you can find or have, it is all important to archive and to see.
    proj·ect
    1. something that is contemplated, devised, or planned; plan; scheme.
    2. a large or major undertaking, especially one involving considerable money, personnel, and equipment.
    3. a specific task of investigation, especially in scholarship.
    4. to propose, contemplate, or plan.
    5. to throw, cast, or impel forward or onward.
    6. to set forth or calculate (some future thing).
    7. to extend or protrude beyond something else.
    8. to use one's voice forcefully enough to be heard at a distance, as in a theater.
    9. to produce a clear impression of one's thoughts, personality, role, etc.

Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 8910

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •