Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You're kidding, right? You would have me (and all these "lurkers") believe that in your years of "researching" 9/11 you have never stumbled across any of the more popular 9/11 CT websites, all of which dedicate entire sections to disinformation in which they whine about those who willfully or for other reasons (like ignorance or stupidity) dump what you do on the Internet?
Here's another CT Website (TruthMove.org) which also laments your right to dilute or even destroy their message, unequivocally stating:
"... The opposition prefers dealing with topics that can be easily countered, or that simply make 9/11 skeptics look like kooks. Controlled demolition and no plane at the Pentagon are some of the most incredible theories in the movement."
TruthMove - Disinformation
OK, so PROVE that there was an airliner at the PENTAGON and indeed PROVE the allegation that the airliner was hijacked.......
Don't change the subject, Princess. You pretended there are no credible voices within the 9/11 CT Movement who consider the pap you spew here to be so un-credible as to be DISINFORMATION ... an attempt by peeps like you to discredit the entire Movement! When I prove there are whole sections of the most popular CT websites dedicated to trashing you, you quickly try to change the subject.
"whole sections of the most popular CT websites dedicated to trashing you,"
Unlike some people on these forums, I tend to NOT take it personally when people disagree. There WILL be disagreement on various facets of the story, and that is fine, everybody has their opinion, I'm just asking were is the physical proof of there ever having been an airliner crashed at any one of the 4 crash sites alleged to have been on 9/11/2001(?)
They don't just disagree with you, they reject your absurd scenarios, claiming you have discredited and perhaps killed their already lame 9/11 CT Movement.
Even your comrades see you as a flaming loon, Princess. Wake up and smell what you are shoveling.
Why would someone need to combine the time of separate and distinct Tower fires in order to misrepresent the burn time, making it far greater than it was?
Why would someone need to post a gif of an obviously fake plane hitting the Pentagon?
I don't suppose you could post a pic of what, other than a plane, hit the Pentagon?
While you are at it, perhaps you could post some pix of what hit the WTC on 9/11/2001?
Spammy has been foaming at the mouth that "no planes were hijacked on 9/11" and could use some help. Really.
So in other words, you feel the need to change the subject rather than address the issue about the burn time.
BTW: the mainstream media was the first to assert that airliners were allegedly hijacked and as yet has failed to supply proof that said airliners existed at all.
They don't just disagree with you, they reject your absurd scenarios, claiming you have discredited and perhaps killed their already lame 9/11 CT Movement.
Even your comrades see you as a flaming loon, Princess. Wake up and smell what you are shoveling.
For the people who are supporting the 19 suicidal hijackers story, please do by all means wake up and smell the burnt Reichstag!
as for dissention in the ranks, note that any group that you can define, be they doctors, lawyers ( etc... ) have disagreements between members, so be it. what does it prove?
We are all HUMAN on this bus ...... and that is good!
So we get audio recordings allegedly from the hijacked airliners,
however, audio recordings are VERY easy to fake, and in the absents of hard evidence, that is an accounting for the aircraft bits, so as to prove that any one of the 4 alleged hijacked airliners was real..... what do we have?
You are not giving evidence to prove the planes were not hijacked,
All I ask for, is physical evidence or photographic documentation of physical evidence that clearly indicates the condition of the rubble pile at "ground zero" after the "collapse" of WTC7 ( and before the clean-up operation had begun ) also documented physical evidence of there having been an airliner crashed at any one of the 4 alleged crash sites. Is this too much to ask?
All I ask for, is physical evidence or photographic documentation of physical evidence that clearly indicates the condition of the rubble pile at "ground zero" after the "collapse" of WTC7 ( and before the clean-up operation had begun ) also documented physical evidence of there having been an airliner crashed at any one of the 4 alleged crash sites. Is this too much to ask?
Footage that kills the conspiracy theories Rare footage shows WTC 7 consumed by fire Daily Mail Online
Footage that kills the conspiracy theories Rare footage shows WTC 7 consumed by fire Daily Mail Online
World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9 11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest - Popular Mechanics
NIST Manuscript Publication Search
All I ask for, is physical evidence or photographic documentation of physical evidence that clearly indicates the condition of the rubble pile at "ground zero" after the "collapse" of WTC7 ( and before the clean-up operation had begun ) also documented physical evidence of there having been an airliner crashed at any one of the 4 alleged crash sites. Is this too much to ask?
Footage that kills the conspiracy theories Rare footage shows WTC 7 consumed by fire Daily Mail Online
Footage that kills the conspiracy theories Rare footage shows WTC 7 consumed by fire Daily Mail Online
World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9 11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest - Popular Mechanics
NIST Manuscript Publication Search
and for the pix, do you have the date/time of when it was taken, and was it a "news" pix or one taken by an agent of we the people to document the event?
You are not giving evidence to prove the planes were not hijacked,
May I point out that the first to assert a given argument should be the first to prove it,
and in the case of 4 airliner hijackings, the mainstream media has made the assertion, but never backed it up with any real evidence.
All I ask for, is physical evidence or photographic documentation of physical evidence that clearly indicates the condition of the rubble pile at "ground zero" after the "collapse" of WTC7 ( and before the clean-up operation had begun ) also documented physical evidence of there having been an airliner crashed at any one of the 4 alleged crash sites. Is this too much to ask?
Footage that kills the conspiracy theories Rare footage shows WTC 7 consumed by fire Daily Mail Online
Footage that kills the conspiracy theories Rare footage shows WTC 7 consumed by fire Daily Mail Online
World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9 11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest - Popular Mechanics
NIST Manuscript Publication Search
and for the pix, do you have the date/time of when it was taken, and was it a "news" pix or one taken by an agent of we the people to document the event?
All I ask for, is physical evidence or photographic documentation of physical evidence that clearly indicates the condition of the rubble pile at "ground zero" after the "collapse" of WTC7 ( and before the clean-up operation had begun ) also documented physical evidence of there having been an airliner crashed at any one of the 4 alleged crash sites. Is this too much to ask?
Footage that kills the conspiracy theories Rare footage shows WTC 7 consumed by fire Daily Mail Online
Footage that kills the conspiracy theories Rare footage shows WTC 7 consumed by fire Daily Mail Online
World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9 11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest - Popular Mechanics
NIST Manuscript Publication Search
and for the pix, do you have the date/time of when it was taken, and was it a "news" pix or one taken by an agent of we the people to document the event?
Learn to run your own search.
didwtc7fallintoa tidypile initsownfootpr - wtc7lies
Why would someone need to combine the time of separate and distinct Tower fires in order to misrepresent the burn time, making it far greater than it was?
Why would someone need to post a gif of an obviously fake plane hitting the Pentagon?
I don't suppose you could post a pic of what, other than a plane, hit the Pentagon?
While you are at it, perhaps you could post some pix of what hit the WTC on 9/11/2001?
Spammy has been foaming at the mouth that "no planes were hijacked on 9/11" and could use some help. Really.
So in other words, you feel the need to change the subject rather than address the issue about the burn time.
BTW: the mainstream media was the first to assert that airliners were allegedly hijacked and as yet has failed to supply proof that said airliners existed at all.
You are being childish ... again.
You seem to forget it wasn't only the media that saw the planes that day and there are even dozens of spectators who also captured the scene in pix and film. Furthermore the MS media did not "assert that airliners were allegedly hijacked" but rather reported events, some witnessed by millions, as they unfolded.
So the obvious question is: why, if your scenarios are what actually happened on 9/11, must you lie in support of them?
The following comes from a well-known 9/11 CT website which, BTW, specifically contradicts your "research." In fact, they claim your agenda "is to discredit the larger body of 9/11 research through guilt by association with sensational and unscientific approach."
Disinformation Targeting the Skeptics
"...It may consist of ideas with no basis in evidence packaged as shocking new findings that supposedly prove the involvement of insiders... An example is the idea that Twin Towers were not hit by Flights 11 or 175 but rather by completely different objects, such as military planes with missile-firing pods."
9-11 Research Misinformation
Why would someone need to combine the time of separate and distinct Tower fires in order to misrepresent the burn time, making it far greater than it was?
Why would someone need to post a gif of an obviously fake plane hitting the Pentagon?
I don't suppose you could post a pic of what, other than a plane, hit the Pentagon?
While you are at it, perhaps you could post some pix of what hit the WTC on 9/11/2001?
Spammy has been foaming at the mouth that "no planes were hijacked on 9/11" and could use some help. Really.
So in other words, you feel the need to change the subject rather than address the issue about the burn time.
BTW: the mainstream media was the first to assert that airliners were allegedly hijacked and as yet has failed to supply proof that said airliners existed at all.
You are being childish ... again.
You seem to forget it wasn't only the media that saw the planes that day and there are even dozens of spectators who also captured the scene in pix and film. Furthermore the MS media did not "assert that airliners were allegedly hijacked" but rather reported events, some witnessed by millions, as they unfolded.
So the obvious question is: why, if your scenarios are what actually happened on 9/11, must you lie in support of them?
The following comes from a well-known 9/11 CT website which, BTW, specifically contradicts your "research." In fact, they claim your agenda "is to discredit the larger body of 9/11 research through guilt by association with sensational and unscientific approach."
Disinformation Targeting the Skeptics
"...It may consist of ideas with no basis in evidence packaged as shocking new findings that supposedly prove the involvement of insiders... An example is the idea that Twin Towers were not hit by Flights 11 or 175 but rather by completely different objects, such as military planes with missile-firing pods."
9-11 Research Misinformation
