I found this Gibroney's video to be snarky and adolescent in its tone, and not terribly helpful. What do you think?
I'd like to discuss so called "no planers" with you. I'd like to know what has convinced you that they are creators of disinformation. I've watched September Clues and several films like it, and find some of the evidence to be very compelling indeed. While I see no reason not to believe the towers were hit by aircraft, I think the many obvious discrepencies and violations of simple laws of physics contained in the film footage is very incriminating evidence, and certainly not outside of the establishment's capabilities.
I find it amusing that many within the 9/11 truth movement go on at great length about just how capable the government is of great conspiracy.. yet when the topic of video manipulation arises most 9/11 truthers declare it ridiculous without providing any clear reasons why. For example, the majority of the 9/11 truth movement agree with David Ray Griffin that the cell phone calls from high altitude were faked. He even goes on about the corporation that patented the technology in his books, yet for some reason we're to believe that no discussion of a comparable VIDEO manipulation of the terrorist attack is necessary, because the idea's just so obviously ridiculous.
I can understand why many of the 'leaders' of 9/11 truth would steer clear of this topic. Namely, because it would risk alienating the movement from the general public, who are far too stupid to grasp such things as video manipulation of news footage. Again, I'm on the fence as to whether or not the projectiles that hit the buildings were authentic American Airlines flights, but i find the generally belligerent tone of the 'mainstream' of 9/11 truth toward 'no planers' to be very counterproductive. I'm interested in hearing any specific criticisms of no plane theory that you may have. Thanks for reading.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The biggest question must be that, if there were no planes, what happened to the passengers on these flights that have died? It poses a logistical problem for the conspirators to somehow fly out and either kill or 'disappear' these people.
ReplyDeleteIn fairness, a similar such plan was suggested as part of Operation Northwoods, in which passengers would be switched to a replica plane while the real plane was destroyed in a staged incident.
But if the passengers are still alive, that would take a lot of resources to keep them either imprisoned or surveilled, and it's very risky. Imagine if they start talking!
Either way, you've got to deal with planeloads of passengers, right? So why not just fly them into the buildings? That's what I would do if I was planning this.
I suspect that rather than 'no planes', there were 'no hijackers' (as none were on the flight lists, right?) and the planes were 'hijacked' using the autopilot tech designed to take control of the plane in an emergency.
My concern is that COINTELPRO loves the no-plane arguments because they are helping to derail 9/11 truth IMO. You know as well as I do that the TV pundits instantly, when hearing from a 9/11 truther, say "so you think there were no planes?" as a ploy to discredit anything they say.
Keep an eye on Joyce Riley, I have my suspicions Power Hour is disinfo, based on their ridiculous tone in the recent video about swine flu vaccine bracelets, and their non-story a while back about vials being loaded on trucks and driven through underground roads, remember that?
Lastly, I was dismayed by the Citizen Investigation Team's accusation that witnesses who claim to have seen a plane at the Pentagon are part of the cover up and are lying about what they saw.
http://frustratingfraud.blogspot.com/2008/11/see-saw-analogy-moot.html
I'm not saying there is zero credibility to no-planeism, but it stinks of COINTELPRO, and the movement needs to sidestep this divide and conquer game and move on to which scum were responsible for this.
I agree with just about everything you said, except for no plane theory stinking of cointelpro. I think it might just stink of a truth far too ugly and revealing for even most people of higher intellect and emotional control to be able to grasp. When I watch the wings of that plane cut into the facade of that building like a hot knife through butter, as it does on every version of the video record, I'm led to choose between two possible explanations that do not violate the laws of physics.
ReplyDelete1. The plane is modified in order to be able to pierce into the steel framed structure in such a way (perhaps to maximize damage).
2. The 'plane' is in reality a digital manipulation of the video, intended to mask the real life image of a missile, or other projectile which truly impacted the building.
that said, I'm in complete agreement that these theories and concepts have no place on the front burner of 9/11 truth, and if placed there (at least right now) would only serve to further alienate the general public from the information that can save them.
No clue about the passengers, but then again I think there's a whole lot we won't have a clue about, regarding 9/11, until we receive a true investigation.
ReplyDelete"A true investigation"
ReplyDeleteExactly. That's what we need. :)