Comment

Comment by james ha on Saturday

ya lionheart, that is supposed to be a 150 ton 757, (AA77) skimming along the ground and hitting the pentagon.

Comment by rlionhearted_3 on Saturday

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o35WC2Gm0kI&t=0s&list=PLNto... Flight 77?

Comment by Deep Space on Saturday

I meant Flight #93.

Comment by james ha on Saturday

ok flight AA77 allegedly hit the pentagon - right into the offices that were supposed to investigate the disappearance of $6 TRILLION. there were a couple of stupid plane parts lying around afterward for evidence but the grass wasn't even scratched.:

http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/killtown/penta_lawn.htm

flight UA93 was the one that passengers supposedly rallied and fought the highjackers into crashing in a field near shanksville, Pa. they made a movie about the heroic passengers who managed to call their families from cellphones - but celphones couldn't reach a cel tower at 20,000 ft at 300 mph in 2001.

flight AA11 allegedly hit the north tower and was "captured" on film accidentally by a fire truck crew who "happened" to be doing some nonsense nearby. the image of the plane was blurry and weird although everything else in the shot was crystal clear. there was a gal named edna cintron waving from the "plane shaped hole" (that had blown outward not inward), waiting to be rescued, which puts the lie to the claim of "inferno",  who was filmed by a helicopter.

flight UA175 was the one that allegedly rammed the south tower and had several videos of the ridiculous plane from various angles.

there werent "thousands of eyewitnesses". standing on a street in manhattan is like  standing at the bottom of a canyon - tall buildings all around and you can't see dick. also why would people who walked through there every day be looking at the WTC (which they must have been tired of seeing every day) looking at just the right moment to see a plane going allegedly 300+ mph (impossible at 1000 ft altitude) which they couldn't have seen anyway because as i said, walking in manhattan is like being at the bottom of a canyon.

oh ya, one "eyewitness" was a CEO of CNN who just happened to see the plane hit the WTC1 from the north, and then WTC2 from the south. impossible to see from his office much less both. a real 767 is a hollow aluminum tube with a plastic nosecone and in reality would squash like a beer can against the massive steel WTC, and then fall to the street below, which didn't happen but there was a pick-up truck driving around later with "plane parts" painted on the side of it. there is the extent of the evidence. oh they did "find" a couple of passenger seats on a building a block away as well. evidence, ha. and the 2 big towers didn't collapse - they were turned into powder from the tops down at the rate of 11 floors per second - including almost all of the massive structural steel, turned into powder. WTC7 though, it did collapse - in a classic from the bottom controlled demolition. oh all 7 of the WTC buildings were destroyed that day as well - the other smaller 4 magically exploded with no reports from the media.

Comment by Deep Space on Saturday

Before my twatter account got permanently suspended (which I don't care about) I was doing a lot of comedy about relationships.

I don't think twitter liked the fact that I pointed out the fact that human relationships don't make people happy. 

It was either that or I called out on some random psychopath to slit Nikki Haley's throat.

Not entirely sure.

Coulda been a combination of both.

Comment by Deep Space on Saturday

I knew a pilot who flew a holographic plane. He said that whenever it crashed into anything, it didn't make any sound. He always told me he thought that was weird. The discrepancy between light & sound. 

Comment by Deep Space on Saturday

Focus on who did it. 

Comment by Deep Space on Saturday

Occam's razor (or Ockham's razor) is a principle from philosophy. Suppose there exist two explanations for an occurrence. In this case the simpler one is usually better. Another way of saying it is that the more assumptions you have to make, the more unlikely an explanation is. 

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor

Comment by Chris of the family Masters on Saturday

nameless "witnesses" and sources (that can't be revealed).

In law they're called 'hearsay' - not admissible in court.

Comment by Deep Space on Saturday

@Michael Miller - I know it's stupid. Oh! the sun rose this morning. - I don't have the name or testimony of anyone who saw it. LOL! People like to believe weird shit because it seems to be more fun than reality.

But anyway, 9/11 was an inside job.

Steel-Framed building don't fall at Free-Fall Speed (unless they're controlled-demoed).

Focus on shit like that.

Comment by Michael Miller on Saturday

Gotta love all these nameless "witnesses" and sources (that can't be revealed).

Comment by Deep Space on Saturday

Ok so why fly planes filled with people into (who the fuck knows where?) the ocean?

when you could just easily crash their planes into buildings instead of using holograms (which is unsubstantiated tech at that level)

where timing would have to be perfect to synchronize with the sounds of the impact explosions right on queue while thousands of people are watching?

And why not use a hologram for WTC7?

Maybe because Flight 77 got shot down & couldn't aquire its' target?)

(just maybe)

So why use holograms for WTC 1 & 2 but NOT 7?

What's the pay-off to using a hologram where everything can go wrong (like finding the location of the debris of the actual planes) verses using real planes that have been fitted with remote override tech (remember all the airports were all maintained by israel.

All 9/11 Airports Serviced by One Israeli Owned Company

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/ICTS.html

I don't wanna insult you Chris, but on this issue I feel like I'm talking to a Flat-Earther.

Comment by Chris of the family Masters on Saturday

Was it one witch crashed leaving little ditch with no plain parts, bodies or luggage visible?

Comment by Deep Space on Saturday

Come on Chris. Just because someone has come to the conclusion that real planes crashed into the towers doesn't mean they believe the 'official story'. Certainly Flight 77 wasn't a hologram. More than likely it was destined for WTC7 before it was shot down. But they demoed it anyway.

Comment by james ha on Friday

ok, here is a link to an analyses of every single image of so-called UA175, the boeing 767 that supposedly hit the WTC south tower. it is pretty irrelevant now after all this time but some of yalls might find it interesting.:

https://tinyurl.com/yg2uwzg

Comment by james ha on Friday

oh i always assumed that WTC7 committed suicide in a fit of grief over the loss of his older and taller brothers.

Comment by Chris of the family Masters on Friday

Thanks james, it's amazing most people believe in the official story....

Comment by Deep Space on Friday

What happened to the hologram that was supposed hit WTC7? LOL!

Comment by james ha on Friday

i think holograms could maybe be used to fool people in real time. 9/11 was easy for them - they sent out a squad of guys to film the WTC explosions - 1 for the first and maybe 4 for the second tower. then they inserted lame-ass computer generated images of planes into the explosion footage at the appropriate moments - and i mean lame-ass. so lame that the 'planes' were gliding into the tower like a ghost, with no crash physics whatsoever, and then the explosion. another depicted the plane as black as night, even though it was bright sun that day. another angle had the plane all crooked like an old man with arthritis. every one of them was ridiculous looking.

notice that we never see the planes hitting the towers and the towers collapsing on TV - if muslims had actually high-jacked planes and rammed them into both WTCs causing their collapse, then we would be force-fed those images 24/7 on TV to remind us that uncle samuel is the good guy and middle east arabs are bad guys - total 24/7 - but we are not. you have to look pretty hard to find footage of planes hitting WTCs and WTCs turning into powder. because simply viewing them a few times puts the lie to the official 9/11 fairytale.

the TV media was totally complicit, especially CNN, NBC and ABC. surprisingly not FOX nor CBS - in fact cbs' dan rather actually said "look at that, those towers are being controlled demolition-ed." still everybody looked the other way,  everybody. except rosie o'donell and trump. they had the balls to speak out originally but they have both recanted since.

Comment by Chris of the family Masters on Friday

The hologram technology development has enabled corporate forces to potentially fake alien event. There are some bits on the net. Mind boggling.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page