911 Facts Consolidated

[000063]

Originally Posted by Robrob

Considering there are more videos of the second crash than of the first crash (for obvious reasons), your point would be...?

Psst: he doesn't have one! He's just trying to keep the ball rolling!

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

It means where the hell are all the videos taken by cell phones? No videos no planes.

Moving the goalposts. You asked where the videos were, not the cell phone videos.

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

FTFM

It means where the hell are all the videos taken by video cameras? No videos no planes.

And now you're backpedalling.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

[Dog Town]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

It means where the hell are all the videos taken by cell phones? ...

In the secret file, with all of these pictures.

[twinstead]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

FTFM

It means where the hell are all the videos taken by video cameras? No videos no planes.

Please don't tell me you have no idea that there exist countless videos of the second plane, and that there is NO reason for there to be many of the first plane at all.

Nobody is that clueless

[swright777]

Originally Posted by twinstead

Please don't tell me you have no idea that there exist countless videos of the second plane, and that there is NO reason for there to be many of the first plane at all.

Nobody is that clueless

It appears that 'somebody' is.

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by Jim_MDP

The ATCC page is referring to a video game. Though I liked this part...



... as I actually did this once IRL returning to SQL with no Rx. Ahh, good times.

For 911 truth video games, simulations, and fantasy are reality. That was the worse part. Clayton has no clue his web site of "facts" is based on nonsense and failure of the author, in many areas. This case, reading comprehension.

[Robrob]

Originally Posted by beachnut

... it gets worse.


How do they know the private pilots off course without a flight plan are off course??? The web site is perfect for Clayton.

Considering private pilots can (and do) not file flight plans, not follow flight plans or even manually switch off their transponders in order to conduct illegal activities - and never get shot down by two F-18's, you have to wonder what fantasy world these people live in?

[jaydeehess]

First you ask this:

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

ahahahhaha

Where are all the videos of the second tower plane? The whole world was tuned into the towers. Where did the black boxes go?

,,,and since its really unclear what the H you are referring to you get asked by several people:

Originally Posted by twinstead

What does "where are all the videos of the second tower plane?" even mean?

Your only reply is:

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

It means where the hell are all the videos taken by cell phones? No videos no planes.

To which you are informed of the complete lack of video capable phones in 2001, and you back pedal, revise it to:

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

FTFM

It means where the hell are all the videos taken by video cameras? No videos no planes.

So, a few points Clayton.

First of all you have not specified what you meant by "videos of the second tower plane". This is really important since if you refer to tower 2(south) or the second aircraft impact, there are actually quite a few videos taken by video cameras of that event.

So first you may want to answer the question as to what the H you are talking about.

If by some really odd machinations with the English language you are referring to the first aircraft impact to tower 1(north) then you'd be correct, only one such video of that event.

Given however that there were NO video capable cell phones in 2001 we already know that there would be very few people on the street with the capability to capture that event. Yes there were quite a few small video cameras available then but one would first have to hear the sound of the approaching aircraft, immediately decide to video it, take the camera out, turn it on, locate the source of that sound and point and shoot.
So quite obviously only persons who already had their cameras out and turned on will stand much of a chance to capture this event. Its not even mid-morning yet so the number of tourists about will be relatively small at this hour and we can safely assume that Manhattanites rarely walk about with their cameras on and ready at all times.

With the actual second event of course there are a myriad of news cameras pointed directly at the twin towers as the north tower burns. Quite to be expected. There would also be a fair number of amateur cameras pointed that way but as far as quality goes (quality of video as well as quality of framing and shot steadiness) its those professionals who's videos will be the best.

As for the black boxes, these are designed to withstand certain conditions. Given that the collapses were powerful enough to snap large structural steel members and that the collapsing buildings were akin to 110 storey rock crushers its not surprising that any object not light enough to be ejected by the expelling of air from the collapsing floors would be bashed and torn asunder until it is unrecognizable. Given also that these boxes would have first been subject to impact with the building and then subject to an hour long fire before being subject to the 110 storey rock crusher, and then possibly subject to fires within the debris pile for days or weeks,,,, tell me gain why you so enthusiastically expect them to have survived in recognizable parts let alone in usable condition..???
Any more questions?

[Quad4_72]

I came here for facts. Am I to understand Clayton will not be presenting any facts?

[16.5]

Originally Posted by jaydeehess

If by some really odd machinations with the English language you are referring to the first aircraft impact to tower 1(north) then you'd be correct, only one such video of that event.

Actually, there were at least two others: the WNYW video that had clear audio and the tourist video who was in a car driving into a tunnel and whose name was Pavel Hlava.

eta: here is what mangoose posted a couple of years ago:

1. Jules Naudet (+ audio, + video)
2. Pavel Hlava (- audio, + video)
3. Wolfgang Staehle (- audio, + video, streamed realtime as still images)
4. Dick Oliver/WNYW crew (+ audio, - video)
5. Ginny Carr (+ audio, - video)

[twinstead]

Well, I don't know about you folks, but I for one find it suspicious that more cameras weren't trained on the WTC when the first plane hit that morning.

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by Robrob

Considering private pilots can (and do) not file flight plans, not follow flight plans or even manually switch off their transponders in order to conduct illegal activities - and never get shot down by two F-18's, you have to wonder what fantasy world these people live in?

The silly web site used a ATC simulation software instructions as source for intercepts.

It is true if you file or don't file a flight plan and fly off the coast of the US and then come back through the ADIZ unannouced, you may get intercepted and asked to land by a fighter; this is true before and after 911. But if you are flying as you say, out an about over the USA, you would not get anyone to care about your inabity to follow your flight plan, or wonder around aimlessly. Unless you hit certain airspace and someone was watching (RADAR, etc.). Then they would have to come get you later, and investigate; no intercept would be expected of the USA before 911, unless you were lost for an hour, or hours breaking a lot of rules.

It was funny the web site cherry picks quotes from instructions for a software ATC simulator. The instructions also have this disclaimer, making Clayton's Facts Thread fail bigger, faster, etc.

Quote:

The Read Binder is updated at the beginning of the month. All information is for use with Xavius Software's Air Traffic Control CenterTM only, is the opinion of the author(s), and does not necessarily reflect the policies or practices of the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration or Federal Aviation Service. Send your questions or comments to support@xavius.com and we'll be glad to help!

A web site filled with opinions, based on opinions. Clayton has hard opinions, no hard facts.

Yes Tony, advances in batteries will make an "electric car come back" from the past. Jay Leno has a 1909 electric car with the original battery. But nothing will make your realcddeal come true. Our great-granddads had electric cars, and our great-grands could have hydrogen cars, who knows?

[Clayton Moore]

Originally Posted by 000063

Psst: he doesn't have one! He's just trying to keep the ball rolling!



Moving the goalposts. You asked where the videos were, not the cell phone videos.



And now you're backpedalling.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Guy on the scene says I didn't see the plain come in I just heard an explosion.

[Clayton Moore]

Originally Posted by 000063

Psst: he doesn't have one! He's just trying to keep the ball rolling!



Moving the goalposts. You asked where the videos were, not the cell phone videos.



And now you're backpedalling.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Awfully dark videos for such a bright shiny day.

[Clayton Moore]

Originally Posted by jaydeehess

First you ask this:

,,,and since its really unclear what the H you are referring to you get asked by several people:


Your only reply is:

To which you are informed of the complete lack of video capable phones in 2001, and you back pedal, revise it to:


So, a few points Clayton.

First of all you have not specified what you meant by "videos of the second tower plane". This is really important since if you refer to tower 2(south) or the second aircraft impact, there are actually quite a few videos taken by video cameras of that event.

So first you may want to answer the question as to what the H you are talking about.

If by some really odd machinations with the English language you are referring to the first aircraft impact to tower 1(north) then you'd be correct, only one such video of that event.

Given however that there were NO video capable cell phones in 2001 we already know that there would be very few people on the street with the capability to capture that event. Yes there were quite a few small video cameras available then but one would first have to hear the sound of the approaching aircraft, immediately decide to video it, take the camera out, turn it on, locate the source of that sound and point and shoot.
So quite obviously only persons who already had their cameras out and turned on will stand much of a chance to capture this event. Its not even mid-morning yet so the number of tourists about will be relatively small at this hour and we can safely assume that Manhattanites rarely walk about with their cameras on and ready at all times.

With the actual second event of course there are a myriad of news cameras pointed directly at the twin towers as the north tower burns. Quite to be expected. There would also be a fair number of amateur cameras pointed that way but as far as quality goes (quality of video as well as quality of framing and shot steadiness) its those professionals who's videos will be the best.

As for the black boxes, these are designed to withstand certain conditions. Given that the collapses were powerful enough to snap large structural steel members and that the collapsing buildings were akin to 110 storey rock crushers its not surprising that any object not light enough to be ejected by the expelling of air from the collapsing floors would be bashed and torn asunder until it is unrecognizable. Given also that these boxes would have first been subject to impact with the building and then subject to an hour long fire before being subject to the 110 storey rock crusher, and then possibly subject to fires within the debris pile for days or weeks,,,, tell me gain why you so enthusiastically expect them to have survived in recognizable parts let alone in usable condition..???
Any more questions?

Thanks for the fairy tale.

[plague311]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

Awfully dark videos for such a bright shiny day.

*facepalm*

[Redtail]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

Thanks for the fairy tale.

Lol! Still not clearing up your question. What are you afraid of?

[NoahFence]

Originally Posted by plague311

*facepalm*

The stupid! It burns!

[jaydeehess]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

Thanks for the fairy tale.

please list those points in my post which you take issue with

lack of cell phones that take video?

time it would take to turn on and shoot with a camera?

the number of cameras that could be expected on a Sept morning in2001?

I do admit my mistake concerning the number of videos of the first tower hit

or perhaps you take issue with my pointing out your lack of reading comprehension and idiotically asking about cell phone videos and are just pouting

[Clayton Moore]

Originally Posted by Reactor drone

So you don't think that's an untruth? You think every government official who has appeared in a news telecast, made a speech, announced a policy or made a public appearance since september 11, 2001 has told everyone that "9/11 is the seminal event of our generation." ?

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore
Quote:
That is what we've been told seemingly every day on virtually every news telecast, every speech, every statement, every policy announcement, every public appearance by every government official since September 11, 2001.

[jaydeehess]

Originally Posted by Redtail

Lol! Still not clearing up your question. What are you afraid of?

Clayton is hoping that and his cell phone video inquiry will go away if he pretends they did not occur.

[Clayton Moore]

Originally Posted by Redtail

Lol! Still not clearing up your question. What are you afraid of?

What question?

[Clayton Moore]

Originally Posted by jaydeehess

please list those points in my post which you take issue with

lack of cell phones that take video?

time it would take to turn on and shoot with a camera?

the number of cameras that could be expected on a Sept morning in2001?

I do admit my mistake concerning the number of videos of the first tower hit

or perhaps you take issue with my pointing out your lack of reading comprehension and idiotically asking about cell phone videos and are just pouting

After the first tower explosion pretty much anyone who had one handy would have had it pointed at or panning the towers.

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

After the first tower explosion pretty much anyone who had one handy would have had it pointed at or panning the towers.

You posted a web site full of nonsense. You failed to post facts on 911, you posted lies and false information.

You can't post the specification for black boxes, and never explains what the black boxes being lost or destroyed on 911 means. In fact, discussing the black boxes means there were planes, which you say there were not planes. Wait till you get to flight 93. Why do you spread lies and never answer questions or support your failed claims?

[Ape of Good Hope]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

Guy on the scene says I didn't see the plain come in

That's because it was plain.






badum tish!

[Redtail]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

What question?

The question you asked about the second tower plane that several people asked you to clarify.

Wait... you did clarify. It was just hidden by an incredibly ignorant claim about cell phone video in 2001.

[Clayton Moore]

Originally Posted by beachnut

You posted a web site full of nonsense. You failed to post facts on 911, you posted lies and false information.

You can't post the specification for black boxes, and never explains what the black boxes being lost or destroyed on 911 means. In fact, discussing the black boxes means there were planes, which you say there were not planes. Wait till you get to flight 93. Why do you spread lies and never answer questions or support your failed claims?

No. Discussing the absurdity that that all FOUR could be lost or damaged beyond recognition means there were no planes.

[plague311]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore
Quote:
That is what we've been told seemingly every day on virtually every news telecast, every speech, every statement, every policy announcement, every public appearance by every government official since September 11, 2001.

Clayton, this is an honest question, I understand your question says since September 11, 2001. However, in the last 6 years, how many telecasts, speeches, statements, public announcements or appearances have their even been?

I think that's the bigger point that you don't seem to be understanding. I am not going to say "no one cares" about 9/11 anymore, but it's not at the top of conversations at this time. It isn't 2002.

Politicians aren't bringing it up in their campaigns, new agencies aren't bringing it up on their networks, hell, even Alex Jones seems to have drifted away.

The reason for that is the questions have been answered, Clayton. Maybe you don't understand the answers, or maybe you don't understand the event itself. The reason no one is talking about it is because, for rational people, the questions have answers.

[plague311]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

No. Discussing the absurdity that that all FOUR could be lost or damaged beyond recognition means there were no planes.

No it doesn't. That's not what it means even a little bit. It means exactly what Jay said it meant. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Clayton Moore]

Originally Posted by plague311

No it doesn't. That's not what it means even a little bit. It means exactly what Jay said it meant. Nothing more, nothing less.

Then there is the misinformation that they were found in the rubble.

[twinstead]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

Thanks for the fairy tale.

Your keen rebuttals are getting sharper, more rational, and even more supremely logical. You're a machine!

[jaydeehess]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

After the first tower explosion pretty much anyone who had one handy would have had it pointed at or panning the towers.

So you are talking about the second tower hit, the one for which there are in fact several professional and amateur videos.
You are correct about one thing, there is a distinct lack of cell phone videos of the hits. As noted many times now, that is due to the distinct lack of video capable cell phones in 2001.

So that leaves single purpose video cameras. While there were in fact more of these in the hands of average persons in 2001, what causes you to expect so many to be present in Manhattan on a Sept morning in 2001?

[jaydeehess]

Originally Posted by

[QUOTE=Clayton Moore;8561278

Then there is the misinformation that they were found in the rubble.

what's that have to do with what I said?

[Bell]

Clayton Moore is (becoming) a troll regarding 9/11

[Bell]

Originally Posted by jaydeehess

Yep, iirc, only one video of that event.(it being hit by a plane that is).

There are three videos of AA11 crashing into WTC1:

1. The famous Naudet video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ys41jnL2Elk

2. The video by Czech immigrant Pavel Hlava
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sus0PELCbn4

3. The webcam images made by Wolfgang Staehle
https://wiki.brown.edu/confluence/do.../18566/033.jpg

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

No. Discussing the absurdity that that all FOUR could be lost or damaged beyond recognition means there were no planes.

More likely means you can't do physics.

It means you have no means, no understanding, no will, to solve E=mgh.

It means you have no means, no understanding, no will, to look up the specifications for "black boxes". To see how much fire and shock they can take. Why waste your precious time on research and gaining knowledge when you have lies to post, and trolling to do?

It means you failed to do research. Your only research is hitting the "Submit Reply". Zero.

There is no need for black boxes to solve what happen on 911, there were no accidents. Black boxes are used as tools to figure out why planes crashed due to accidents, mechanical failure. 911 was a crime by 19 terrorists who crashed planes on purpose.

When you solve E=mgh, you might understand why the boxes may of been damaged/destroyed and not found. The black boxes could be trapped in debris, like the floors fused together, which I would post a photo of but you are a troll, and you do nothing to solve 911; you post lies and nonsense; it is the best you can do, and you do it better than most troll except fatfreddy.

[tsig]

Originally Posted by beachnut

... it gets worse.


How do they know the private pilots off course without a flight plan are off course??? The web site is perfect for Clayton.

Poor Clayton fooled by idiots who copy and paste nonsense; the person who did the web site is super stupid. If you are outside the United States and you are off course, you could be intercepted. The source is talking about the ADIZ.



What an idiot. http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_26.htm Summa Cum Stultus

Here's what Clayton should be doing


What can be done

It is not really my place to tell other adults what to do with their time. The question 'what can be done' has many answers. It is up to the reader to pursue justice in whatever way seems appropriate to her/him. I can make these suggestions: investigate for yourself, reflect, think about it, talk about it, pass my paper around, browse through the provided links, get your mind/heart wrapped around the truth, share it with others, write your own paper, call your family and friends, call/write your congress-people and tell them we know, write to your local newspapers and tell them we know, be kinder to your children, work out your own personal crap you've been avoiding for so long, eat better food, take a walk, and chop lots of wood. Convince yourselves that our children need our undivided attention, plant a garden, travel to Iraq, give money to some of the 9/11 websites, get involved, ask yourself why Pat Tillman was really killed, watch less television, ride your bike, take public transportation, SLOW down, listen to Caroline Casey on Thursdays at 2 p.m. PST on KPFA.org, have some friends over for dinner, light a fire and talk about it. Find a way to connect, and the world that is currently being run by these scornful, lost children will start to unravel and reveal itself for what it truly is. The Emperor indeed has no clothes. But it is up to us to lift the mirror and hold him accountable.

Eat right, exercise and hug your kids and all will be right.

[LSSBB]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

No. Discussing the absurdity that that all FOUR could be lost or damaged beyond recognition means there were no planes.

Wait, the ones they found, plus the ones they couldn't find, mean no planes? Even when the ones they found have information validating the common narrative, that a terrorist piloted plane crashed into a building and another went into the ground in Pennsylvania?

Why even bother coming here and debating? With a statement like that, it doesn't appear that any Fact can convince you. And none of your Conjectures will convince those who have seen and understand the facts.

Reality is knocking. Do yourself a favor, and open the door and let it in.

[jaydeehess]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

After the first tower explosion pretty much anyone who had one handy would have had it pointed at or panning the towers.

Yep, so?
Just how many of those cameras would you expect to be in the vicinity on a Sept morning in Manhattan in 2001?

As I said, its not really the height of tourist season and not many people walk around their home city with their handycam every day, especially on their way to work.
It quite apparent you are assuming that in 2001 the prevalence of video capability among the general population was as it is today. Thus your hilarious demand for all those cell phone videos.

[jaydeehess]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

No. Discussing the absurdity that that all FOUR could be lost or damaged beyond recognition means there were no planes.

Originally Posted by plague311

No it doesn't. That's not what it means even a little bit. It means exactly what Jay said it meant. Nothing more, nothing less.

As for the black boxes, these are designed to withstand certain conditions. Given that the collapses were powerful enough to snap large structural steel members and that the collapsing buildings were akin to 110 storey rock crushers its not surprising that any object not light enough to be ejected by the expelling of air from the collapsing floors would be bashed and torn asunder until it is unrecognizable. Given also that these boxes would have first been subject to impact with the building and then subject to an hour long fire before being subject to the 110 storey rock crusher, and then possibly subject to fires within the debris pile for days or weeks,,,, tell me gain why you so enthusiastically expect them to have survived in recognizable parts let alone in usable condition..???

Quote:

Then there is the misinformation that they were found in the rubble.

Attempting to change the subject, Clayton?

The topic as concerns the recorders has been whether or not they could be expected to survive in recognizable (much less usable) condition after experiencing a high speed crash , an hour long fuel and office fire, and the collapse of a 100 storey steel and concrete structure. Simple answer to that is, no, they could not be expected to.

Now you want to somehow, claim that erroneous reports that they were found fits into a vast conspiracy in some way?

[brazenlilraisin]

Originally Posted by jaydeehess

Just how many of those cameras would you expect to be in the vicinity on a Sept morning in Manhattan in 2001?

All 43.