So your taking that report as gospel? and the point loosechange made was not of mismatching parts, more the fact there didnt even appear to of been a plane there in the first place, which is backed up by the photos taken just after the impact.
9/11 Third Tower mystery "solved".
- Thread starter checjb
- Start date
- Status
So your taking that report as gospel? and the point loosechange made was not of mismatching parts, more the fact there didnt even appear to of been a plane there in the first place, which is backed up by the photos taken just after the impact.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Dec 2009
- Posts
- 13,052
- Location
- london
you can watch september clues for information on TV Fakery on 9/11, he make some mistakes but points out a lot of the obvious edits and fakeness.
when i get home if i have the energy and you lot don't laugh and actually care to be educated on tv fakery i will show you how a plane can not enter a building and leave the building intact with it being half way inside.
just not possible = fake.
also check out pumpitout's phone calls to the people that took the video and see how many don't want to talk about their videos etc.
believe it.
when i get home if i have the energy and you lot don't laugh and actually care to be educated on tv fakery i will show you how a plane can not enter a building and leave the building intact with it being half way inside.
just not possible = fake.
also check out pumpitout's phone calls to the people that took the video and see how many don't want to talk about their videos etc.
believe it.
No, not gospell. I have read that, I have seen loose change and a thousand and one other videos and have come to the conclusion. the official story is correct.
If you read it you would see the pictures of the heavy damage of wtc7.
there are plenty of pictures of parts of the plane.
And how do you get the cut down lamp posts and generator with a missile.
Because a plane doing 500mph is going to leave lots of debris on the front lawn. what debris which is left (which wont be a hole lot) will be on the inside of the pentagon and yes there are photos of this debris. Just trying to find them.
Last edited:
That's fake, you can tell by the pixels
See this is the problem, ive read both sides and formed my opinion. i accept it is nothing more than opinion and get annoyed by people who have only read the "official" version of things but discredit it being planned. and more so idiots like yourself who tell people what they have read or watched is lies and fake when they are relying on blind truth themselves in order to believe their version of what happened.
As for the lamp post and generator id have to look into which bit you are specifically talking about but just as easily as im sure you could list 50 things which could disprove it being planned, i could list an equal amount which suggest it could have been planned, each of us without really knowing our sources are 100% factual.
How can you have done "research" and not know about the lampposts and generator?
they are key points of both sides arguments
ROFL. Loose change says loads of stuff and as I have shown are missed out or lied about. As you do not know about the lampposts how have you researched it. This is what CT do, they live out a large proportion of information, lie saying there is no photos of debris, take quotes out of context. If you spend teh time and go through each point it can easily be discredited one by one.
How can lamposts be planned, witness saying a plane hit them, and they are cut down at eh right heights and width. in front of people.
Last edited:
You don't know what free fall is do you.
"Free fall describes any motion of a body where mavity is the only or dominant force acting upon it"
Which means if you drop something from any hight it will fall till it meets another object.
So that discounts buckle. Buckle is not free fall. And if it did buckle then it would fall away not free fall..
This is why most people in the US don't belive nist.
How can you have done "research" and not know about the lampposts and generator?
they are key points of both sides arguments
because my "research" was watched about 4 years ago and i dont remember every last second of it off the top of my head, and i dont have the time to watch it all through again for the bit about the lamposts and generator just to please some moron on here. but just to indulge you the only bit i recall without any help of lamposts was how it was noted that a jet that size coming in at the speed it did, did NOT rip up lamposts and power lines considering how low it was flying in order to hit the pentagon.
I know what free fall is. i also know we did not have senstive equipment rigged up in wtc7 to measure nano seconds.
Yes the building could reach near free fall speeds with buckling. Due to the sheer weight. If we had sensitive equipment you would find that it was not at free fall speed and just off. But we only have video footage to go by. Which can do that detail.
It's not really "every last second" it's like 85% of all the talk surrounding the pentagon....
Ok so what your saying is that, im assuming you have read "eye witness" reports that lamposts were knocked over and a generator hit? right? which must mean a plane hit?
then choosing not to look at the actual pictures with your own eyes which shows no real sign of a plane or anything resembling a plane hitting the pentagon?
ye smart move!
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 1,979
- Location
- Way up High.
So this comes from the BBC who quoted that wtc7 had collaspsed before it did....lol. And they not only stated it collapsed even thought the picture behind the newscaster showed it had not. Oh yes a very manic news day but thumbs up to anyone who can predict the first metal structured building to collapse from fire anywhere and they told us before it happened. What a F joke.
What did they do with the plane they stole? Also, why steal a plane if you don't intend to use it? Also where is all the debris of the pentagon from the explosion? Small hole with blast inside would mean that the vast majority of the wreckage of the pentagon would be outside surely?
That's pancake not free fall. As I keep on tell you free fall is when NOTHING IS THERE TO STOP IT.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_fall
Apart from steel buildings have collapsed before. Madrid tower being one of many. That was from pure fire with no structural damage. Also in less time than the WTC.
- Status