Jump to content

The Facts of WTC PLANNED & CONTROLLED DEMOLITION


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, theo102 said:

Boring, meaning it's obvious that you have no point to make.

 

What "unfeasible nonsense" do you think I'm advocating, specifically?

 

Actually although I disagree with him on much, the point Comedy Time makes here is a good one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 440
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

911 was a huge scam. Regardless of the precise details. We all agree it was an orchestrated scam... Don't trust your Government. That we can agree on. Full stop.   

WTC Building 7 Primed for Demolition Prior to the day of September 11th 2001.   There is a video of "Lucky Larry" Silverstein, the owner of the WTC Complex, where he says he had a conversati

By elephant in the room I mean exactly what you're saying in regards to people like Silverstein and his pals. Most normies don't talk about that stuff, they just post jet fuel can't melt steel beam me

Posted Images

1 minute ago, Reet Hard said:

More gaslighting attempts and people trying to tell me what I think and what my argument is 

 

Pointing out your assumption isn't the same as me gaslighting you. I haven't tried to tell you what I think.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Reet Hard said:

Yes you did don't lie it's all there in writing remember.

 

I'll copy and paste where you did if you want.

Do it.

 

Edit:: there was a typo in my earlier post: " I haven't tried to tell you what I think." should have been " I haven't tried to tell you what you think."

 

Edited by theo102
Typo
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Reet Hard said:

I haven't assumed anything. 

Your assumption was that I was making a claim about truth when I made a claim about a theory, which is why you said that I was misusing Occam's Razor, since it says nothing about truth, as your article correctly pointed out.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Reet Hard said:

Yes you did 

 

Like I said, your name speaks for itself.

 

The point is that unless you've got an alternative theory about the flightpaths going over radar dead zones then you've got no business talking about Occam's Razor.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2001/11/03/pentagon-crash-highlights-a-radar-gap/83167fda-f291-4a5e-8960-d501c217960d/

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sheesh - get a frickin' room. Mods will be along soon I reckon, all this off topic guff.

 

@theo102 I await your overall version of 911.

@Reet Hard I await a response to my clouseau post. PLUS - Your claim it was the wrong engine verified and now a response to this post that you seemed to have missed from that link I gave you...

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/explaining-the-9-11-murray-st-engine-from-flight-175-n612ua-that-hit-wtc2.9022/

 

 

 

Source: https://plus.google.com/+FredRobel/posts/HmQ8WfDkQVj
 

Fred Robel
Aircraft & Aviation Maintenance
Apr 29, 2017

The TOBI duct, which provides cooling air to the High Pressure Turbine disk, pokes out amidst a sea of clear plastic wrap, as it encircles the engine center shaft area.

We keep the plastic wrap over the outer part of the engine, to keep from dropping things down into the combustion can, through the NGV assemblies, which ring the outside of the area.

Pratt JT9D-7R4D aircraft engine buildup.
Content from external source

20170829-114909-bii9a.jpg
 
 
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Comedy Time said:

 

Explain the holes dude. Reality cares.

 

These holes that you keep bleating on about are utterly moot. All buildings came down in a manner that is simply not consistent with the official line or "reality".

So, what kind of word salad are you serving up today?  I await.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, JacksonsGhost said:

These holes that you keep bleating on about are utterly moot.

 

Explain the holes dude. It's a fundamental issue!!

 

They were made by planes. That works. 

They were made by no planes. Doesn't work.

 

13 minutes ago, JacksonsGhost said:

All buildings came down in a manner that is simply not consistent with the official line or "reality".

 

Thank you for sharing your opinion. That has nothing to do with "no-planes".

 

13 minutes ago, JacksonsGhost said:

So, what kind of word salad are you serving up today?  I await.

 

If the use of words confuses you, shall I simplify my request?

 

I would like you to explain how columns on the WTC1/2 perimeters were blown inwards to simulate the shape of a plane.

 

Edited by Comedy Time
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/2/2020 at 1:24 PM, mishy said:

 

Here's a better analysis of the first strike. No plane shaped hole until few seconds after impact.

 

https://videopress.com/v/tyb4tbsm

 

It has nothing to do with the capabilities of the video recorder, and anyone saying so is just being dishonest.

 

tower.JPG.50fee115e5cc05eb59abdd93d4f103af.JPG

 

 

 

 

After pages and pages of waffle, here's all you need to know about the (lack of) planes on 911. No plane shaped hole at impact.

 

But feel free to carry on going round in circles. Asking how many people were involved etc is irrelevant, and not being able to answer these question is also irrelevant. Just because "no planers" can't say how many people were in on it, that for some reason means the planes were real? lol

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Comedy Time said:

I would like you to explain how columns on the WTC1/2 perimeters were blown inwards to simulate the shape of a plane.

 

I believe planes struck both buildings.  The aircraft are canards used to deflect any debate on what really happened.  It's still working very well to this very day as you so eloquently illustrate.

Edited by JacksonsGhost
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JacksonsGhost said:

 

I believe planes struck both buildings.  The aircraft are canards used to deflect any debate on what really happened.  It's still working very well to this very day as you so eloquently illustrate.

 

Dude....I agree with you totally. I'm not doing the deflecting...maybe you should address this issue at the no-plane team.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mishy said:

 

After pages and pages of waffle, here's all you need to know about the (lack of) planes on 911. No plane shaped hole at impact.

 

But feel free to carry on going round in circles. Asking how many people were involved etc is irrelevant, and not being able to answer these question is also irrelevant. Just because "no planers" can't say how many people were in on it, that for some reason means the planes were real? lol

 

 

 

Spam. Blurred video already answered. I don't care whether you agree or not.

 

How was the exterior blown inwards. 

 

Shhhhhhhhhh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...