Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And of course, this is a lie. Most of the witnesses were ordinary people on the streets of New York that day or people watching it real time on television... all over the world. And if they cleared them out ahead of time, where are the thousands of missing people, to include my cousin Maggie Alario?
Welcome to the real universe. It is a messy place.
Your belief that it was all media fakery is insane and insulting.
I cannot conceive of how despicable a person must be to promote such obscenity.
And I wonder WHY? What does one hope to gain by trying to push such a tale, to the point where they diminish the suffering and memories of other people to get there? What is the satisfaction? Being heard? Some kind of negative attention reaction? Why?
It's been pointed out earlier in the thread that most of the "witnesses" were media and media related people- some of whom changed their original stories.
No, it was pointed out by truthers to handwave away the thousands of witnesses claims, with absolutely no support for that claim. Its just another lie perpetuated by truthers. To perpetuate this lie, shows more about your character, than actually looking for the "truth". and to echo HistorianDude "I cannot conceive of how despicable a person must be to promote such obscenity."
MY Aunt and Uncle were there that day. They have no ties to the media. They saw both planes. The saw the fires. They smelt the fires. They saw the smoke and they saw the collapse of both towers (they were out of the area by mid-afternoon).
So once again:
HOW DID PEOPLE WHO WERE THERE THAT DAY, SEE CGI PLANES AND SMOKE?
I want you to provide a concise detailed report with support for this claim.
I'm not talking about the media. I'm talking about real life people who were there in New York City on that day.
Please provide the technology they used, and how it was done.
the rest of your post is clear nonsense and does not address the question asked.
Sorry, but is it rather humorous to imagine the items mentioned causing any sound akin to such a massive explosion after a reported series of apparently timed "booms". Little explosions at varying intervals perhaps, comparatively speaking to what we were shown, sure, some noise, sure, but I don't think it would cause the very loud rhythmic consistent "boom-boom-boom-boom" that was reported by firemen.
We saw computer generated smoke.......................
During the pancake, the floors acted like a plunger in a Syringe. The towers skin and windows became the tube of the Syringe. The increased pressure blew the windows out as each massive acre of floor compressed air between them. It's said that the towers were about 95% air. But not all the air went so easily out the window space. There was just as much window as there was steel perimeter columns. So the air takes the path of least resistance to the core. The core is collapsing and thick debris is preventing the air from going up. Its next path of least resistance would be to go down the core. The air pushed though the core any way it could and the pressure built up. It forced its way out on lower floors wherever it could. According to the survivors of at least one tower, a hurricane wind blows through the staircase which is located in the core...
Matt Komorowski: “The first thing I really felt was the incredible rush of air at my back. And maybe I felt it before everybody else, because I was the last guy.”
Stone Phillips: “Like a gust of wind, behind you.”
Matt Komorowski: “Gust of wind. Wind tunnel. It was the most incredible push at your back, that you can feel.”
--------------
BILL BUTLER, NEW YORK FIRE DEPARTMENT: We took two steps down from the fourth floor and the building started to shake.
SALVATORE D'AGOSTINO, NEW YORK FIRE DEPARTMENT: You could hear the floors pancaking one on top of the other, huge explosions.
LIM: Boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, and faster as they get closer. What I remember the most was the wind. It created almost like a hurricane-type force and actually pushed one of the firemen right by me.
MIKE MELDRUM, NEW YORK FIRE DEPARTMENT: I was flown down a flight of stairs, a little groggy for a while. I noticed somebody on a half landing just up from me, a few stairs and I thought it was one of our guys and it was David Lim.
and as far as 'people' saying boom-boom-boom-boom:
Fire Marshal John Murray:
Quote:
We get there, we pull up on West Street and
you know we see this lines of cars, lines of trucks.
So we couldn't really go too far, so we figured we
would just pull over right there. I don't know what
street that was. It was just outside the tunnel. Down
here somewhere. On the water side of West Street. We
popped the trunk, we get our gear, we carry our bunker
gear and stuff in a bag. We get our gear, start
walking, there is like a bike path there on West
Street. So we start walking up the bike path and the
whole time you are hearing, boom boom boom, you know,
more ****ing bombs, what the hell is this. They kind
of sounded like block busters or something. We were
walking and I'm like what the **** is going on. As we are walking,
we see a detective looking, everybody is looking up and we are kind of
looking forward walking, you know, heads up guys, we
got jumpers. That's when I look up and see all these
people.
(*** is fu...)
again "boom-boom" or 'heard explosions' does NOT mean bombs
Last edited by workingclasshero; 01-24-2012 at 08:44 PM..
No you have not. You've heard a few eye witness testimonies repeated thousands of times, like everyone else has. There's a big difference.
Of course you totally dismiss the eye witness testimonies that claim that they didn't see a plane, or that there was no plane ....or that it didn't look like a commercial jet .. or that it was absolutely no way it was a commercial jet because it had no windows and was gray .... or that it was white with an odd insignia on the nose ... or that it looked like a small commuter jet ... or that all they heard was what sounded like a missile .. etc. etc.
You speak as though every eye witness saw the same thing. Nothing could be further from the truth.
But the issue is not what eye witnesses saw or didn't see ... Eye witness testimony is notoriously faulty, as any accident or crime investigator will tell you. Video evidence is far, far more reliable, and will be considered far more accurate than eye witness accounts. So, I cannot prove or disprove what someone claims to have seen, or what others claim to have not seen. But I can accurately analyze what I SEE in the videos ... and what I see is a crudely constructed hoax that wouldn't pass the smell test for a Hollywood B film, and I have no problem or reservations about being very specific:
1) the claim that the plane is traveling at 500+ MPH is physically impossible for a jet of that variety ... any commercial jet for that matter. Max level flight at sea level is approximately 330-350 MPH ... and that would be next to impossible to maintain, let alone maneuver and strike a building not much wider than the wingspan of the plane.
2) Aluminum planes cannot slice through structural steel and concrete as if they were made of gelatinous material ... and certainly not penetrate and emerge out the other side with the nose intact, and leaving a "road runner" like outline in the shape of the plane at the impact site. Only an idiot would believe that.
3) Planes don't pass through structural steel and concrete at the same velocity as they move through air .... examining the frame rates of the plane as it approaches the Tower, and then measuring the frames during which time the plane first strikes the building and then disappears into the building shows virtually the same velocity. This is obviously impossible, since we can all agree that structural steel and concrete are significantly more dense than air, and would surely at least slow some portion of the plane down beginning at impact and continuing as the plane either flattens against the building or as the video shows, manages to cut through it, from nose to tail.
4) Buildings don't repair themselves .... wings do not disappear into the building leaving no entrance wound in the structure for a second after the wing disappears ... which can readily be seen to occur in the crudely made compositing and keying job depicted in the video, easily seen when slowed down and viewed frame by frame.
5) There is no mass to the tail section which could possibly slice through the building's structure, even if the wings (with engines) or the main body (with it's spine) could (which it couldn't). The tail section would have been ripped from the body and fallen like a stone to the ground.
6) Jets create trailing wake vortexes which travel along the path and directly behind the aircraft, and those wind current forces are strong enough to cause an accident hazard to following aircraft coming in after them ... this is why there are separation rules and delays of 5 minutes or more between multiple aircraft landing on the same runway. Careful examination of the fireball explosion at impact and the subsequent massive clouds of smoke show no vortex disturbances ... none at all. This is impossible to explain. It's another one of those reality checks that don't pass the smell test ... fine for the unsophisticated movie viewer, a huge red flag showing a fake to anyone with a shred of knowledge about the subject.
I can say without the slightest hesitation or equivocation that what is depicted in these videos is absolutely, 100% fake. I don't need to address what someone claims to have seen as an eye witness. They can claim whatever they care to, and for whatever reason they do is totally immaterial to what is clearly a fake rendition of a plane crashing into the tower on these videos.
As would be expected in a court of law, the video evidence trumps eye witness testimony because eye witnesses can lie .. they can be inaccurate ... they can make mistakes .... video doesn none of those things IF the video is not manipulated and is the true recording of what was occurring live. Since what is seen on the video is impossible ... it is clearly fake ... and if the video is fake, the story is too, regardless of how many people claim to have witnessed what was depicted in the videos.
I now believe that all of these alleged "eye witnesses" who have wildly different accounts of what they saw ... from small planes to exact identification of the plane and the carrier, are disinformation plants to draw attention to the varying accounts of what each of them witnessed, and away from the clearly fake video of a video composite plane smashing into a building with composite damage and smoke and fire ...
100% fake video. Eye Witness testimony is totally subordinate to that fact, and quite irrelevant.
It's been pointed out earlier in the thread that most of the "witnesses" were media and media related people- some of whom changed their original stories.
It's been pointed out earlier in the thread that most of the "witnesses" were media and media related people- some of whom changed their original stories. It is interesting to look back at the first news broadcasts and hear how different "witnesses" saw different things, including orbs, missiles, windowless large planes, small commuter planes, military planes, passenger planes, no planes, etc.
As well, there may have been some kind of street level and up smoke screen generated around the towers to conceal the controlled demo from any onlookers. But IMO, onlookers would be few. I think the place was cleared out long before anyone was in danger.
It must be some kind of mind programming that causes people to THINK they have heard from "thousands" of witnesses. In all honesty, have you heard thousands of eye witness reports?
Actually, I've probably heard at least a thousand. And the vast majority aren't even remotely connected to the media.
No, it was pointed out by truthers to handwave away the thousands of witnesses claims, with absolutely no support for that claim. Its just another lie perpetuated by truthers. To perpetuate this lie, shows more about your character, than actually looking for the "truth". and to echo HistorianDude "I cannot conceive of how despicable a person must be to promote such obscenity."
MY Aunt and Uncle were there that day. They have no ties to the media. They saw both planes. The saw the fires. They smelt the fires. They saw the smoke and they saw the collapse of both towers (they were out of the area by mid-afternoon).
So once again:
HOW DID PEOPLE WHO WERE THERE THAT DAY, SEE CGI PLANES AND SMOKE?
I want you to provide a concise detailed report with support for this claim.
I'm not talking about the media. I'm talking about real life people who were there in New York City on that day.
Please provide the technology they used, and how it was done.
the rest of your post is clear nonsense and does not address the question asked.
Yes, DD, again, how did 'they' insert CGI into people's eyes?
How did J watch the first plane plow through the north tower, while standing in the 92nd floor of the South tower? She was in the insurance industry.
How did R see the first plane plow into the North Tower while she was walking to her job at the WTC? How was that CGI'd? She was an executive assistant in a financial company.
How did K, standing on the west side of the South Tower, watch, hear, and feel, the second plane crash into the building? She was an AVP at a financial company.
How did S see the same as K? He was a broker at a financial company.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
