The Ultimate 9-11 Truth - Watch this! - You Won't Believe Your Eyes Anymore

[bitrebel]

http://www.septemberclues.info

[PinkiePie]

Why does everyone have to do nothing but talk about this stupid terrorist attack.  It was like ten years ago, this is a HAPPY day for some of us.

[Grouver (BtcBalance)]

http://www.septemberclues.info

I know for a fact the goverment isn't telling the truth about what caused 9/11.
But I cannot agree with the stuff that is displayed as the truth in this video.

[bitrebel]

http://www.septemberclues.info

I know for a fact the goverment isn't telling the truth behind 911.
But I cannot agree with the stuff that is displayed as the truth in this video.

Can you explain what it is that you do not agree with?
Which positions, or facts displayed? What is it exactly you do not agree with?

[the joint]

http://www.septemberclues.info

Inconclusive.  Demonstrates nothing.  Most of everything in there is based upon faulty assumptions or flawed analysis.

[Inedible]

Why does everyone have to do nothing but talk about this stupid terrorist attack.  It was like ten years ago, this is a HAPPY day for some of us.

lol - I had to read that twice to make sure I hadn't read it wrong.

[bitrebel]

http://www.septemberclues.info

Inconclusive.  Demonstrates nothing.  Most of everything in there is based upon faulty assumptions or flawed analysis.

You cannot say one single thing that retorts anything in the video. As a typical operative, you will avoid all issues demonstrated in the video. You will never ever bring to the table, the contrasting opinion. You will leave it out completely, by saying things like just said. You are clearly delusional or intentionally misleading. You said absolutely nothing in your post to rebut anything stated in the video. You showed no evidence you even watched it at all.

So far, you fail.

[the joint]

http://www.septemberclues.info

Inconclusive.  Demonstrates nothing.  Most of everything in there is based upon faulty assumptions or flawed analysis.

You cannot say one single thing that retorts anything in the video. As a typical operative, you will avoid all issues demonstrated in the video. You will never ever bring to the table, the contrasting opinion. You will leave it out completely, by saying things like just said. You are clearly delusional or intentionally misleading. You said absolutely nothing in your post to rebut anything stated in the video. You showed no evidence you even watched it at all.

So far, you fail.

Ok, here's an easy one.
The "multiple axis" argument is bullshit as clearly the cameras are on different axis and at different heights.
How about the one where it's like, "what happened to the backdrop?!"  and "the plane is coming in parallel to the ground here, and it's divebombing here?"  Yeah, no shit, cause one camera is clearly positioned above the tower (you can see the top of the roof) and the other is clearly positioned beneath the top of the tower.  In one case, you will see the sky cause camera is pointed up, in the other case, you will see the ground cause camera is pointed down.  This can also create the impression that in one case the plane is 'divebombing' and in the other it is not.

Here's another one.  The nose of the plane going through and coming out the other side of the tower?  A skyscraper is like a huge column of air.  If you displace the air in that column quickly, it has to go somewhere.  So, if plane flying 550 mph flies into the tower, compressed air will burst out the opposing side.  By the way, this is why in other conspiracy videos when they argue that you can see "explosions" at the bottom of the WTC immediately preceding its collapse, the explosions are not really explosions at all.  When the tower begins to collapse, all that compressed air gets pushed down and so all the windows get blown out at the bottom before it has even fallen.  It's extremely plausible that the 'nose' you see coming out of the building is debris of a similar shape.

The audio analysis is equally bullshit.  Do you have any idea how different the same sound can seem when it's recorded with different mics in different locations with different wind/environmental noises?  Overwhelmingly loud sounds can also spike the limiter on your mic such that it clips and you won't hear anything at all.  It's quite possible you could be recording with a particular type of mic and not hear any explosion.   Also, if you have a drum kit, that 'reverse cymbal loop' sounds nothing like a cymbal at all.  By the way,  I own a drum kit, a recording program with a professional drum sampler, and various mics.

Just a few.

[ElectricMucus]

It's freaking hilarious to hear the same arguments over and over from different people on different boards all the time.

If you ask me the WTC wasn't even blown up on the same day as the TV broadcast. But I have no way to prove it and no incentive to even attempt it which is also my point in this discussion.

You people are like arguing soccer fanatics who aren't even fit enough to run for 20minutes.

[the joint]

It's freaking hilarious to hear the same arguments over and over from different people on different boards all the time.

If you ask me the WTC wasn't even blown up on the same day as the TV broadcast. But I have no way to prove it and no incentive to even attempt it which is also my point in this discussion.

You people are like arguing soccer fanatics who aren't even fit enough to run for 20minutes.

That's why arguing plausibility/implausibility is much easier than arguing definitively one way or the other.

[bitdragon]

plane? what plane?

edit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gN9twj_i59I&feature=player_embedded

[ElectricMucus]

It's freaking hilarious to hear the same arguments over and over from different people on different boards all the time.

If you ask me the WTC wasn't even blown up on the same day as the TV broadcast. But I have no way to prove it and no incentive to even attempt it which is also my point in this discussion.

You people are like arguing soccer fanatics who aren't even fit enough to run for 20minutes.

That's why arguing plausibility/implausibility is much easier than arguing definitively one way or the other.

The thing is I heard every theory you people are discussing now and those you don't 10 years ago on #wtc during the broadcast.

[the joint]

It's freaking hilarious to hear the same arguments over and over from different people on different boards all the time.

If you ask me the WTC wasn't even blown up on the same day as the TV broadcast. But I have no way to prove it and no incentive to even attempt it which is also my point in this discussion.

You people are like arguing soccer fanatics who aren't even fit enough to run for 20minutes.

That's why arguing plausibility/implausibility is much easier than arguing definitively one way or the other.

The thing is I heard every theory you people are discussing now and those you don't 10 years ago on #wtc during the broadcast.

Yep.  Sad isn't it?

[bitrebel]

We were shown Previously produced CGI video on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001

There were no hijackers, and the eye witnesses to planes were paid actors and SIMS that never existed.

That's the unbelievable truth.

[the joint]

We were shown Previously produced CGI video on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001

There were no hijackers, and the eye witnesses to planes were paid actors and SIMS that never existed.

That's the unbelievable truth.

Yep, sure it is.  Cause the video said so, right?

[bitrebel]

We were shown Previously produced CGI video on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001

There were no hijackers, and the eye witnesses to planes were paid actors and SIMS that never existed.

That's the unbelievable truth.

Yep, sure it is.  Cause the video said so, right?

You are one of the most ignorant people in the whole world. Go back to sleep. You have never been awoken and likely never will be.

[the joint]

We were shown Previously produced CGI video on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001

There were no hijackers, and the eye witnesses to planes were paid actors and SIMS that never existed.

That's the unbelievable truth.

Yep, sure it is.  Cause the video said so, right?

You are one of the most ignorant people in the whole world. Go back to sleep. You have never been awoken and likely never will be.

Haha alright bro.  

I told you why that video proves nothing.  If you care to rebut, feel free.

[bitrebel]

I've shown the video http://www.septemberclues.info to at least a dozen people, in person. Friends of mine and people I know. Every single one of them agreed they were fooled completely by the lies and the media and the government. They ALL concluded the film was very intriguing and accurate as far as they could tell.

Most people who have watched it will agree. But there is always some jackass agent or operative on board to try to discredit the movie.

Watch it for yourself and see.

[the joint]

I've shown the video http://www.septemberclues.info to at least a dozen people, in person. Friends of mine and people I know. Every single one of them agreed they were fooled completely by the lies and the media and the government. They ALL concluded the film was very intriguing and accurate as far as they could tell.

Most people who have watched it will agree. But there is always some jackass agent or operative on board to try to discredit the movie.

Watch it for yourself and see.

Did watch it.  Faulty analysis, inconclusive, and I told you why.

[trentzb]

We were shown Previously produced CGI video on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001

There were no hijackers, and the eye witnesses to planes were paid actors and SIMS that never existed.

That's the unbelievable truth.

Yep, sure it is.  Cause the video said so, right?

You are one of the most ignorant people in the whole world. Go back to sleep. You have never been awoken and likely never will be.

Personal attacks are not necessary are they? What could you possibly gain by a personal attack. If he doesn't agree with your point of view how would that negatively affect you?