The Lie of 9-11 and it's after effects

Truth hurts.
shoot the messenger when the truth hurts. were just the messenger laying out facts that the best pilots in the world have said its impossible for commercial airliners to do all those incredible feats the 9/11 coverup commission said was done that they could not have done them yet these amatures who could not even fly a cessna somehow did? :auiqs.jpg: :abgg2q.jpg: and not only that,she is calling all these DOZENS of pentagon employees there who have come out and said there was no evidence of an airliner there but that THEY saw a missile she is calling all THOSE people morons as well.comedy gold. :auiqs.jpg:


Irish Ram in her fucked world she lives in,wants us to listen to HER instead of the best pilots in the world and DOZENS of pentagon employees,she sure is good for laughs.:auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg:

somehow in her warped mind your a moron if you point out the FBI ILLEGALLY confiscated the cameras across from the gas station. :abgg2q.jpg: the turht hurts indeed.
 
Last edited:
I can rely on one of the best. My brother-in-law, a Senior Pilot with United. They were all his friends. He spent hours and hours with them every day. He has a little more insight than you, a janitor/handy man, has.

So, tell us where the passengers went, LA... :dunno: <doing that doesn't work. Patch that big old hole in your theory.
Tell us your version of 911. Were the planes hijacked, or were all the pilots in on the suicide mission? Just answer that for me, then continue with personal insults in place of debatable viewpoints as per your IQ...
Show us what ya got, LA :auiqs.jpg:
 
Last edited:
Irish, & Candycorn,... What do You have to say about what the New York Fire Commissioners stated?

And how do You explain the BBC showing Building 7 collapsing before it happened?

===============

New York Fire Commissioners Call For new 9/11 Investigation: “Overwhelming Evidence Of Explosives”​

Date: July 30, 2019

"
History was made this month in regard to 9/11 as New York area fire commissioners called for a new investigation into the tragic events that unfolded that day. The resolution called for a new investigation due to the “overwhelming evidence” that “pre-planted explosives . . . caused the destruction of the three World Trade Center buildings.”

On July 24, 2019, the Franklin Square and Munson Fire District, which oversees a volunteer fire department serving a hamlet of 30,000 residents just outside of Queens, New York, became the first legislative body in the country to officially support a new investigation into the events of 9/11, according to Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

The resolution calling for a new investigation was drafted by Commissioner Christopher Gioia and it was immediately and unanimously approved by the five commissioners."


"

“We’re a tight-knit community and we never forget our fallen brothers and sisters. You better believe that when the entire fire service of New York State is on board, we will be an unstoppable force,” said Commissioner Christopher Gioia, adding, “We were the first fire district to pass this resolution. We won’t be the last.”​

According to the report:

The impact of 9/11 on the community extends well beyond the victims and their grieving families. On September 12, 2001, the Franklin Square Fire Department was called in to assist with the massive rescue and recovery effort that was just getting underway. Countless members of the department, including Gioia and Commissioner Philip Malloy (then rank-and-file firefighters), spent weeks on the pile searching in vain for civilians and fellow responders who might still be alive. Today, Malloy is one of thousands suffering chronic health effects.

The department also lost one of its own in Thomas J. Hetzel, affectionately referred to as “Tommy” by the commissioners. Hetzel was a full-time member of the New York Fire Department in addition to serving as a volunteer firefighter in Franklin Square. A touching memorial to Hetzel was on display during the meeting, and Hetzel’s widow, parents, and sister were all in attendance.
“The Hetzel and Evans families were very appreciative of the proceedings,” Gioia commented the day after the meeting. “They know it’s an uphill struggle. But at least they have hope, which is something they haven’t had in a long time.”


The importance of this resolution — especially coming from a legislative body of firefighters — cannot be understated. The impact of first responders calling for a new investigation over the use of explosives is massive. The naysayers who call those who question the official narrative “kooks” will have a hard time going after fire commissioners.

This move is yet another blow to the highly questionable and hole-filled official narrative. As TFTP reported earlier this year, in another major move from the great folks over at the Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, and 9/11 victim family members Robert McIlvaine and Barbara Krukowski-Rastelli, a joint federal lawsuit has been filed to assess any evidence the FBI may have known about that contributed to the destruction of the towers on 9/11 which they may have kept from Congress.

The complaint cites the failure of the FBI and its 9/11 Review Commission to assess key 9/11-related evidence that the FBI can be shown to have had, or been aware of, regarding:

  1. the use of pre-placed explosives to destroy World Trade Center Buildings, 1, 2, and 7;
  2. the arrest and investigation of the “High Fivers” observed photographing and celebrating the attacks on the World Trade Center on 9/11;
  3. terrorist financing related the reported Saudi support for the 9/11 hijackers;
  4. recovered plane parts, including serial numbers from all three crash locations;
  5. video from cameras mounted inside and outside the Pentagon; and
  6. cell phone communications from passengers aboard airplanes.
According to the press release on Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, this is evidence relevant to the 9/11 Review Commission’s and the FBI’s compliance with the mandate from Congress, which should have been assessed by the FBI and the 9/11 Review Commission and reported to Congress. The complaint also cites the destruction by the FBI of evidence related to the “High Fivers.” Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth has joined in bringing the counts that involve the evidence of the World Trade Center’s explosive demolition and evidence related to the “High Fivers,” while the other plaintiffs are party to all counts.



Also, as TFTP previously reported, a monumental step forward in the relentless pursuit of 9/11 truth took place last December when a United States Attorney agreed to comply with federal law requiring submission to a Special Grand Jury of evidence that explosives were used to bring down the World Trade Centers. Then, in March, the group behind the submission, the Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry, announced the filing of a “petition supplement” naming persons who may have information related to the use of said explosives.

According to Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, the 33-page document contains 15 different categories of persons who may have information material to the investigation, including contractors and security companies that had access to the WTC Towers before 9/11, persons and entities who benefited financially from the WTC demolitions, and persons arrested after being observed celebrating the WTC attacks.

A names-redacted version of the petition supplement, which was filed with the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York on February 14, 2019, has been made available to the public. The un-redacted version filed with the U.S. Attorney today will remain undisclosed in the interest of maintaining the secrecy, security, and integrity of the grand jury proceeding.
As TFTP reported in December, for the first time since 9/11 the federal government is taking steps to hear evidence that explosives may have been used to destroy the world trade centers.

The Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry successfully submitted a petition to the federal government demanding that the U.S. Attorney present to a Special Grand Jury extensive evidence of yet-to-be-prosecuted federal crimes relating to the destruction of three World Trade Center Towers on 9/11 (WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7).

After waiting months for the reply, the U.S. Attorney responded in a letter, noting that they will comply with the law.

“We have received and reviewed The Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry, Inc.’s submissions of April 10 and July 30, 2018. We will comply with the provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 3332 as they relate to your submissions,” U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman stated.

According to the petition, dozens of exhibits were presented as evidence that explosives were used to destroy all three world trade centers.

The Lawyers’ Committee’s April 10th 52-page original Petition was accompanied by 57 exhibits and presented extensive evidence that explosives were used to destroy three WTC Towers on 9/11.That evidence included independent scientific laboratory analysis of WTC dust samples showing the presence of high-tech explosives and/or incendiaries; numerous first-hand reports by First Responders of seeing and hearing explosions at the World Trade Center on 9/11; expert analysis of seismic evidence that explosions occurred at the WTC towers on 9/11 both prior to the airplane impacts and prior to the building collapses; and expert analysis and testimony by architects, engineers, and scientists concluding that the rapid onset symmetrical near-free-fall acceleration collapse of these three WTC high rise buildings on 9/11 exhibited the key characteristics of controlled demolition. The July 30th Amended Petition included the same evidence but also addressed several additional federal crimes beyond the federal bombing crime addressed in the original Petition.

The Lawyers’ Committee concluded in the petitions that explosive and incendiary devices that had been preplaced at the WTC were detonated causing the complete collapse of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7 on 9/11, and the resulting tragic loss of life, and that “the evidence permits no other conclusion — as a matter of science, as a matter of logic, and as a matter of law.”
“This Petition Supplement is intended to assist the Special Grand Jury by providing a roadmap for a meaningful investigation into the yet-to-be-prosecuted 9/11 WTC crimes that the Lawyers’ Committee has reported and documented in our Petitions,” Attorney David Meiswinkle, President of the Lawyers’ Committee’s Board of Directors, said.

Finally, after nearly two decades of ridicule, dismissal, and outright intolerance of information contrary to the “official story” of what happened on 9/11, the public may finally learn the truth of what happened and who was behind it.

Article posted with permission from Matt Agorist"

Matt Agorist​

Matt Agorist is an honorably discharged veteran of the USMC and former intelligence operator directly tasked by the NSA. This prior experience gives him unique insight into the world of government corruption and the American police state. Agorist has been an independent journalist for over a decade and has been featured on mainstream networks around the world. Agorist is also the Editor at Large at the Free Thought Project.



 
You don't pay attention, truth.
I do believe the government was involved. I do believe explosives were planted without arousing any suspicion at all. I also believe that a missile hit the Pentagon. I don't believe the third plane was going to the White House at all. I think that was never going to hit the White House. That was phony narrative from the White House.
I don't believe that all the people on the planes were taken to a secure location somewhere and probably gassed or something, without being seen.
Or that drones were disguised as planes and fooled everybody. I do believe that the world saw planes plowing into the towers. I do believe the planes were hijacked, as per the plan, and those people, the pilots, and crews died on contact. Voila. My theory gets rid of the passenger/plane dilemma that LA's theory grapples with and offers up 0.
And no way in hell did 4 pilots for United agree to slam their plane into a building. That is beyond ridiculous.

How difficult do you need to make it?
If you can get the same desired results in 2 steps, why use 9 steps instead?
 
Last edited:
morons...

I can rely on one of the best. My brother-in-law, a Senior Pilot with United. They were all his friends. He spent hours and hours with them every day. He has a little more insight than you, a janitor/handy man, has.

So, tell us where the passengers went, LA... :dunno: <doing that doesn't work. Patch that big old hole in your theory.
Tell us your version of 911. Were the planes hijacked, or were all the pilots in on the suicide mission? Just answer that for me, then continue with personal insults in place of debatable viewpoints as per your IQ...
Show us what ya got, LA :auiqs.jpg:
That's "Hear say" in a Court of Law.

Out on the street it's called a "Fabrication, Rumor, &/or a LIe" etc.& is not worth squat.
 

A Massive amount of Data, from many, many sources, absolutely shows what The American people, & The World, were told about what happened on "9-11", was, & is a Horrific Lie, that led to Undeclared, & Unceasing War, Countless numbers of lives lost, & injured, "Trillions of Dollars Wasted", as well as the empowerment of "The Police State" in America, and many other nations.

I'm starting this post out with what the "New York Fire Commissioners" presented to The Public. Which The First Trump Administration "stonewalled", via Attorney General Barr, over "Procedural matters".


Ya'll, Jet Air Liners do not disintegrate upon impacting buildings such as the Pentagon, nor when crashing in to the ground!

The Plane to Ground, Cell phone call, which brought about the famous "Let's Roll!", was not possible until several years after 9-11.

No Plane crashed in to Building Seven, nor did WTC1, nor WTC2 collapse on it.

British News showed "Building 7" collapsing minutes before it actually did.

These are just a few examples of the Data that I will be posting herein. And I say again,.... The American People & The World were lied to.

===========





New York Fire Commissioners Call For new 9/11 Investigation: “Overwhelming Evidence Of Explosives”​

Date: July 30, 2019

"
History was made this month in regard to 9/11
ir
as New York area fire commissioners called for a new investigation into the tragic events that unfolded that day. The resolution called for a new investigation due to the “overwhelming evidence” that “pre-planted explosives . . . caused the destruction of the three World Trade Center buildings.”


On July 24, 2019, the Franklin Square and Munson Fire District, which oversees a volunteer fire department serving a hamlet of 30,000 residents just outside of Queens, New York, became the first legislative body in the country to officially support a new investigation into the events of 9/11, according to Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.


The resolution calling for a new investigation was drafted by Commissioner Christopher Gioia and it was immediately and unanimously approved by the five commissioners."




Ya'll, Jet Air Liners do not disintegrate upon impacting buildings such as the Pentagon, nor when crashing in to the ground!

Why not?
 
You don't pay attention, truth.
I do believe the government was involved. I do believe explosives were planted without arousing any suspicion at all. I also believe that a missile hit the Pentagon. I don't believe the third plane was going to the White House at all. I think that was never going to hit the White House. That was phony narrative from the White House.
I don't believe that all the people on the planes were taken to a secure location and gassed without being seen.
Or that drones were disguised as planes and fooled everybody. I do believe that the world saw planes plowing into the towers. I do believe the planes were hijacked, as per the plan, and those people, the pilots, and crews died on contact. Voila. My theory gets rid of the passenger/plane dilemma that LA's theory has. And no way in hell did 4 pilots for United agree to slam their plane into a building. That is beyond ridiculous.

How difficult do you need to make it?
If you can get the same desired results in 2 steps, why use 9 steps instead?
Somebody call Pope Leo, & Tell him that some kinda miracle is ongoing on this board.

Hold that phone call,.....

Irish You've never stated anything like your comments made in Post#525,
& You've been railing against the fact that Our Government Attacked Our People.
 

FAQ #5: Do the seismic data from the events at the World Trade Center corroborate the eyewitness, video, and forensic evidence of controlled demolition?​

Richard Gage, AIA

"However, in 2006, researchers Craig Furlong and Gordon Ross published an article, "Seismic Proof – 9/11 Was An Inside Job (Updated Version II)," in the Journal of 9/11 Studies. Furlong and Ross determined that there was, as Bollyn had contended, indeed proof of explosions both before the tower collapses and before the airplane impacts.

In 2009, the destruction of WTC 2 (the South Tower) was exhaustively analyzed by Graeme MacQueen in an article, "Did the Earth Shake Before the South Tower Hit the Ground?," which was published in the Journal of 9/11 Studies. MacQueen concluded that the testimony of numerous witnesses and the shaking of tripod-mounted cameras corroborated the pre-collapse explosions—not only at WTC 2 but at WTC 1 as well. He then correlated those explosions with the timing of the seismic spikes in the data from the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory.

Finally, we refer you to a 2012 article by Andre Rousseau, an expert in applied geophysics and the author of more than 50 published papers on progressive mechanical waves and geology. Published in the Journal of 9/11 Studies, his article is titled, "Were Explosives the Source of the Seismic Signals Emitted from New York on September 11, 2001?" We find Rousseau's article to be the most definitive analysis of the seismic evidence to date. In it, he directly challenges the official LDEO interpretations of the seismic waves and concludes that the waves clearly point to pre-airplane impact explosions and pre-collapse explosions as the causes of the seismic signals. He reaches a similar conclusion for WTC 7."

"

The Best Evidence​

The results of independent research conflict with the conclusions by LDEO (Lamont Doherty-Earth Observatory) that the waves were caused by airplane impacts and resulting building collapses.

In 2006, engineers Craig Furlong and Gordon Ross showed that the plane impacts could not have caused the seismic signals attributed to them by LDEO, because they originated several seconds before the 9/11 Commission’s radar-based times of impact.

The seismic events, therefore, must have resulted from causes of a different type. The best (and probably only plausible) candidate for these causes would seemingly be explosions in the basements of the Twin Towers, for which there is abundant physical and testimonial evidence.
[6]

Although the present Point deals only with the seismic evidence, much of the physical and testimonial evidence is documented in Point TT-8: “Why Did the Twin Towers Collapse? The Physical and Testimonial Evidence.” [7]

The conclusion of Furlong and Ross – that seismic evidence does not fit the official story (in any of its versions) – was reinforced in 2012 by a French geophysicist, Dr. André Rousseau, who reanalyzed the seismic wave data. [8] Rousseau concluded that the LDEO report is flawed in three significant respects:

  • The radar-based timing of the airplane impacts does not match the origin-times of the seismic waves (as indicated by the data);
  • The lack of explanation of why, although the two towers were destroyed in essentially the same way, the data show large differences between them in terms of released energy;
  • The frequencies of the waves are much too low to have been caused by plane impacts and building collapses (although they match those of underground explosions, evidence for which is documented in Point TT-8)."

"Conclusion​

The discrepancies described above indicate that the LDEO conclusions about the nature of the events that generated the signals recorded at Palisades cannot be correct. Most strikingly, the ground radar data, which is very precise, showed WTC 1 to have been struck 15 seconds later than the Palisades-recorded seismic activity, which LDEO scientists attributed to an airplane impact. The radar also shows WTC 2 to have been struck later than the seismic activity attributed to it. The seismic activity, therefore, must have been produced by something other than the crashes of the airliners into the two buildings.

Rousseau, like Furlong and Ross, provided reasons to conclude that the signals that the official story attributed to airplane impacts had actually been caused by something else – which, as evidence documented in Point TT-8 suggests, was shocks, explosive in nature, that had occurred at the bases of the buildings. Rousseau further demonstrated that the wave details themselves were characteristic of such explosions, not of plane impacts or building collapses."


 
Somebody call Pope Leo, & Tell him that some kinda miracle is ongoing on this board.

Hold that phone call,.....

Irish You've never stated anything like your comments made in Post#525,
& You've been railing against the fact that Our Government Attacked Our People.
lol. Are you hard of reading??

post # 483
post #486

My theory is much better than yours...
 
That's "Hear say" in a Court of Law.

Out on the street it's called a "Fabrication, Rumor, &/or a LIe" etc.& is not worth squat.
What in the hell are you talking about? What is hearsay? Is what any other pilot says also hearsay? Is that what you refering to?
Are you calling me a liar?
 
Irish, & Candycorn,... What do You have to say about what the New York Fire Commissioners stated?

And how do You explain the BBC showing Building 7 collapsing before it happened?

===============

New York Fire Commissioners Call For new 9/11 Investigation: “Overwhelming Evidence Of Explosives”​

Date: July 30, 2019

"
History was made this month in regard to 9/11 as New York area fire commissioners called for a new investigation into the tragic events that unfolded that day. The resolution called for a new investigation due to the “overwhelming evidence” that “pre-planted explosives . . . caused the destruction of the three World Trade Center buildings.”

On July 24, 2019, the Franklin Square and Munson Fire District, which oversees a volunteer fire department serving a hamlet of 30,000 residents just outside of Queens, New York, became the first legislative body in the country to officially support a new investigation into the events of 9/11, according to Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

The resolution calling for a new investigation was drafted by Commissioner Christopher Gioia and it was immediately and unanimously approved by the five commissioners."


"

“We’re a tight-knit community and we never forget our fallen brothers and sisters. You better believe that when the entire fire service of New York State is on board, we will be an unstoppable force,” said Commissioner Christopher Gioia, adding, “We were the first fire district to pass this resolution. We won’t be the last.”​


1770090743331.webp


====

Much like yourself, Gioia (sp?) didn't ever offer the "overwhelming evidence".

Are you ever going to tell us what the commission report got wrong? You keep saying the government's version isn't correct but won't tell us what they got wrong.
 
wist43 did you take a look at at any of those 3 videos i posted? if not please do so,especially the first one,it has things in it i had never heard about before,it is about a pentagon employee that has put together a lawsuit that has SEVERAL pentagon employees giving sworn statements they want to go on record with but are too afraid sense they know they will be murdered if they do,one only has to look at the JFK assassination how people are murdered off if you give testimony that does not go along with the governments version of events. please watch them,as i said yesterday,i started wacthing the first 30 minutes of your video and will eventutlly watch the entire segment so you could return the favor to me that way.:)

she is not an agent like langley agent candyass is who has penetrated this site,and defends EVERY government version of events.

she strikes me as one of those people that they can handle the truth on the JFK assassination that the CIA killed him cause he wanted to pull us out of vietnam and get rid of the fed,she strikes me as one of those people who CAN accept it that the CIA was willing to murder innocent bystanders who gave testimony that did not support the magic bullet theory of the warren commission,someone who can accept it that our government lied to us THEN but when it comes to 9/11,if the facts dont go along with her narrative,wont look at them because JFK is long in the past so she can accept it the CIA pulled THAT off,but 9/11 hits too close to home for her which is typical of half of Americans so unlike JFK,no matter what evidence or facts you lay out out to her that prove the governments version IMPOSSIBLE,she closes her eyes and covers her ears afraid to go down that rabbit hole.

Like i said,thats typical of half of Americans.i am sure you have noticed OVERSEEES,peiople are much more open to it being an inside job than here in America. Hell half of Americans still to this day are so brainwashed by our corrupt school system and the media they still incredibly think Reagan was for the people and stood up to the elite for them same as JFK. :auiqs.jpg:

The government will never come clean about 9/11.

we can take that to the bank they will never come clean on 9/11. Hell Look at the JFK assassination how they are STILL covering that one up over 6 decades later.
Okay, I'll take a look at them when I get a chance... can you repost them so I don't have to track them down??

-------------------------------

Europeans, especially older Europeans, tend to be naturally suspicious of "terror" attacks because of their experiences with Gladio.

Also, they tend to get more diverse reporting on American events - at least they used to.

Not so much anymore though. The European Deep State has stepped up their censorship and controlled media game since 9/11.

The 7/7 tube attack was a false flag, but the majority of Europeans haven't a clue.

-------------------------------

The primary reason the Deep State so vigorously defends government sponsored terrorism and false flags, even when all of the original actors are dead, is to protect trade craft and future operations.

If the true facts became widely known about JFK, Pearl Harbor, 9/11, Gladio, Boston Marathon, 7/7, et al, the citizenry might just rebel enough to actually put the puppet masters out of business.
 
Okay, I'll take a look at them when I get a chance... can you repost them so I don't have to track them down??

-------------------------------

Europeans, especially older Europeans, tend to be naturally suspicious of "terror" attacks because of their experiences with Gladio.

Also, they tend to get more diverse reporting on American events - at least they used to.

Not so much anymore though. The European Deep State has stepped up their censorship and controlled media game since 9/11.

The 7/7 tube attack was a false flag, but the majority of Europeans haven't a clue.

-------------------------------

The primary reason the Deep State so vigorously defends government sponsored terrorism and false flags, even when all of the original actors are dead, is to protect trade craft and future operations.

If the true facts became widely known about JFK, Pearl Harbor, 9/11, Gladio, Boston Marathon, 7/7, et al, the citizenry might just rebel enough to actually put the puppet masters out of business.

You’ve been asked to reveal the supposed major falsehoods in the 9/11 Commission Report like a dozen times now.

You haven’t revealed anything except your impotence.
 
She's typical... most people are so prideful they can't consider other people's opinions, or in this case actual physics that disproves the official version.

They'll never look at anything they think might challenge their position.

By definition, that makes them intellectually dishonest.
Intellectually dishonest OR a mercenary poster, keyboard warrior for Official Conspiracy Theories....
 
Well, we've been beating this dead horse here for way too long. And we aren't going to change each other's opinions, so we'll just have to agree to disagree. Maybe 100 years from now, the government will release the classified documents.:disbelief:
You hold opinions formed from ignorance and propaganda, we hold opinions based on facts and aeronautical knowledge and experience.
 
15th post
You hold opinions formed from ignorance and propaganda, we hold opinions based on facts and aeronautical knowledge and experience.
That's great, now you can tell me where all the passengers were gassed and ovened, where the fake planes/drones were built, and how much the pilot's families were paid when the pilots were talked into the suicide mission, why Boeing lied when they said they found airplane parts in the tower debris, and how the world was tricked into believing that they saw planes and not drones. Who built the gas chamber, and were they then gassed to stop any rumors? And that pesky DNA of some of the crew that was found on the crash site....
Just to get past the myth that a plane can't do that, here's one doing that:


How low can they go at top speed?

Regale us with your truths, Pete...
 
Last edited:
You hold opinions formed from ignorance and propaganda, we hold opinions based on facts and aeronautical knowledge and experience.

How did the human remains get to the crash sites if the planes were all substitute drones? Your "factual" opinion please... LOL This should be hilarious.
 
You don't pay attention, truth.
I do believe the government was involved. I do believe explosives were planted without arousing any suspicion at all. I also believe that a missile hit the Pentagon. I don't believe the third plane was going to the White House at all. I think that was never going to hit the White House. That was phony narrative from the White House.
I don't believe that all the people on the planes were taken to a secure location somewhere and probably gassed or something, without being seen.
Or that drones were disguised as planes and fooled everybody. I do believe that the world saw planes plowing into the towers. I do believe the planes were hijacked, as per the plan, and those people, the pilots, and crews died on contact. Voila. My theory gets rid of the passenger/plane dilemma that LA's theory grapples with and offers up 0.
And no way in hell did 4 pilots for United agree to slam their plane into a building. That is beyond ridiculous.

How difficult do you need to make it?
If you can get the same desired results in 2 steps, why use 9 steps instead?
Irish, saying that you are intellectually dishonest is not saying you are lying.

Being intellectually dishonest simply means you refuse to look at information and facts that challenge your positions.

You posted a New York Times article that you thought would disprove my contention that the original, unmodified passenger planes did not hit the towers.

I read the article, in good faith, and reported back to you that it simply did not say what you thought it it said - that seemed to insult your pride and pissed you off enough for you to take your ball and go home.

The difference between those of us who have arrived at vastly different conclusions than you, is that we consider all positions.

I read your article, conversely you refuse to watch a short 14 minute segment of a documentary I provided to you.

I'm willing to hear you out, yet you refuse to consider anything outside your preconceived understanding.

That is why I, and many others on here consider you to be intellectually dishonest. Doesn't mean we think you're lying. Just means your locked into a position and refuse to consider anymore information.

As you said, there's nowhere left to go in discussion and debate with someone who refuses to honestly consider other points of view.

I'll give you another chance to review a considered opinion. The video between 1:27-1:40.

 

New Topics

Latest Discussions

Back
Top Bottom