Welcome to the Unhypnotize Truth Community!
A great place to discuss conspiracies, UFOs, NWO, truth, reality and enlightenment.

• » Conspiracies Discussions
• » UFOs and Extraterrestrial
• » Spiritual and Paranormal
• » World and Alternative News

Its time to wake up to the global conspiracy...and move beyond...
Our community is here to spread truth, discuss the Global Conspiracy and the world wide Truth Movement!

YES! I want to register for free right now!
Page 3 of 5 First 12345 Last
Results 21 to 30 of 41

Thread: September Clues - There Were No Planes

  1. #21

    Re: September Clues - There Were No Planes

    ABC News Special Report: "Planes crash into World Trade Center"

    He never saw a plane like that before, because it wasn't a plane at all. He said it twice, corroborating witnesses like Burnback and Oliver who described a drone. It was identical to what hit the north tower.

    Mr Arraki

    "Yeah. I--I saw--yeah, I saw the second plane, it go boom. I--I heard, you know. I just wake up my head like that I saw the side, too"

    Arraki claims that the plane that hit WTC2 was identical to the plane that hit WTC1. Arraki's description of the first plane is reproduced below:

    "I saw it come up from the left, and I saw the plane coming through to the building, go inside, a small plane, no, no, it was plane, you know, like they teach the people to pilot plane, small plane, you know, it was that kind of plane, yes, going into the building, and I never saw that plane before. It's like something, I don't know, it's like they work with the motors, I never saw a plane like that before!"

  2. #22

    Re: September Clues - There Were No Planes

    I took the work from September Clues and transformed it into something more conclusive. Dick Oliver called the orb a remote controlled drone. He was on the ground and saw it floating just like it did in 4 live broadcasts. Dick was totally oblivious that his honest account completely destroyed the myth of a real plane impacting T2.

  3. #23

    Re: September Clues - There Were No Planes

    Mark, cryptically laughs at the end of his description, further proving that he was describing the slow moving drone, and falling short of confirming that it really wasn't a plane. It's no different than Jean Hill saying she saw the secret service shooting back, but falling short of fingering the driver. Of course it didn't belong in the area because it was a drone and not the boeing 767 it was supposed to be.

    Eyewitness on 9/11 Mark Burnback was able to get a good view of the plane that hit the World Trade Center, because he said that the plane was flying very low. He explained to FOX News that the plane had no windows, a blue logo, and did not look like a commercial plane.

    Fox NewsCaster: "Mark Burnback, a Fox employee, is on the phone with us. Mark witnessed this... Mark were you close enough to see any markings on the airplane?"

    Mark Burnback: "Hi gentlemen. Yeah there was definitely a blue, circular logo on the front of the plane towards the front. It definitely did not look like a commercial plane. I did not see any windows on the side. It was definitely very low...

    "Mark, if what you say is true, those could be cargo planes or something like that. You said you did not see any windows on the side?"

    Mark Burnback: "I did not see any windows on the side. I saw the plane was flying low. I was probably a block away from the sub-way in Brooklyn and that plane came down very low, and again it was not a normal flight that I have ever seen at an airport. It was a plane with a blue logo on the front and it just looked like it did not belong in this area."

  4. #24

    Re: September Clues - There Were No Planes

    Quote Originally Posted by rsol' pid='241190' dateline='1333985462
    thanks for that but you are wasting your time. in about a week these goons will post yet more of the same "evidence" they posted 6 pages ago as they seem to think quantity beats quality every time.

    Ive said it before. no planers are BY DESIGN undermining anything associated with 911 truth.

    They have had their bullshit shown to them but they deny ANY data to the contrary.

    In fact its almost starting to feel like spam. attention seekers every last one. they are not interested in the truth but prefer outlandish theories because they are simply more fun.
    I've said it before, anyone who ignores that an orb bumped into the south tower is BY DESIGN undermining anything associated with 911 truth. The orb was not a plane, could never be a plane, and will never be a plane in any world but fiction. The 911 research community has simply ignored the 'pink elephant in the room', just like they did with jfk, by acting like the driver didn't shoot the President.

    It is the common man that keeps these obvious truths from the masses by those few people who actually research these events. They ignore the most conclusive proof in favor of less controversial theories that leave room for debate. Saying the orb is a plane is a simple falsehood, nothing more or less. If all 911 researchers agreed on that simple fact, there'd be a real truth movement that would spider off in so many directions it would make peoples head spin.

    They've had their bullshit shown to them but they continue to ignore 4 broadcasts which show an object smaller than a chopper.

    Flight 175 never showed up, but an orb coming from the west did, an impossible direction based on reality and the 911 commission. There's nothing complicated about it. The media was forced to call a dot 'the plane' and that's the only truth movement that'll ever catch on with every-day-people. A plane cannot go between two towers before crashing into the back of one of them. The media pretending an unknown flying object was a plane is the most important smoking gun in 911 truth.

    Last edited by roger rules; April 15th, 2012 at 09:04 AM.

  5. #25

    Re: September Clues - There Were No Planes

    To be honest, my first bit of thought that "that ain't right" was seeing the nose of the plane stick out past the building when it hit the tower. There was chopper footage that shows it quite clearly and I knew that was weird. I saw it on a film maybe about a year ago, i'm not sure, how it was a clipart image superimposed on top of what i now know is an orb, as you're referencing it. And then there's the different impact angles of the second plane. Nothing adds up with the cover story.

    Over time, what I didn't see as odd, have ALL come into clear view. Like, the passports and Qurans of the supposed hijackers were the ONLY remnants of the 'planes' and the people who were supposed to be on them. Doesn't make sense, how could paper survive, intact, and everything else disintegrate. Oh, and then there was the engine found, which is too small to be a jet the size of the ones that supposedly hit the towers.

    Even though at the time that this happened, I knew it wasn't the 'planes' that made the towers fall. That one I knew from the beginning. These were controlled demolition takedowns.

    This whole thing is a big damn joke to the Illuminati. It was planned from a long time ago. And we're all just pawns in their game.

    And then there's Building 7. I've heard the stories there about a guy who got out. He was walking on bodies that were covering the entire floor on his way out. These people were murdered. And then it was another controlled demolition. I didn't see that one until after. And of course, that didn't make sense.

    I love all this information you've brought in here. More stuff yet that I hadn't yet heard about. Some that I had. I didn't know about the drones or orbs. I knew that the planes didn't exist. I did see the report of the guy on the ground that said it was more like a missile that flew over, but then he changes his story on air to "plane".

    This whole big thing is a cover-up for mass murder. First, kill all those people in the buildings and in the surrounding area, and then send our people to a war which was unnecessary to murder more innocent people, and have our people killed as well.

    There is just soo much information out there that SHOULD be seen and taken into account, but no one seems to want to look at it and/or take it seriously. And those that do, are considered to be crazy or worse, or they don't admit that they know it to be true (which is worse than those of us looked at as crazy, because they are keeping it a problem instead of being part of a solution).
    The truth IS out there! We just tend to look in all the wrong places.

  6. #26

    Re: September Clues - There Were No Planes

    Quote Originally Posted by Lexion View Post
    It's a fucking chopper.
    Close is good enough for horse shoes and hand grenades, but unfortunately for the trolls, not on 911. The orb was smaller than a chopper and was simply an unknown flying object that was filmed by 4 news stations.

  7. #27
    Senior UHF Member Active Member Rank Truth Vibrations's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Yes I'm American
    Rep Power

    Re: September Clues - There Were No Planes

    Helicopters don't come down on such an angle, great find! it's definitely a UFO but I'm willing to bet is one of ours and was involved in taking down the towers. IMO
    Can you see past your belief systems?

  8. #28

    Re: September Clues - There Were No Planes

    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.

  9. #29

    Re: September Clues - There Were No Planes

    That is one of those 'priceless' moments that would NEVER be caught unless someone goes through frame by frame, examining in detail. Not enough people do though.

    That's awesome, man! Keep the evidence coming!
    The truth IS out there! We just tend to look in all the wrong places.

  10. #30

    Re: September Clues - There Were No Planes

    Quote Originally Posted by SUNGAZER View Post
    That is one of those 'priceless' moments that would NEVER be caught unless someone goes through frame by frame, examining in detail. Not enough people do though.

    That's awesome, man! Keep the evidence coming!
    Thanks. It's not that hard if someone wanted tell it like it really happened.

    Techmac's digital attempt at computer generated imagery was assinine. Note that it has no right wing and the left wing and engine dislodge right after it gets below the copyright. It convienently zooms in preventing view of the faux image between the towers. WB11 didn't get its first plane morph until 9:27 and the similarities between the two are profound. Only a cgi could have a fake left wing and no right wing.

    Last edited by roger rules; April 20th, 2012 at 10:27 AM.

Page 3 of 5 First 12345 Last

Similar Threads

  1. Bovine bellies yield clues for new biofuels
    By CASPER in forum Environment
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: January 27th, 2011, 09:31 PM
  2. September 11: Planes That Hit WTC Were Not Boeing 767s
    By Unhypnotized in forum September 11th attacks (911)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: September 10th, 2010, 02:21 AM
  3. Menstrual Periods: Clues to Ovarian Cancer
    By CASPER in forum Cancer
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: July 20th, 2009, 07:28 PM

Tags for this Thread