Rest stop. Barely two bars. Sloooow, but thought to be in touch. About half my screen time is now dealing with comments, which was my original reason for not enabling them. On the other hand, there are interesting messages floating in; interesting in one sense or another…
Take ‘Robin Adair’s, which I’ve pasted below…
September 16, 2018 at 6:57 pm (edit)
One thing I’ve noticed Allan is that few 9/11 Researchers give any significance to Stewart AFB but it was directly in the flight paths of AA 11 and UA 175. See Northwoods about switching planes for drones.
Also it is only mention once on the News that UA 93 safely landed in Cleveland Ohio and the passengers were evacuated. However this is in the Documentary In Plane Sight
which leaves the question about 77 which flew over the Whitehouse (remember Cheney’s famous countdown reported by Minneta?) then headed to the Pentagon. In other words flew over the most secure and restricted air space in the world unmolested by SAMs then plunges into the Pentagon exactly where an audit was being conducted on the DOD’s missing Trillions.
How fortuitous!
Damn straight! That the “hijacked planes” were a distraction! It was a legend that had been build up for years with the Bojinka Plot followed off by Atta’s flying circus of flight school trainees.
They had an even more spectacular show planned but luckily the NYPD and state police were’t in on the act and busted the Israelis who had planned to blow up the tunnels and bridges that led to Manhattan.
Just a few random shots from my files for visual balance.
My first assumption was that Robin has merely been so overwhelmed over the years by various claims and theories about what ‘the planes’ did or did not do, that he just ‘forgot’ that the point of my post was that there were no planes. No planes AT ALL (as Barbara H. would put it).
But during my ‘wake up misery’ a few minutes ago, it occurred to me that Robin’s comment is more likely the same general sort of NLP that Corbett subjected us to in his documentary on ‘Wargames.’
What’s Robin doing, really? While looking like he’s agreeing with me, his underlying assumption (not stated!) is that ‘bogie’ planes (hijacked or not) were really flying around that day. That I don’t believe this could not be clearer, especially given my addendum. And Robin has had plenty of time (and has been corrected by some of you) to realize his error. Truly, either Robin is mentally challenged or he is a state disinfo operative.
I don’t have the time nor the inclination to go into details here but let me just lay the matter to rest, after which I’d ask to hear no more bull shit on this subject: There are no photos of any of the ‘bogie’ planes boarding, not one image of the hijackers or anyone else at security or the ticket counter or boarding gate. Given the airport/camera/security situations at all airports (even pre-9/11), how could this be? (Please read the previous sentence again and pretend it’s in CAPS.)
FYI, the Unsubscribes continue to roll in with each post. I’m hoping they are trolls who just flat give up.
You know how, don’t you? Right: Since there were no planes at the end of the scenario (hitting the buildings), why the fuck would there be planes at the beginning? All they needed was a guy at the ‘blip injector’ screen, wherever the fuck he was, and another with a radio – maybe the same guy – that could be ‘switched’ to seem to be broadcasting from… wherever he wanted, the ‘bogie’ flights or even from other planes, or from the FAA or whomever. Someone suggested the Pilots For 9/11 Truth video. On it you will hear a tower asking a real flight to look out his window for Flight 11. The guy sees nothing. In a documentary made by the same propagandists who made the feature Flight 93, this happens again; this time Flight 11 was ‘right below you,’ says the tower. The guy looks down, rolls his plane to see better and guess what? No Flight 11.
A very quick google brings me to a couple links. This one seems well-researched and shows that Flights 11 and 77 did not exist on 9/11. The other two flights were faked in other ways, I presume. This one indicates that 175 was still an active blip after ‘hitting the tower.’ Seems the ‘blip injection’ guy was a bit slow in ‘erasing’ the flight from ‘reality.’
I don’t know specifically how the ‘Flights’ appeared on the tower radar screens at Boston, Newark, and Dulles, but I guarantee it was done at the will of the perps, via special software/equipment designed for that purpose. Maybe the blips appeared during a ‘hand off’ or something. Who’s going to argue or walk outside, look up, and say, ‘I don’t see no plane!’ Once a blip appears on a screen it is assumed (instinctively and quite rightly) to be a real plane.
the image is a ‘plasma instability — a High-Current, Z-Pinch Aurora — seen in sky as ‘the world ended’….I’m headed for other ancient sites.
So, again, let’s put this to rest. if you were planning this op, wouldn’t you design it with the least possibilities for fuck ups? As soon as real aircraft are involved, all kinds of things could go wrong.
Addendum: Yes, the ‘Wargames’ were necessary misdirection for all sorts of reasons. One obvious one being this: It’s one thing for a real flight to be unable to visually ‘see’ a non-existent plane that’s supposed to be right out his windscreen — that can be pooh-poohed — but if an F-16 jock pulls up where a plane should be and sees nothing… well, we have a real problem, don’t we? Hence all the ‘fog of war’ horse shit, and all the misdirection of Corbett’s ‘Wargames.’
And Robin, I have my eye on you for (more?) NLP. If you just had a ‘dumbass moment’, fine. But do this for me: Admit that your comment was misleading in that you seemed to agree with me, while your subtext was quite the opposite. Maybe you only skimmed my post and didn’t understand it. Is this the case? If not, what happened?
Dr. Judy Wood (psy op or no) has a point: Where did the towers go?
I’m going to try to get where I’m going then sit down and write my book reviews. It would be nice if the comments were kept to ‘reasonable,’ i.e., sans misdirection/disinformation/NLP. Please….
Allan
If you believe airplane were used during 9/11 show me just one seat or on luggage of any of the four airplane…you cant
During part of my 35 year gig as a technician at Cornell’s lab of elementary particle physics, I had a some info taped to the door to my work area. One of the items explained why it was quite literally physically impossible for the upper block of WTC1 to crush its way through the undamaged steel frame below and accelerate while doing it. One day I noticed a student reading it, so I struck up a conversation with her. She told me that she had been scheduled to fly on one of the planes that hit the towers, but the night before, she received a phone call, supposedly from the airline, telling her that her flight had been cancelled.
The evidence strongly indicates that the planes were remotely controlled. But of course, there is still, and never will be, and doubt that one large commercial jet hit each tower. The only people who questions that irrefutable fact are those who have not studied or do not understand the evidence, or disinformation agents. Obviously, that sort of nonsense turns people off to 9-11 truth and makes truthers look like deluded nut jobs. *All* credible, qualified, and respected 9-11 researchers, groups and organization are in unanimous agreement that one plane hit each tower, because the evidence proves it. There were no hijackers, though.
http://www.journalof911studies.com/plausibility-of-911-aircraft-attacks-generated-by-gps-guided-aircraft-autopilot-systems/
Hank’s back! I’m hitting the road now but while I’m driving, Hank, please explain how the airplanes that hit the towers did so at the speeds recorded, i.e., something like 100 knots over their max operating speed. (See Pilots for 9/11 Truth). Start with that, ‘Hank’. A ‘Cornell physicist’ should make short work of this easy question.
You know, in a cartoon world with cartoon physics, everything is possible.
the key..Ace Baker
This shit he’s getting so transparently stupid at this point. Great story Hank. Start it off with the bit about 35 years and how you yourself were a doubter, then come up with this magical person with a story that confirmed to you that the airplanes were real. Just excellent. I give this one an A+ in it’s manipulative effects on any readers.
Leaving aside your obvious ill intent, I genuinely want to know what evidence you have that it is an “irrefutable fact” that one plane hit each tower. Seriously. Please tell us. If you don’t believe in the hijackings, then why on earth would a real plane have had to be in play? Irrefutable fact. Your words.
Welcome back Hank.
You just found a data point supporting Allan’s theory of no-planes based on your quote:
“One day I noticed a student reading it, so I struck up a conversation with her. She told me that she had been scheduled to fly on one of the planes that hit the towers, but the night before, she received a phone call, supposedly from the airline, telling her that her flight had been cancelled.”
Based on this new info you supplied, there was no flight for your student that morning!!! Excellent.
That’s where I went, too.
A final accounting for our lies awaits all. The devil that deceived was cast into the lake of fire, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
I think it has a lovely ring to it.
Monitoring a Sept 11th, truther blog is like a never ending game of whack a mole. No discussion is allowed. What’s the answer? The privacy we cling to is an illusion. We have no privacy and efforts to maintain anonymity create the conditions where these nameless, cubicle creeps, multiply and continuously morph and clone themselves till they drown any real conversation, logic, or discourse.
Yep. Spot on. It’s funny, when one wave of them disappears then another comes back. It’s not even a question that this shit is intentional and/or coordinated.
My only question is what happened to the individuals that were on “the planes” ? Been following for years and this is my first peep. Take care of your self Allan and thank you !
Find the list, Daniel, then see how many were actual people. As i’ve said, I did this and found very few ‘people’ with any histories.
Also guys let’s keep it real. You overestimate the importance of a blog (certainly this blog)if you think the government is wasting valuable assets trying to confuse you. They already did that as you can plainly see. Mission accomplished. No shills or disinformation agents here,
just egos looking for validation.
Luckily my ego has abandoned my pathetic efforts of
saving you guys from pointless arguments.
Please criticize my point so I can feel validated.
Best
And please don’t remove me from your blog, where
Would I go to show everyone how smart I am?
Nobody claimed that the Secretary of Defense was the one misdirecting. There are firms that pay hourly wages to simply come to places like this and push an agenda. I think it is noteworthy that as soon as Allan started writing about 9/11 was when these kind of insidious misdirectional comments began.
no shills or disinfo agents here, …he’s only here to show everyone how smart he is.
Omg
Media collusion?How did we get so many sleuths with Mensa class stats.It only took 17 years to conclude that.? You guys gonna have this all wrapped up soon.
Ahh world peace, can’t wait!!😎😎🤡
Excellent psychological tactic there. Don’t argue the point, so insult the readers intelligence. We are getting the entire playbook of methods for undercutting Allan’s blog. When did you see Allan claim to have been the first to talk about media collusion? Why on earth do you think that makes us think we are special? Allan is simply calling out members of the alternative media as false messengers here. Nothing special, nothing genius, but he’s definitely CORRECT in his points.
Are you capable of saying anything that is not a blatant tactic to undercut this blog? If you disagree and are legitimate, then we’d love to hear what points you have to make. But no. You are only capable of one of many forms of manipulative attack. You are wasting your own time, cuz we ain’t buying it. If you wanted to offend anyone here, you have failed miserably. 😘
Back to the topic: the 911 deceptions; how the heck they were done/not done.
Here is someone who’s done the work of setting up a site, spreading worthy info.
Link: http://endthesystem.com/the-anatomy-of-a-great-deception/
Worth 5 seconds to have a look. Some folks need a video. Points touched on are remarkably similar to ones appearing here on Allan’s site.
> … and shows that Flights 11 and 77 did not exist on 9/11.
This half-sentence made my day. Both numbers (11 and 77) are the most favorite numerology gems of TPTB, and IMHO a clear sign of a deception.
Cass R. Sunstein… Obama Whitehouse appointee 2004 Administrator of Office of Information. Called by the Whitehouse the most cited law professor on any faculty in the United States. Elena Kagan 2008 Dean of Harvard Law School, US Solicitor General , elevated to Supreme Court, Called Sunstein the pre-eminent legal scholar of our time, the most wide-ranging, prolific, cited, influential,…
Sunstein’s essay “Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures, posted on August 2008, published in Journal of Political Philosophy June 2009. Written in Leo Strauss political philosophy preferred two level style, an esoteric core (for the wise few), and an exoteric coating of “noble illusions” required by the masses.
Sunstein’s Argument broken down into exoteric (quotes) and/or paraphrased by David Ray Griffin.
1) A conspiracy theory is best defined as “an effort to explain some event or practice by reference to the machinations of powerful people, who attempt to conceal their role (at least until their aims are accomplished. )
2)Although conspiracy theories can be both justified and true, and although the US government has sometimes spread false conspiracy theories, anti-government conspiracy theories in the United States are usually both unjustified and false.
3)According the 9/11 conspiracy theory “U.S. officials knowingly allowed 9/11 to happen or even brought it about”, and “U.S. government officials destroyed the World Trade Canter and then covered their tracks.”
4)people typically accept the 9/11 conspiracy theory “not as a result of a mental illness….or of simple irrationality, but as a result of a ‘crippled epistemology,’ in the form of a sharply limited number of (relevant)informational sources.” The main cause of belief in the 9/11 conspiracy theory, in short is”informational isolation”.
5)The 9/11 conspiracy theory is “demonstrably false”: it is also unjustified, being based on evidence that is “weak or even non existent”:and it has led to a “degenerating research program.”
6)9/11 conspiracy theorists, being extremists, are likely to become violent, “with terrifying consequences.” and have pernicious effects from the government’s point of view,…by inducing unjustifiably widespread public skepticism about the government’s assertions, or by dampening public mobilization and participation in government-led effort, and undermining public debate.”
7)”Conspiracy theories turn out to be unusually hard to undermine”, but if government can dispel (false and harmful) conspiracy theories,” such as the 9/11 theory,”it should do so.”
8)In seeking to undermine the 9/11 conspiracy theory, the government should take a twofold approach;besides dealing with the theory’s demand side, by seeking to inoculate the public against it, the government should also address its supply side, by seeking to “debias or disable its purveyors.”
9)Although one might think that the government could use credible public information to cure the 9/11 conspiracy theory’s purveyors of their false beliefs, this approach will not work, because this theory has “a self-sealing quality.” which makes its purveyors “resistant to correction,” especially by “contrary evidence offered by the government.”
10)Accordingly, because the government of an open society cannot (normally) “ban ‘conspiracy theories’ or “tax…those who disseminate such theories,” the best approach is for the government to “engage in cognitive infiltration of the groups that produce conspiracy theories.”
Reading through the document text for the hidden esoteric message to the few, the wise, we can see that the only way to defeat 9/11 truth movement, would be to destroy it by using means that would entail the abrogation of the Bill of Rights and the 1st Amendment.
It is perfectly reasonable to assume those with the persistent self contradictions, faulty premises,leading to false conclusions do not have cognitive dissonance, are not mentally challenged, but are just earning a living fulfilling the need for cognitive infiltration, by undermining and infiltrating conspiracy theorists discussions. Cass says you can’t use facts because you have none, so the dirty tricks are the name of the game.
Marsh Collins,
Thank you for this information… it fits the M.O. In other words, in order to gain power over a situation (Conspiracy Theorists), infiltration is the first line of action. Once in, they can move themselves into a position to sway the “faulty reasoning” into submission or simply drown ’em out by taking it over completely. This is how the masses are swayed into believing impossibilities… ie, planes slicing through steel towers. Have I got it right?
Kind regards,
~Kimberlie
I believe large numbers of people are/and have been for a long time dedicated to protecting the Sept 11th official sacred myth and many other sacred myths. The obstinate , unreasonableness, threats, distraction, misinformation, etc etc which at times can tear down your faith in your fellow human beings, is basically bought and paid for. I do not think it is that hard to spot these people, and I am getting less shy about calling them what they are. Yes is frightens people from seeking the truth, and helps enforce their delusions and their belief in the impossible unbelievable lies we are told. Kind regards to yourself as well.
I have a few minutes before I have to be on the road. Although the people here mostly are more than aware of govt shills spreading disinfo at sites like this one, Sunstein’s document should end any ‘genuine doubt.’ There is no actual genuine doubt here, however. Anyone even half awake can see who are the shills here. I have enough personal experience to know how serious the effort at misdirection/disinfo is, the best being meeting a person who has 300 Facebook identities.
Even aside from the time wastage factor (of letting shills fire away), my personal reason for wanting them off this site is that they give me the creeps. Knowing they exist all over the Net and especially within the ‘alt media’ is bad enough, but seeing their slimage on my site….. it forces me to ask myself how they can look in the mirror and so forth.
I may have more to say on this later. Warming up the rig to hit the road…
There were planes .. then NO planes .. my head’s in a spin
I’m thinkin .. this is eXactly how it is they could win.
Changed my mind. I hadn’t even noticed this guy ‘Bacon,’ who is out of here when he posts his next comment. Adair is going to be gone too. I’m a bit busy right now but in general I don’t have the time to deal with these assholes. I’ll leave Adair’s comment there for now but no, I’m not going to put up with this.
Allan-
I will send you a bank check in the amount of $500 if you can convince me that 9/11 was not the result of terrorists flying planes into buildings. And I promise to keep an open mind. The theories bouncing around here seem like a fun game to play, but we got some real f-ing problems that deserve our attention. Jim
What an absolutely hysterical comment! Made my wake up! ‘And i promise to keep an open mind’!!! Whaddya think, folks?
Watch out Allan – I’m sure ‘Jim’s’ check will bounce! Oh wait, we’d all be paying you that 500 bucks of fiat currency anyway since the bank account most likely is funded by our tax dollars ‘hard-at-work’ 🙂
I’m pretty sure this is my favorite comment of all time.
Don’t ban Robin, this shit gets repetitive and boring without the drama. I try to keep up, to understand what you people are talking about. Sometimes listening to what you guys have a problem with helps me to understand where your coming from. I dont have time for all the lectures and links you guys post. Even if I had the time I really dont want to click them. If what you guys claim is true I would just be putting myself on the hit list for the powers PTB. Keep it up I listen.
Yeah we love the drama of the lying little assholes. It livens up the boredom of the hum drum struggle to grasp reality.
Nope, ….no shills or disinfo agents here. No one collecting a paycheque here. Just bored spectators who don’t have the time to keep up with the links.
Jesus people. You are seriously making me long for the days of Lou’s inane babble. You are missing Allan’s larger point – media collusion. Sadly, 9/11 is almost two decades in the rear view. Wake up. Allan is calling out SpaceX shenanigans and putting us on alert that something is afoot right now. Pay attention. I am light years behind him in research but am tagging along because he has earned my trust. He is out there on tge bleeding edge of this. Enough with the distractions already. Let’s see where this crazy fucker can take us.
Miles MacQueen~
Without a doubt in my mind… Media collusion to the hilt! Yes, we need to Pay Attention!The PTB (government and alphabet news) are most likely preparing for another Psyop for the masses. Those who have eyes to see and ears to hear need to stay awake: it is a privilege to be alert to what has happened (Lies) and what is happening (Lies) right before our eyes and ears…
SpaceX is big PsyOp. Allan alerted us to it months ago…
Here’s News just in about an hour ago today, September 17, 2018:
” SpaceX, Elon Musk’s space transportation company, on Monday named its first private passenger as Japanese businessman Yusaku Maezawa, the founder and chief executive of online fashion retailer Zozo.”
Ha! Space transportation to the moon and beyond!, right………………. just like the planes hitting the towers. Didn’t happen…….. won’t happen.
Again, Media collusion to the hilt!
Kind regards,
~Kimberlie
Ditto, Miles. Spot on.
“9/11 is almost two decades in the rear view. Wake up. Allan is calling out SpaceX shenanigans and putting us on alert that something is afoot right now.”
Eager to live today, get ready for what’s next.
By the way, a point of logic: It is not up to anyone (like me) to prove what did NOT happen (planes slicing through steel towers). If someone wants to claim that something happened (planes hit the towers), it’s up to him to produce the evidence. This is how logic works, so anyone who repeats that I have not proved what did not happen is either a moron or out for mischief here.
#
‘Eyewitnesses’ who either don’t exist or who are employed by the state/media count for little; ditto pieces of junk with no serial numbers on them. If planes crashed, give me the address of the NTSB warehouse where they have re-assembled the wreckage.
(I’m in a bad mood, with my finger hovering over the ‘Spam’ button, so careful careful if you are going to respond to this.)
I’ve been looking for a way to comment on what’s going on here. As sure as stars I don’t want to mess with anyone, and especially with one in a bad mood and a hand on the terminator button. A certain fatigue has set in and I keep thinking of Captain Gulliver’s predicament when all the little Lilliputians had him tied to stakes in the ground. We are the Lilliputians and we are the ones who did the tying and we are not sorry because we had no intention of doing so. I’m only sorry to hear how distraught you’ve become over the moderation of these comments. Well, my retarded metaphor will not be stretched to include the serious threat of cognitive infiltration as per Sunstein. However, if I were you, I’d shut the comments down for any length of time that I needed to remain patient and rested in the face of seething truth seekers who just may prove me wrong in particulars like no planes v. no plane crashes. I see you are well aware of the work done by Citizens Investigation Team who highly recommend your article on The Deep State and have shown where something like thirteen witnesses corroborate a north of Citgo flight path of a large passenger jet and what appeared, from their point of view, like it’s crash into the Pentagon. CIT is certain that a flyover was synced to an explosion by other means. So when I hear an emphatic declaration that no planes were involved in 9/11 I gotta question that. I’m hearing fatigue and exasperation which I know can interfere with judgment. But like you say, I could be wrong.
I found the CIT investigation credible. I have been fooled so many times, and I do not know for certain, or know these people for certain, to confirm they are just normal people. By no planes , no plane crashes, means no 11, 175, 77, 93. If they are not a professional organized psyop, it is probably honest testimony of average people giving good credibility through the consistency between them. Their point of view was limited by the sloping terrain, which prevented a view of the pentagon. But the timing they described with the plane reaching the pentagon at the same time as the explosion, is suggestive, and of course the obvious, if there was a plane crash, there would be a crashed plane.
Yep, good point (about CIT). Why are there not more comments like this by folks who disagree with me?
FYI If you sent out an email for this blog.. I did not get it…..? I did not unsubscribe and someone in comments was talking about unsubscribers.
Hi Allan,
Like you have so succinctly pointed out, all of the so called witnesses were government employees coincidentally just in New York at the right time. Further to that, much of the “Amature” footage seems to have been cropped directly from the same sources. What we do not actually have is numerous different/independent witnesses or corroborating evidence. That we were watching a pre prepared montage made-for-tv show should be obvious by now. It is key to note that the BBC referred to building 7 by both number and name 24 minutes before its collapse ie. “The Salomon Brothers building”, not just ” WTC 7″. Another coincidence is the BBC did not keep original footage from that day “for reasons of cock-up, not conspiracy” (from the Editors, BBC ). Laughable. False or “spoofed” radar images of the aircraft would be well within the US military capability; Think Northrop Grumman EA-6B or General Dynamics EF-111 Raven. There is another aircraft that I would like to mention (Allegedly over Washington), I am suspicious about it as it was originally known from a still photo( (Linda Brookhart, V.P. of Taxpayer federation of Illinois,) and later a short piece of film( unknown provenance). This is the E-4B which is a mobile command and control centre with state of the art Electronic Warfare suites and advanced communication/co-ordination abilities. The Airforce says it knew nothing about this plane, a highly modified 747-200, an ideal platform to help manage such an undertaking as this. I have not seen this plane mentioned and if not an oversight, why is it there? I cannot help thinking of the rock with the “C” on it and corresponding “C” on the terrain from Apollo. Sorry to go on a bit, keep up the good work and safe travels.
The E-4B(s) are an interesting subject, yes, but I don’t count them as ‘aircraft'(s) in the same sense as the false flights. Btw, did anyone look at the links I provided in this post? Two flights never existed and 175 flew on as a radar blip (on an ATC scope) an hour after it ‘crashed.’ These, plus the two pilots that looked out their windscreens at where a bogie should have been and saw nothing. Explanations from those who believe real planes were used are required.
Also, I’ve asked for an explanation of the total lack of photographic evidence that anyone (like hijackers) boarded any planes. Without an explanation for this, a reasonable observer would conclude that no planes were in fact boarded.
These issues come to mind. Tip of the ‘berg kinda stuff.
Yeah right. Anyone who doesn’t agree with your hypothesis must be a “disinfo agent”. You still haven’t proven that there were no planes involved since lack of evidence such as Airport videos or the fact had false boogies painted on the screen at NEADs does not prove your point.
Also it is an assumption that since this happened at NEADs as part of a drill then it must have happened with civilian ATCs as well.
Can you prove this to be the case? Otherwise it is just theory.
It seems that if someone doesn’t accept what you say without question then they must be an agent of some kind. That is not informed debate! That is a CULT.
The fact is that we do agree on various points such as the fact that aluminum planes could not have penetrated the WTCs nor caused their eventual collapse.
Yet you seem to be going in the same direction as the September Clues fan club in a total “no planes”, no nothing hit the World Trade Centers and they were all inserted digitally later on by the media.
But the fact is that almost all witnesses saw something hit the towers.In fact the first reports were a small plane or a missile. They even publish those diverse reports over at Clues which actually destroys their case about it all being exclusively digital magic.
Also you’re right. I never believed the Official Story right from the beginning and have done a lot of research in the area personally. In fact I was probably one of the first researchers to call it the “Government’s Conspiracy Theory” way back when I was posting on the Usenet NG Alt. Conspiracy and proposed that NIST actually be awarded a Hugo award when that steaming pile of horse shit first came out.
I never believed that planes hit the towers or the Pentagon despite many people in the so called “Truth Movement” trying to convince me otherwise. Nor did I buy the happy horse shit that nanotermites or any conventional explosive brought down the Towers.
They would have taken months if not years to surreptitiously plant the explosives at each level. All without anybody noticing!
True there were conventional explosives planted in the WTC for a certain effect but the evidence indicates that nukes were involved as well.
As far as planes, planes, planes and mythical terrorist with box cutters they were merely a distraction causing people to look away from the actual event and the culprits involved.
Whether this was done exclusively by painting blips on a screen or was actually carried out by swapping actual planes out according to Northwoods for drones or missiles is irrelevant.
The main point should be that no planes could have penetrated the WTC Towers or the Pentagon and that Corbett and his happy band of actual disinfo agents is trying to perpetuate this myth.
In other words we know how it couldn’t have been done i.e. with planes or nanotermites. What is purely speculation is how it was done since they conveniently destroyed the evidence afterward with the exception of leaving two smoking craters that burned for months afterward and a death toll of people still dying from the aftereffects.
I am extremely puzzled where you ever saw Allan claim that he had definitively proven something. You call his theory a theory like that is some insult, but I’m pretty sure that’s all Allan ever intended it to be. There’s no cult here. In fact, it is you who really seems to have flown off the walls when people have called your claims into question.
I just go on facts and evidence. From Allan, I have seen solid facts and evidence with no claims of certainty. From you, I have seen very little evidence and LOTS of claims with certainty.
Truly, either Robin is mentally challenged or he is a state disinfo operative. Prove Allans statement… this is black and white… this is classic script writing…
‘Burnt Bacon,’ huh? How did you get a new identity that fast? Must’ve been ready to go….
Oink oink oink!
It is my theory that no airliners were used that day. I could not have been clearer and have repeated it since. I could be wrong. If you are going to disagree with me, fine, back it up, but DO NOT write a comment that is misleading by giving the impression you agree with me but meanwhile referring to real planes I’ve just said do not exist.
One way govt shills work is by doing exactly what you are doing: creating an argument and not letting go, meanwhile denying behavior that should be obvious to all, and also meanwhile going off on irrelevant tangents (like most of your comment).
One more comment like the above and you are out of here. Just one.
(Folks, I appreciate your coming to my defense but that’s just what shills want, to waste your time and muddy the water. You have to ignore them. I suspect this guy will be gone soon, but it’s up to him.)
Okidoki, not your defence, but my original mind. Every time I play with possibilities,
I ask, “What would I do if I were a military pro tasked with pulling off this stunt, knowing failure is not tolerated, that there are many guns at the heads of my family members?”
(Apply this to anything: if you were the bad guy, what would you do?) I would do it so
it would be impossible to fail, with multiple backup ops, so everything would be totally in my control. No planes means total control. So that’s what I would do. Real simple.
Let the world watch the videos. Let the tenor anchor voices broadcast the news.
Make the videos perfect, check them a hundred times. Get ready to roll. Disappear witnesses, have layer after layer of cover, no investigation, of course, etc., etc. But
the basic step is there aren’t any massive tubes of aluminum hurtling through the air out of my total control.
Addendum.
Above, “What would I do if I were a military pro tasked with pulling off this stunt, knowing failure is not tolerated, that there are many guns at the heads of my family members?”
Think like The Iceman.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpTDo4fUW4s
Here’s another thought the Average Joe can grasp. Murphy’s Law.
If something can go wrong, it will go wrong. Each plane is a zipping, zooming,
twisting, turning, stalling Murphy. Ever been in a Cessna high in the air, piloting? The things bob and weave like a rubber duck on a windy sea.
Don’t want no Murphys there. So the plans say ‘no planes’.
Yes. I’ve done this before: Put myself in the room when this was planned. The first decision would be that too much can go wrong with real planes. This is 101 stuff, isn’t it?
Re:
“This is 101 stuff, isn’t it?”
Totally agree, note the air of impatience, but important. Dealing with folks whose ‘views’ are borrowed, copied from others, never studied, I find – to break the mesmerism shackling their minds – gotta bring in common sense, make them touch stuff, demonstrate with bricks in a backyard, etc. Actually easier with young children, hard with arrogant educated professionals whose ‘knowledge’ is divorced from experience (guys like Lou).
Yourself, in your adventurous past, no doubt could see more ‘reality’ by
cold raw experiencing stuff.
Your comment about how their actions exactly mirror how a government shill would act is the key. It would have been one thing if they just would have said, “hey I disagree with you and here’s why…”, but every single comment of theirs was strangely insidious and almost subliminal in undercutting you. The true point was masked by BS, every single time.
I don’t mean to feed the trolls, sorry Allan, but I would rather expose their crap for what it is than leave their poisonous words unchecked. It’s damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
It’s okay. They sucked me in too.
Yeah. I agree. Alan you are acting very paranoid in that anyone who has a slightly differing point of view MUST be a disinformation agent. Easy now. Tranquilo Jefe.
There’s a bit of difference between,
A: There were no planes.
B: No, there were so planes!
A: I mock you, disagreeable one!
and
A: There were no planes.
B: Yeah! And look at how they changed the planes around!
A: . . . . wtf?
Does that help, Robin?
p.s. Allan, one of those “unsubscribes” might have been me, changing which address I’m subscribing from.
Really do not understand where you ever got authoritarian from here. If Allan writes a post in furtherance of his theory about no planes, and someone responds saying essentially, “Very good. An interesting thing is that the flight paths of those planes both intersected at blah blah blah and one flew over the White House”, then it is quite fair to call BS on that. That is not authoritarian to question it. I am sure if Robin would have laid out a full rebuttal, Allan would have been all ears. Instead, he got what seemed to be a subtle undercutting of his main point by this IMPLIED reality of planes existing in a quasi-positive post. It was someone undercutting him while looking like they were in support. That is textbook misdirection (though Allan leaves open the possibility they just missed the point).
He is well within his rights to call BS on someone undercutting his whole point in an implied and misdirecting way. You are way off-base about it/him being authoritarian.
I did lay out a full rebuttal by referring Allan to Pilots for 9/11 Truth video intercepted and pointing that various NORAD assets were moved to other locations away from NEADs.
Not to mention an actual Government document Operation Northwoods that was approved by the JCS which could have been incorporated as part of the 9/11 Operation.
Why didn’t Allan address those points?
It seems you have thrown the whole subject of authoritarianism on it’s head here. Who’s the one being authoritarian here?
Where have I impugned Allan with personal attacks by suggesting he’s some kind of Government shill or “confused” in some way? That is nothing but ad hominem!
The key difference is that you said what you said in an implied, insidious manner. Your whole bottom paragraph is a straw man. I have seen quite enough from you to have little doubt that you are not on the level.
Regarding your evidence, the existence of a previous plan to swap planes is not proof that planes were swapped. It’s POSSIBLE, but it’s not certain like you have repeatedly stated. Logically, I see a much stronger case for no planes than swapped planes. And the fact that I don’t just blindly endorse no planes should tell you exactly how authoritarian Allan is.
“Straw man”. Give me a friggin break:
Quote
What’s Robin doing, really? While looking like he’s agreeing with me, his underlying assumption (not stated!) is that ‘bogie’ planes (hijacked or not) were really flying around that day. That I don’t believe this could not be clearer, especially given my addendum. And Robin has had plenty of time (and has been corrected by some of you) to realize his error. Truly, either Robin is mentally challenged or he is a state disinfo operative.
It’s like telling somebody that found their car wired for explosives that really nobody’s after them and that they must be “paranoid”.
My last paragraph was a paraphrase of what he said above in quotes. So who is being disingenuous? Not I.
Also the fact is that neither theory can be proven conclusively. So there you are.
At least I have documentation backing me up not a bunch of hot air.
As I wrote. There is no mention in any reports anywhere that civilian ATC was affected by simulated blips. Find me one report that says otherwise?
On the other hand like the WTC Stewart AFB was privatized just before 9/11. Not only that but the maps show that both 11 and 175 intersected at that exact point. What a coincidence?
Also if it was just all blips on a screen then why control the Airports where the flights originated from?
You go ahead and accept Allan’s theory. Frankly I don’t give a damn.
Theories are a dime a dozen. Some better than others. The better ones don’t extrapolate by saying for example that if there were false bogies painted on the screens at NEADs than it must have happened to FAA’s ATC’s radars as well.
Where’s the fucking proof?
“You know how, don’t you? Right: Since there were no planes at the end of the scenario (hitting the buildings), why the fuck would there be planes at the beginning?”
This was EXACTLY what I was trying to say in responding to Robin. Thank you for putting it into words. That commenter literally said they believed that no plane hit the towers, but at the same time was trying to imply that the hijackings/flights were real! Why in God’s name would the original flight have to have been real if we are to understand that no flight hit the tower???
That was my point. If you believe the whole video-hitting-tower is fake, then why on earth would they have bothered with a real hijacking of a real flight? Nonsense. Your quote is perfect.