look, parts from a plane ...
on that topic, since the mainstream media was the first to assert that hijacked airliners were used as weapons, and has indeed failed to substantiate that claim, I would say that the work is already done in this matter. Where is the proof that any of the 4 airliners even existed at all? How much of any one of the airliners was recovered and by what means examined to determine its validity as an actual bit of the aircraft in question and not simply a random scrap of metal?
look, parts from a plane ...
on that topic, since the mainstream media was the first to assert that hijacked airliners were used as weapons, and has indeed failed to substantiate that claim, I would say that the work is already done in this matter. Where is the proof that any of the 4 airliners even existed at all? How much of any one of the airliners was recovered and by what means examined to determine its validity as an actual bit of the aircraft in question and not simply a random scrap of metal?
You're failing to prove no planes were involved.
That's pretty ******* retarded, even for a truther. Plane parts don't just fall out of the sky without a plane.look, parts from a plane ...
on that topic, since the mainstream media was the first to assert that hijacked airliners were used as weapons, and has indeed failed to substantiate that claim, I would say that the work is already done in this matter. Where is the proof that any of the 4 airliners even existed at all? How much of any one of the airliners was recovered and by what means examined to determine its validity as an actual bit of the aircraft in question and not simply a random scrap of metal?
You're failing to prove no planes were involved.
And exactly what makes you so certain that this was guaranteed for sure a part from either "FLT11" or "FLT175"? critical bits of airliners have serial numbers and was any serial numbered part recovered from the wreckage ever verified as to belonging to any one of the alleged hijacked airliners?
That's pretty ******* retarded, even for a truther. Plane parts don't just fall out of the sky without a plane.look, parts from a plane ...
on that topic, since the mainstream media was the first to assert that hijacked airliners were used as weapons, and has indeed failed to substantiate that claim, I would say that the work is already done in this matter. Where is the proof that any of the 4 airliners even existed at all? How much of any one of the airliners was recovered and by what means examined to determine its validity as an actual bit of the aircraft in question and not simply a random scrap of metal?
You're failing to prove no planes were involved.
And exactly what makes you so certain that this was guaranteed for sure a part from either "FLT11" or "FLT175"? critical bits of airliners have serial numbers and was any serial numbered part recovered from the wreckage ever verified as to belonging to any one of the alleged hijacked airliners?
Not to mention ... that's landing gear. If that landing gear didn't come from either flights 11 or 175, then post a link to an article about a plane crashing that day upon trying to land without landing gear. Or an engine...
You're failing miserably. And I'm not done yet.
The burden of proof is yours. There are eyewitnesses who saw the plane fly into the south tower, there were networks who televised it live as it happened, there were dozens upon dozens of people who video taped it. Given that, there is no logical explanation for how plane parts ended up in lower Manhattan other than the official narrative. You have the burden to prove those plane parts came from elsewhere since the evidence they came from flight 11 or 175 is overwhelming.That's pretty ******* retarded, even for a truther. Plane parts don't just fall out of the sky without a plane.look, parts from a plane ...Start by proving there were no planes involved.
on that topic, since the mainstream media was the first to assert that hijacked airliners were used as weapons, and has indeed failed to substantiate that claim, I would say that the work is already done in this matter. Where is the proof that any of the 4 airliners even existed at all? How much of any one of the airliners was recovered and by what means examined to determine its validity as an actual bit of the aircraft in question and not simply a random scrap of metal?
You're failing to prove no planes were involved.
And exactly what makes you so certain that this was guaranteed for sure a part from either "FLT11" or "FLT175"? critical bits of airliners have serial numbers and was any serial numbered part recovered from the wreckage ever verified as to belonging to any one of the alleged hijacked airliners?
Not to mention ... that's landing gear. If that landing gear didn't come from either flights 11 or 175, then post a link to an article about a plane crashing that day upon trying to land without landing gear. Or an engine...
You're failing miserably. And I'm not done yet.
How do you know for sure
that somebody didn't drive by in a pickup truck
and drop the engine or other part, while all eyes were on the exploding tower? Do you have proof that this did not happen?
The burden of proof is yours. There are eyewitnesses who saw the plane fly into the south tower, there were networks who televised it live as it happened, there were dozens upon dozens of people who video taped it. Given that, there is no logical explanation for how plane parts ended up in lower Manhattan other than the official narrative. You have the burden to prove those plane parts came from elsewhere since the evidence they came from flight 11 or 175 is overwhelming.That's pretty ******* retarded, even for a truther. Plane parts don't just fall out of the sky without a plane.
And exactly what makes you so certain that this was guaranteed for sure a part from either "FLT11" or "FLT175"? critical bits of airliners have serial numbers and was any serial numbered part recovered from the wreckage ever verified as to belonging to any one of the alleged hijacked airliners?
Not to mention ... that's landing gear. If that landing gear didn't come from either flights 11 or 175, then post a link to an article about a plane crashing that day upon trying to land without landing gear. Or an engine...
You're failing miserably. And I'm not done yet.
How do you know for sure
that somebody didn't drive by in a pickup truck
and drop the engine or other part, while all eyes were on the exploding tower? Do you have proof that this did not happen?
So what have you got besides supposition and inuendo?
The burden of proof is yours. There are eyewitnesses who saw the plane fly into the south tower, there were networks who televised it live as it happened, there were dozens upon dozens of people who video taped it. Given that, there is no logical explanation for how plane parts ended up in lower Manhattan other than the official narrative. You have the burden to prove those plane parts came from elsewhere since the evidence they came from flight 11 or 175 is overwhelming.That's pretty ******* retarded, even for a truther. Plane parts don't just fall out of the sky without a plane.look, parts from a plane ...
You're failing to prove no planes were involved.
And exactly what makes you so certain that this was guaranteed for sure a part from either "FLT11" or "FLT175"? critical bits of airliners have serial numbers and was any serial numbered part recovered from the wreckage ever verified as to belonging to any one of the alleged hijacked airliners?
Not to mention ... that's landing gear. If that landing gear didn't come from either flights 11 or 175, then post a link to an article about a plane crashing that day upon trying to land without landing gear. Or an engine...
You're failing miserably. And I'm not done yet.
How do you know for sure
that somebody didn't drive by in a pickup truck
and drop the engine or other part, while all eyes were on the exploding tower? Do you have proof that this did not happen?
So what have you got besides supposition and inuendo?
Without hard evidence, the supporters of the official narrative should just throw in the towel and admit that they can NOT prove the validity of the hijacked airliners story, for all anyone knows the images on the videos ( Evan Fairbanks Vid. etc.... ) are all totally fake, where is the hard evidence?
why hasn't anyone accounted for the aircraft?
Umm, I guess it needs to be said ... not a single video has ever proven to be fraudulent. Not one.The burden of proof is yours. There are eyewitnesses who saw the plane fly into the south tower, there were networks who televised it live as it happened, there were dozens upon dozens of people who video taped it. Given that, there is no logical explanation for how plane parts ended up in lower Manhattan other than the official narrative. You have the burden to prove those plane parts came from elsewhere since the evidence they came from flight 11 or 175 is overwhelming.That's pretty ******* retarded, even for a truther. Plane parts don't just fall out of the sky without a plane.look, parts from a plane ...
You're failing to prove no planes were involved.
And exactly what makes you so certain that this was guaranteed for sure a part from either "FLT11" or "FLT175"? critical bits of airliners have serial numbers and was any serial numbered part recovered from the wreckage ever verified as to belonging to any one of the alleged hijacked airliners?
Not to mention ... that's landing gear. If that landing gear didn't come from either flights 11 or 175, then post a link to an article about a plane crashing that day upon trying to land without landing gear. Or an engine...
You're failing miserably. And I'm not done yet.
How do you know for sure
that somebody didn't drive by in a pickup truck
and drop the engine or other part, while all eyes were on the exploding tower? Do you have proof that this did not happen?
So what have you got besides supposition and inuendo?
Without hard evidence, the supporters of the official narrative should just throw in the towel and admit that they can NOT prove the validity of the hijacked airliners story, for all anyone knows the images on the videos ( Evan Fairbanks Vid. etc.... ) are all totally fake, where is the hard evidence?
why hasn't anyone accounted for the aircraft?
This is more absurdity from you. Since a commercial jet had never been flown into a skyscraper at more than 400 MPH, the reality is, you have absolutely no idea what such an event would look like. So to declare that every single version recorded that day are faked because it does not meet your seal of approval is beyond ridiculous. But then, ridiculous is all you've ever been armed with.
And what proof would be good enough for you? If we supplied an identification number that ties the part to the plane, all you would do is claim the government made it up. It's never ending. We supply evidence, you claim it's faked.
