My fellow Trenchers,
Over the years I’ve commented on thousands of articles on numerous subjects on FTT. We tend to agree the majority of the time, mainly because for those who are awake (Trenchers), most of what we discuss is fairly easily discernible, at least as far as being able to fathom the truth behind the ‘official’ b.s. It’s what we do, and we’re damn good at it.
There IS, however, one topic that we’ve been quite divided on, and it has been a point of contention for as long as I’ve been posting here. That would be the planes vs. no planes (Twin Towers only) on 9/11. So today, I’d like to ask for everyone’s vote (a REAL vote, one that can be tallied up visually…no shhhh – secret ballots) on this matter… and no, unlike the so-called ‘government’s’ ‘voting’ system, dead people aren’t allowed to vote.
[poll id=”4″]I only have one request… that any replies to other comments be devoid of any foul language or name-calling (yes, I’m well aware that I have numerous priors in both departments). So let’s try to keep it civil, okay folks?
Have a great frickin’ Friday, Trenchers!
# 1 NWO Hatr
Too many anomalies in both the visual and physical data. 🙄
***NO PLANES. CONTROLLED DEMOLITION, a well planned and executed job***
Hey y’all just letting you know I’m the vote for planes, when 9/11 happened I was in 7th grade, my dad being in the know heard about it and picked me up immediately, I spent the rest of the day watching tv…I had limited internets back in the day. Now I haven’t watched the cia Lear video yet but I did watch the “wobble” video with the planes violently shaking. I also began diving into 9:11 that very day thinking – even at 7th grade level – wtf ? I understand in a lot of the interviews no one actually saw planes (ground zero etc) but as for the video angles and such of other wise vetted people, you see planes. No plane at penta gram, none in shanksville, but the twin towers ? Idk I’ve never heard of a better explaination. Cgi wasn’t that good and holograms ?? Maybe but still not sure. To this day I challenge anyone on most anything 9/11 and it usaually ends in my favor ( coulda been a politician lol). All in all I agree 100 it was played out by Jews and screws within the fed but as for planes in nyc, everything I’ve seen makes me think the planes were empty remote pioleted, and used as the big scary explosive to hide the fact that towers n and s were packed to the gills with thermite… Either way the planes were of little siginigance save shock and awe.
I saw some vid a short while back that showed the antenna on a tower turn to dust and disintegrate.. It also showed a massive hole in the middle of building 6…
https://youtu.be/aoAa_B2kRuo
https://youtu.be/wkwmtVqIpoM
I think it was taken out with space based weapons… imo
No plane wreckage at the alleged Shanksville site; withheld evidence at the Pentagon; massive obfuscation of facts surrounding that day by “authorities”.
I don’t know what did happen, but I do know it didn’t happen as we’ve been led to believe and since every single politician and main news source has access to as much, if not more verifiable information as any of us, yet refuse to question the official narrative, they are all complicit and guilty of misleading us.
To me it seems far-fetched that planes didn’t hit the buildings. What kind of planes, and whether they were remotely piloted, are separate questions.
I have a very hard time believing that those buildings fell straight downward because of the damage from the planes and/or fire. And WTC 7 is a huge red flag. Controlled demolition appears likely.
I know for a FACT that Israelis had foreknowledge of the attacks. The incident with the “five dancing Israelis” makes that clear enough. They would not have been set up to film the WTC from a perfect vantage point at the perfect time if they hadn’t known something was going to happen. And obviously the Israelis stood to gain more from 9/11 than anyone else. The USS Liberty comes to mind…
Hey #1, from all of the arguments I’ve seen over the years since 911, I voted no planes. Lack of plane crash evidence at the Pentagon, Shanksville and at the twin towers nailed it for me. The videos are just a “production” for the most part. Do you think they staged Matt Lauer’s reaction live on the Today Show, with him sitting there reporting that an “accidental” plane crash into the first tower had just happened when the 2nd plane hit on “live” TV. It certainly helped the “shock and awe” factor. The media would have to have been complicit if you agree with the no plane side of this argument. I don’t see how they pulled it off if the MSM wasn’t in on it.
The poll results only indicate that more education is needed, because people are believing disinformation.
Everyone’s entitled to their opinion, but unfortunately, none of them trump the scientific proof.
“It’s easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled”
Mark Twain
The planes that struck were likely hijacked by Flight Termination Systems (FTS) to ensure they would strike their targets. This ensured they would pull nearly impossible maneuvers to do so.
And what a coincidence! Pentagon multi-trillion dollar thief and Israeli neocon Dov Zakheim was CEO of System Planning Corporation and manufactures the Flight Termination Systems!
Voted no planes simply because I really don’t know but tend to vote the other way from what the MSM posts and serious lack of evidence of plane parts on the ground. Yep I’d really like to know the truth about this. Saw a video once that supposedly proved no planes could have hit the buildings, but I have no link to this video. Either way,planes or no planes did not cause the Twin Towers to fall.
I believe that planes did hit the towers, but not the ones reported. I remember reading many years ago the real planes were at a hanger somewhere. There’s so much disinformation out there, who knows. I do not believe however that planes brought down the twin towers. I’m in the controlled demolition camp, building 7 sealed the deal when Jane burgermeister reported on the BBC it collapsed while it stood behind her. Not to mention, an office fire has never collapsed a building to my knowledge.
What hit the pentagon? Probably a missle, I’ve yet to see clear footage. And the lawn showed hardly, if any debris. We’ve all heard of the dancing Isrealies, and when apprehended said it was the Palestinians who did it. And they were there to record the event. Foreknowledge. Inside job. It’s my hope that someday we will know the whole truth. We have this monstrosity of a police state thanks to that day.
The video shows the plane (aluminum vs. steel and concrete) slicing into the building like a Wiley Coyote cartoon……………come on guys.
I believe something hit the towers but not planes due to the lack of plane parts. Controlled demolition seems most likely. The explanation for the plane that hit the ground was that it hit so fast and hard that it buried itself. Right! That statement alone should tell you that this whole thing is BS.
911 was an inside Jewish handjob!
Goddamint people…
What part of fkng handjob don’t you people fkng understand!
🙂
I’m NOT going to sift through all of the evidence and lies again, because I’ve done it too many times.
A different approach would be to explain WHY they want you to believe their lies. What’s their motive for trying to convince people that no planes were used, and how far would they go to accomplish it?
The entire “war on terror” is based on the 9-11 event. All of the wars we’ve since been engaged in, all of the spying, the TSA, the DHS, and the hundred new laws written could never have been passed if that event hadn’t transpired.
The entire New World Order plan relies on the public believing that we were attacked on 9-11. All the marbles, the whole ball of wax, the whole nine yards.. in short.. EVERYTHING the Zionists have worked toward for a hundred years is wrapped up in the believability of this one false-flag event, which was sloppy as hell because they’re not used to having their false-flag events questioned.
In comes a “9-11 Truth movement”, which continually gains followers, simply because the attack was so sloppy, and ill-prepared, and they realize that the country’s freedom is riding on the truth. The only way to stop these people from spreading the truth is to discredit them. First they’re ignored, then they’re mocked, but they continue to gain followers because there are just too many holes in the official story.
How would YOU stop them? You can’t arrest them all, you can’t kill them all, and in fact, you can’t even find them all, so what could you possibly do to make the general public ignore these people?
And getting the general public to ignore these people is a top priority, because 9-11 was the beginning of their “end game”. There’s no turning back after that, and all the shekels are riding on people believing it.
Your only hope is to discredit the “9-11 truth movement”. You have to make people think they’re all nuts, or you’ll lose everything, so you please tell me how you’re going to do it?
The ONLY way to discredit these people, who have all the facts and science on their side, is to get them all to say something that you can use to make them all look silly. Am I right about that, or is there a different way?
And THAT is why professional liars and propagandists like Gerard Holmgren are insisting no planes were used.
NOW…. what makes it more obvious, is that whether or not planes were used is irrelevant to spreading the truth. Anyone working in the 9-11 truth movement can easily point to a ton of other evidence to prove we were lied to, and just leave that facet of the story as an “unknown” for the purposes of their political activism. But NO….. that’s not what they’re doing, are they?
They’re drumming away on this one detail of all that happened on that day, because the purpose is to discredit anyone who repeats it, and convince the general public to see that the official story is the more sensible of the two options they’re given. (19 Arab Hi-jackers, or No planes? …. The no planes story sounds crazy as hell, so I guess the 19 Arab hijackers did it)
So forget the planes, or the lack of them, and instead concentrate on the molten steel found in the basements of all three buildings that collapsed that day. The presence of molten steel is proof that explosives were used to take down the buildings because of the temperature required to produce what was seen, and that can be confirmed in any library. FORGET THE PLANES (or the lack of them)
mr. lear convinced me of “no planes”. his affidavit was convincing.
Do you have a link to Mr. Lear’s affidavit? If I have time, I’d like to have a look at it. Thanks.
Is Mr. Lear the main proponent of the “no plane” theory today?
(Gerard Holmgren the Jew was peddling it 10 years ago, but it’s still the name I still associate with it).
http://www.fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/9-11-John-Olson-Lear-Affadavit-11-22-09.pdf
I posted the entire affidavit on your article as well, but I guess you missed that…
http://www.fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/no-planes/111543
Thanks, Hatr
There were planes…engines were found that don’t match civilian airliners ..they were drone military aircraft . one person saw a plane that had a blue Philips circular logo on it . they were doing wargames that pitted soviet vs NATO…..the NATO symbol is the above mentioned symbol.
yes, there were planes, and there’s no shortage of proof that there were planes, but being out of touch with the 9-11 crowd for so long, I don’t know how much of it has disappeared over a decade.
I think a lot of the original “9-11 Truth movement” disappeared, like I did, and a lot of what was known at the time disappeared with them.
It seems like the new truth movers are being stalled by the same lies once again. (the “no plane” theory disappeared, and came back, possibly because I wasn’t around to argue against it.
LOL!
There may have been commercial sized jets, but if you think any hit a building that day you’re f-in retarded.
Just as retarded as the people who think 19 arabs or that cell phone calls where made from over 5000ft in a moving plane over PA in 2001.
The laws of physics are immutable.
Some of you think the physics of a piloted plane vs. a UAV of the same size and shape are different. I feel sorry for you. It must suck to be so dumb you cant’ know you are. you are the blue pill.
While I do not know the truth about every detail of what actually did happen I am learned enough to remove the ‘not physically possible’ from the muck of lies.
IF I HAD TO GUESS…(or was writing as a thriller novel)
I’d say mossad, CIA, MI-6 probably where the ‘henchmen’ of the power elites. (cause war and implement patriot act style legislation)
I think the real planes where landed and emptied.
NYC-Tomahawk cruise missiles where fired from other aircraft and where cloaked with holographic tech. These slammed into a transponder pre-placed in the towers probably on some type of fuel tank. The interiors where thermate/ thermite laced and via proximity detectors, micro nukes where detonated in the basement to break the foundation.
Pentagon- a jet on approach to Regan Airport fired a tomahawk with an autonomous remote computer route for desired impact on the other-side of the building.
PA- was because american hippsters love to think that ” “WE” fought these bastards and stopped them”
more PHYSICALLY possible than the official story.
Got a great story for you all…
I used to work for a demolition company back in 2001. It was dirty work, but it paid well, and I’ve always liked blowing sh#t up anyway, ever since I was a kid. So I get to work one day, and the foreman is pissed as hell because someone forgot to order the demolition charges on time for us to receive them. After giving the matter some serious thought, he headed down to the nearest sporting goods store and bought eight aluminum bats. After arriving at the concrete steel reinforced skyscraper, the foreman positioned two of us on each corner of that building, We then proceeded to pummel that sucker into a pile of rubble in record time.
The story has a sad ending, however. We were hit with a lawsuit the very next day.
Wrong building.
Oh, I forgot one thing.
There wasn’t so much as a single molecule left of those bats to be found anywhere once we were done.
That’s F’N hilarious #1! How does a guy tell ya, “Yup, that’s the building right there.”, and still have anything left once the lawsuits were done with him?
LOL… simply amazing what aluminum can do, ain’t it, Millard?
So, were you one of those kids back in the sixties that got the chemical kit for Christmas? lol
I was just informed that I do not have permission to edit this comment? WTF?
True life experiences are always the best.
Ya just can’t make this shit up.
Fkng hillarious.
Yes, now I remember the Lear affidavit.
THERE’S A BIG F&*KIN DIFFERENCE BETWEEN “NO PLANES HIT THE TOWERS” AND “NO 767” HIT THE TOWERS.
I agree with Mr Lear, but NO WHERE does he say that no planes hit the towers, and his entire discussion of the event, deals ONLY with 757s and 767s.
The fuselage segment found in the wreckage was definitely NOT from a 767, and no one disputes that. (and if it were planted there before the event, it would have been pulverized, and it couldn’t have been planted there after the event without may witnesses seeing it done, so it was from the PLANE that HIT THE TOWER.
Many credible witnesses, much photographic evidence, physical evidence, and look closely at the hole made by the plane. You can see the beams bent inward. There were no explosives on the outside of the building prior to the plane hitting them, and explosives on the inside would have bent them outward.
How can aluminum wings cut steel beams?? Once again.. when calculating the shearing force of an object, an encapsulated liquid at high speeds has the properties of a solid. The fuel inside the wing provided the strength to cut the beams. You’re NOT dealing with hollow aluminum tubes for purposes of these shearing-force calculations.
(you want to research “fluid dynamics” to confirm this)
LOL… you’ve got no one to blame but yourself for this one, JR.
It was your comment alone on this article that prompted me to post this poll.
http://www.fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/f4-phantom-jet-hits-concrete-wall-at-500-mph/151688
You’re 100% on the money in the vast majority of your comments on other subjects, but your cognitive dissonance on this topic never ceases to amaze/amuse me.
Thanks for the laugh. 😀
Hey #1, another point. At the Pentagon, the wings of the plane didn’t even break the windows in the adjoining offices. Just one round hole in the Budget Analyst’s office.
I do believe most know something smells “fishy” regarding 911. But when you appoint the perpetrators to investigate themselves and, by golly, it was Osama Bin Laden, directing the attack on his laptop in Tora Bora, what do you expect?
“THERE’S A BIG F&*KIN DIFFERENCE BETWEEN “NO PLANES HIT THE TOWERS” AND “NO 767” HIT THE TOWERS.”
Wrong again, JR.
“Former CIA and commercial pilot John Lear has come forward and sworn an affidavit stating that the Twin Towers were not bought to the ground by planes crashing into them.
In his expert opinion the official version of events that claims two planes crashed into the towers is actually “physically impossible.”
http://www.fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/cia-pilot-swears-oath-planes-did-not-bring-towers-down-on-911/151664
Try to keep up, brother. 🙄
Hatr… again, he’s saying no 767 hit the towers, and planes didn’t bring down the buildings.
Agreed on both points. Something other than a 767 hit them, and explosives brought them down.
I’ll load the video later, but here again, you have to be careful of what he’s actually saying. As far as what’s written in the text is concerned, he’s still not saying ‘no planes hit the buildings’
he’s saying “the official version of events is impossible” because the official version involves 767s — he’s not saying it’s impossible that two planes hit the buildings.
Why on earth would it be impossible for planes to hit buildings?
I think you have to read more carefully.
Okay — I watched the movie, and this Lear guy definitely did claim no planes were used.
It just means he’s a lying sack of schit, still working for the government, and was called upon to spread a little disinfo. (and he made a few other false statements in there: “I don’t believe you can remotely control an aircraft the size of a 767” … all of which are made with remote-control capability built in as standard equipment, and he should know that.)
The alleged professor of engieering mechanics (Dr. Judy Wood, a known BS artist) claims that the “TIPS of the wings couldn’t cut the beam BECAUSE THEY HELD NO FUEL” (thereby confirming that the rest of the wing could cut the columns).
ANY theory has to address all the available data, and no one in the no-plane crew has addressed the hole in the side of the building itself, with columns bent inward, with anything other than sci-fi weapons that allegedly exist.
The holograph machine discussed by Lear is “what the military wants to acquire by 2025”, and only flashes a “momentary” projection in a given area. As of the making of the video, it was only on the DARPA wish-list, and still wasn’t capable of producing planes flying through the sky.
(remember — we’re not talking about TV here. There were many eye-witnesses to the second plane. Only the first one caught them by surprise)
It would appear that some of the most intelligent people in the country (Trenchers) disagree with you, JR.
No Planes (75%, 54 Votes)
Planes (25%, 18 Votes)
Total Voters: 72
“It just means he’s a lying sack of schit, still working for the government, and was called upon to spread a little disinfo.”
Sorry, JR. John Lear’s EXPERT assessment of what a plane CAN and CAN’T do holds FAR more weight with me than someone’s OPINION who knows ZIP about aviation. Have you ever flown a plane? Even if you have, it damn sure wasn’t an airliner.
Something you just did really pisses me off. That’s an OLD Cheka/NKVD/Gestapo tactic. When your argument/evidence is weak, DISCREDIT EVERYONE ELSE.
Then only you’re right.
By default.
Y is it ? Everything is so real till it isn’t? It’s exactly the same but different !
Roll it over hit rewind,play it again? Time stops for no one. Slow mo all the time trying to make sure everything makes perfect sense till there is a different perspective. Cut paste,make another version of the, for real deal and yes It’s amusing. To much info bout chit that don’t make perfect sense.
Watch September clues. If you still feel that planes were used, take the gun and use it on yourself….
My opinion was and of course still is- this OP was far too critical to actually use planes, much less dipshit coke head arabs. Missiles, covered up by TV trickery masking the actual objects is how it was done. End of discussion. Watch some football this Sunday and let me know if your palm reaches your forehead when you see how easy it is to superimpose a yellow line onto the playing field the way they do? Going through players isn’t it? I’m not even going to get into Mechanics of Materials, or Frosh physics……
Planes/no planes makes no difference now. We know who the players are and they’re still hiding behind their desks in D.C. and Tel Aviv or on their own private island they purchased with the money they stole.
#1, what do we do about it is a better question.
“It would appear that some of the most intelligent people in the country (Trenchers) disagree with you, JR.”
This is a questionable claim, at best, because I’m constantly seeing these “most intelligent people in the world” falling for some of the basest propaganda and disinfo tactics. (the “no planes” nonsense only being the tip of the iceberg)
“Sorry, JR. John Lear’s EXPERT assessment of what a plane CAN and CAN’T do holds FAR more weight with me than someone’s OPINION who knows ZIP about aviation.”
Once again, Hatr, you need to work on your reading comprehension skills, because EVERYTHING I read on John Lear’s “expert” assessment dealt with a 767, and NO ONE, has claimed that a 767 hit the towers. HIS “EXPERT ASSESSMENT” MEANS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING BECAUSE IT DEALS EXCLUSIVELY WITH A PLANE THAT WE KNOW WAS NOT USED.
Secondly, all of his aviation credentials prove absolutely NOTHING about his honesty, and that fact that he’s a rich Jew who has spent much of his life working for the government definitely calls it into question.
Thirdly, you’re going back to unscientific poll results to make your argument rather than addressing the facts:
How did “no planes” blow a hole in the side of the building with columns bent inward?
How did this hologram technology deceive eye-witnesses who watched the second plane hit the tower?
How did all of the allegedly photo-shopped or GCI images of the planes that allegedly weren’t there wind up in independent footage of the event?
Why haven’t we seen any of the hologram technology, or the secret weapons allegedly used to blow holes in the building before or after 9-11? Can someone make a hologram plane fly across the sky today? If so, why hasn’t this technology, or the secret weaponry shown up in any of the may wars we’re engaged in fifteen years later?
The “no planes” theory requires all the major news agencies to be part of the plot BEFORE it happened, because they had footage to show the public immediately after the event (if not live as the second plane hit). If they were part of the plot before the event transpired, why did they spend the morning discussing explosives in the buildings, which they afterward spent years denying?
And, possibly what makes the whole “no plane” theory look silliest, is the simple question “why would they not use planes?” They would have to engage this miraculous and mysterious hologram machine somewhere, and then blow holes in the buildings to make it look like planes hit them, somehow alter all of the TV and independent footage of the planes, and then arrange for a bunch of witnesses to lie about seeing planes. WOULDN’T IT BE A HELL OF A LOT EASIER TO FLY A REMOTE-CONTROLLED PLANE (drone) INTO THE BUILDING? That alone is enough to make this entire “no plane” theory look sillier than shit.
“Something you just did really pisses me off. That’s an OLD Cheka/NKVD/Gestapo tactic. When your argument/evidence is weak, DISCREDIT EVERYONE ELSE.”
I”m not discrediting anyone; these are legitimate questions that the “no plane” theory doesn’t address.
Now…we went through all this about a year ago. Have you since then looked into the ability of a fuel-filled wing to sever the columns?
You’re making bad jokes about it right on this page (After giving the matter some serious thought, he headed down to the nearest sporting goods store and bought eight aluminum bats), but if you ever did the actual math, you’d see one of the “no planers” biggest lies exposed, but instead of looking into this for yourself, you just decided to keep on believing what you were told. (even though some of the “no planers” (Lear, and Wood) themselves admit that the fuel-filled wings could sever the beams, and only the tips couldn’t. This matter is irrelevant, because since we don’t know what kind of plane was used, we don;t know where the tips would have hit. Okay?
SOMETHING YOU DID PISSES ME OFF…… YOU’RE BELIEVING WHATEVER YOU’RE TOLD WITHOUT LOOKING INTO THE FACTS YOURSELF…. or you’d understand exactly how aluminum wings can sever steel columns, which fact exposes all of the “no planers” for the BS artists they are.
I did all of this ten years ago, and the reason I left the “9-11 Truth Movement” is because it became an endless battle against the Jews of the “9-11 Bullshit Movement” over this “no plane” nonsense, the mini-nukes, the holograms, the Woolworth missiles, and all manner of nonsense designed to make all of us look like idiots. Guess what? They won. The entire 9-11 truth movement now does look like a gang of idiots, because they believe nonsense without looking into the veracity of people’s claims.
Now.. once again… Did you, over the last year, even bother to research the ability of a fuel-laden airplane wing to sever the building’s steel columns?
I think not, because if you did, you would have caught the “no planers” in their biggest lie, and hopefully stopped believing them, and wouldn’t have made the joke you did (above).
If people refuse to do their own research, and instead believe whatever they’re told, there’s absolutely nothing I can do for them. It’ll be “no planes” today, “mini-nukes” tomorrow, and God only knows what the next day.
What the poll results confirm is that we’re definitely NOT the “smartest people in the world”
I’m done with 9-11. I was done with it a decade ago, because deceit and lies are ALL our enemy does, and there’s nothing I can do to stop people from believing it. Like our second article rights, it’s become an endless process of bickering with Jews, and our side still has too may people who believe them, and believe the TV.
I spent years just getting 911truth.org to admit there were explosions in the buildings (which they didn’t do until 2004, after I exposed them for the shills they are). Like I said above, they have all the marbles riding on the believability of this event. They’re NOT going to stop trying to discredit everyone who questions it.
If the “no plane” theory isn’t just another attempt to discredit truthers, then what are they doing to discredit us? (Do you think they’re giving up?)
I’ve spent all the time on this that I’m going to. If you, or anyone else wants to believe that no planes hit the towers, you can cling to the nonsense like a religion as far as I’m concerned, but I’m done wallowing in the stupidity of it all.
“YOU’RE BELIEVING WHATEVER YOU’RE TOLD WITHOUT LOOKING INTO THE FACTS YOURSELF…. ”
You STILL don’t get it, JR.
I’ve seen two completely different videos shot from two different locations that I’m positive you’ve never seen, so this has NOTHING to do with “believing what I’ve been told”, it has to do with what I’ve SEEN with my own eyes, O.K? And no, don’t ask me to produce them, because they’ve been scrubbed from the internet for years (it’s been my experience that they DON’T scrub the b.s. information from the net, only the TRUTH). But the fact remains that I HAVE seen them, and they were enough to convince me of the fact that NO PLANES HIT THOSE BUILDINGS.
Now, I’ve stated this before, and I’ll say AGAIN… IF it could be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt what really transpired as far as plans/no planes, and the proof were available (but unseen as yet), I would unequivocally LITERALLY BET MY LIFE THERE WERE NO PLANES, BASED ON THE EVIDENCE I’VE SEEN. This is NOT bullsh#t, I’ve NEVER made any such claim about ANY OTHER TOPIC on this site before.
So, I guess the question here is… WOULD YOU LITERALLY BET YOUR LIFE THAT THOSE WERE PLANES WE APPEARED TO SEE HIT THOSE TOWERS ON 9/11?????
Be honest (if you can).
btw… “What the poll results confirm is that we’re definitely NOT the “smartest people in the world”
Unfortunately (in your case only), you’ve left me no choice but to concur.
Hatr…. I’m sorry to sound offensive, but I’ve lost my patience on this issue.
I WILL BET MY LIFE ON PLANES HITTING THE BUILDINGS, BECAUSE I KNOW PEOPLE WHO WATCHED IT HAPPEN … LIVE .. NOT ON FILM.
You should not base any opinion on a few pieces of video footage, but instead look at the total of combined evidence. Any theory has to address all the evidence available.
If you look at the discs I sent you, you’ll find a high-resolution, original photo of the second plane approach — High-resolution is important, because it can be zoomed in upon to the point where you can see that it hasn’t been doctored in any way.
There are 2000 professional architects and engineers looking into this now, and not one of them questions a plane’s ability to sever the columns (this is one of the main claims of the “no planers” that’s easily exposed as a lie), and even a Dr. Wood and Mr. Lear now only state that the tips of the wings couldn’t cut the beams. (possibly because I did de-bunk this a decade ago)
“I’ve seen two completely different videos shot from two different locations that I’m positive you’ve never seen, so this has NOTHING to do with “believing what I’ve been told”, it has to do with what I’ve SEEN with my own eyes, O.K?”
You didn’t see shit with your own eyes. What you saw was two videos, which could easily have been fabricated, and if they’re videos that I’ve never seen, it’s most likely that they were, because I looked through all the evidence that was available at the time.
Remote controlled drones flew into the towers coinciding with perfectly timed explosives to bring the towers down. (Building 7, still no explanation other than controlled demolition) A cruise missile hit the Pentagon.
There, argument settled! I’ve seen all the videos, reviewed tons of research and articles over the years, and that’s my 2 cents worth. And I’m smarter than the average bear!
Remote controlled “drones” the size of a commercial jet still cant go 500mph at sea level.
ANY plane that size would rip apart from barometric pressure at that speed.
Several years ago I realized I was saturated with, and could no longer read, another article on molten steel.
It was at that very moment that I moved from what and how all the way to WHO? Oh how the floodgates opened.
.