Capstone
Gold Member
- Feb 14, 2012
- 5,502
- 952
- 290
...there is a LOT of evidence that doesn't need any speculation at all, the fact of the "collapse" events of WTC1, 2 & 7 + the fact that the airliner crashes ( or should I say alleged airliner crashes ) into the WTC towers could not possibly be as alleged by the mainstream media, the argument that "OH BUT THE PLANES WERE GOING SOOOO FAST" is totally without merit in this discussion, the plane shaped gashes just like in RoadRunner cartoons is proof plenty that AMERICA is being lied to about this whole scene.
Please, don't tell me you're a no-planer !
Whether the aircraft deployed on 9/11 were actually hijacked passenger jets or remotely flown military planes/drones (as the famous footage of the undercarriage of the second impacter would seem to indicate), there were, almost certainly, aircraft used in the operation. This is borne out by a huge body of eyewitness testimonies, live television coverage of the second impact (which I saw with my own eyes on the day of the travesty), and a good bit of circumstantial evidence, such as the confusion-fomenting air defense drills and operations that had a good many interceptors playing war games with the Ruskies in freakin' Alaska on that fateful morning (which would not have been a necessary component of a black operation that didn't involve the use of aircraft otherwise far more vulnerable to US air defense systems). They might not have been (and probably weren't) the flights we were told they were, but the evidence strongly suggests that airplanes were used in the false flag attack.
You're right about the visible nature of the three "collapses" caught on tape in NYC. To the least bit discerning eye, the videos alone are quite damning to the official explanation, to say nothing of numerous highly credible eyewitness accounts of belt-like, demolition-style explosions, ETC.