Honestly, how dumb can you conspiracy theorists be? You see an airplane hit a building and refuse to believe it happened. Go get professional help idiots.
The same plane is photographed from different angles and conspiracy liars want to pretend that the PLANE attacked the building from different angles. Such agenda-driven stupidity is sad rather than funny.
It's odd that in every newscast none of the reporters ever see the plane approaching... None of them ever react until a few moments AFTER the explosion.
@HPislegend248 No shit, but in many of the videos the plane is visible for over 2 seconds. Not only that, there is not one video of a person present at the scene who sees the plane incoming, even though 1000's of eyes are staring up at the sky after the first impact. Oh, I suppose seeing an event in person has a 2 second delay as well...
@corruptedsilence Oh gimme a break. In any wide shot video, the plane is a pinprick in the beackground. Seeing as most people are looking at the plume of smoke and gaping hole in the South Tower, it is natural that they didn't register it. They weren't scanning the background for more planes.
OK there has literally been 50 TV specials this week on 9/11. Are you serious;y suggesting that not one of them has an account from an eyewitness in New York that day. Are you serious?
@HPislegend248 LOL. Pinprick in the background? Not true at all. Maybe you're that oblivious to your surroundings, but most people are not. Surely someone would have heard the plane and looked around for it.
No, I'm not suggesting that. You're misinterpreting what I said. There is no video or audio footage, civilian or newscast, that shows a witness seeing or hearing the incoming plane. If you can find one, I'll gladly admit I'm wrong. Until then, it's still strange.
@corruptedsilence Have you been watching the news? Generally when the news anchor is speaking, the footage is muted so you can hear them. So no, they couldn't have heard it in the news room. Watch the news sometime.
youtube.com/watch?v=L5gERa8jhIc
youtube.com/watch?v=zMseIGe-YvE
Both show people hearing, seeing and reacting to plane before it hit, both by civilians and CNN.
@HPislegend248 Once again, no shit. But when I talked about hearing the plane, I clearly meant witnesses present at the scene, as a news anchors' surroundings wouldn't include the towers or an incoming plane. :P
Your first link is sounds valid, but has obvious visual problems. Notice how lit up the towers are by the sun, yet the plane is black and appears to not be hit by sunlight.
In the second clip it seems to me that the crowd was reacting to the fireball, not the plane.
@corruptedsilence Of course the plane is dark. As you can see from any footage of the 2nd plane, it curves in to the left as it hits the WTC. So they would be seeing the bottom of the plane as the footage is taken from the plane's right side. And plus you can see the sun reflect off the wing just as it impacts.
You can clearly hear people yelling "My God" and shouting as the plane approaches. They only scream when it hits.
Are you suggesting that the plane is some sort of an optical illusion?
@HPislegend248 LOL! It doesn't matter if the plane turned to the left before impact. I don't know about you, but anytime I look up and see a plane on a cloudless day, I can see the sun lighting it up and can almost always identify whether is AA, UA, Continental, etc. The lighting of the plane just does not match up with the lighting of the surroundings.
I hear maybe 2 or 3 voices and they seem more calm than the later shouts. To me the first voices are reacting to the damage of the 1st impact.
@corruptedsilence I apologize for not having bionic vision. I think u need to try that again. You cannot see the letter on an object 200m+ away, unless its huge, which a plane is not.
You hear 2 or 3 voices. the low number does not eradicate the fact that the voices are there. And, as you said, a plane makes a lot of noise. You're only going to hear voices exclaiming loudly, which people weren't until it hit. They're confused, not realizing what it meant. Who could have predicted what happened?
@HPislegend248 You don't need bionic vision to recognize the paint job on an aircraft, which is usually very distinct per each airline. Not to be mean, but do you even think before posting? :
As I said before, to me the voices before the impact don't seem to be reacting to an approaching plane, but to the damage and aftermath of the first impact. However, this argument is futile, as I don't believe that nothing was there, only that this subject is strange.
@corruptedsilence Yes I do think. I think I live in the country where lots of planes have flown over my house and I can tell shit about them. Stop making stupid points. You cannot tell anything about a plane form that distance. Period. There's prob some more up-close footage you could find but I've done more digging than I ever cared to do
As I've already said. A few people start shouting as the plane approaches. What else would they be shouting about? Its a frickin' plane hurtling toward them.
@HPislegend248 Maybe YOU can't, but speaking for everyone else just makes you look like an ass. I surely can, though. I live a couple miles from a major airport, so planes fly over my house much lower than what you're accustomed to seeing, but still higher than the planes on 9/11. Don't be so naive. The planes were only about a 1000 ft up. Not hard to see, kiddo.
That's your opinion. The 1st voices sounded more like bewilderment, than shouts. I still think they were reacting to the building.
@corruptedsilence I'm still confused. Who exactly are you saying didn't react to the plane that should have reacted to the plane?
Are you saying the government fabricated the plane? Is it a hologram or something? Why would they go to that much trouble? Why not just blow it up like they tried to in 1993?
@HPislegend248 Lol, seriously? The people at the scene. What's so confusing about that?
I don't know what the government did, no one does but a select few, I'm sure. But they needed the planes to make it seem like a terrorist attack. No one would ever believe terrorists planted bombs throughout three entire buildings. 3 of the most secure buildings in the world for that matter.
Yes, there is light in THAT video. But in many others the plane is black when it clearly should be reflecting light.
@corruptedsilence People at the scene DID see it. Watch 1 of 50 shows on 9/11 that was on last week. There's plenty of eyewitnesses who'll account the whole thing. Unless they're all CIA operatives and not one regular joe citizen was in NY that day(lol).
They had security in 1993 and that didn't stop them. All they would have to do is make a massive bomb and walk in the front door.
So THAT plane is real but the ones in far away shots are fake? I'm still confused as to what u're saying exactly.
@corruptedsilence So what was it? A United Airlines Boeing 767 with stealth capabilities? You're not doing a very good job of clarifying what you think.
@HPislegend248 LOL. That's because unlike you, I don't come to conclusions based on brittle evidence and limited knowledge. I don't know what it was, but like I said, I do know it was not a normal UA Boeing 767, as the story you follow claims. Just because I ask questions doesn't mean I subscribe to every "truther" theory out there.
My point is that a truck bomb is a billion times easier to plant that it is to rig the whole building with explosives. Use your brain.
@corruptedsilence I never said they should rig the building with explosives. You did. i said they should just get some huge bombs(s) and blow up the bottom the tower. It still falls. It would make way more sense for the govt. to do that than.........do whatever it is you're accusing them of doing(I'm not really sure what you're accusing them of, seeing as you won't tell me).
So what was special about the plane? Was it immune to sunlight?
@HPislegend248 LOL. It may make more sense to YOU, but that doesn't mean it's correct. They tried that before and it barely damaged the building at all. No, it made more sense for them to do it this way. This method put much more fear in to the minds of people. It turned Manhattan into a war zone for a day. Also, they needed to be sure to actually take the buildings down this time, only one way to be sure, and that's a demolition.
@corruptedsilence Oh right so now the 1993 bombing was by the govt. too, was it? And I suppose terrorists are figments of our imagination.Or maybe they're all CIA agents planted within Al-Queda to take responsibility for 9/11. Is there any terrorist event on American soil you don't think was done by the govt?
And my point is the same. There were simpler ways to demolish the towers than to fake planes flying into them
@HPislegend248 I never said that. "They" is a general term that meant anyone who was behind it. It is a fact that Al Qaeda and such was funded and helped to start by our own government, so they could've been behind it, who knows.
It's not about simple. It was supposed to be big and flashy. The whole point of it was to scare the hell out of the American people as much as possible. It worked just how they wanted and they were able to use that fear to achieve goals they couldn't have before.
@corruptedsilence They were funded by the Americans in the 70s/80s, when you were still in the Cold War and wanted to help repel Communism from the Middle East. I'm pretty sure crashing planes into iconic buildings in one of America's busiest cities was not what they had in mind when they funded them.
Enlighten me. What exactly did 9/11 achieve, apart from a whole lot of troops in the Middle East and a lot of dead people. AL Queda didn't achieve any goals in 9/11, apart from pissing off America
@HPislegend248 Seriously, you are very naive... Are you 13 or 14? You're pretty sure? LOL. You're some kid in Ireland. You would know less about "their" intentions than just about anyone. Towers can be rebuilt, people can be replaced. They allowed Pearl Harbor to happen without warning. They attacked our own ship in the Gulf of Tonkin to justify killing 58000+ Americans in the Vietnam war. And you're thinking they won't kill 3000 Americans? You're silly.
@corruptedsilence What has my nationality got to do with anything? OK so the Japs were allowed to being your navy to its knees and your govt. is cool with Communism and just invaded Vietnam for the hell of it. Is there any tragedy you're govt. didn't do? Just cos shit happens doesn't mean the govt. let it happen.
@HPislegend248 You must be a moron. Those things are only TWO tragedies in our history. Not every tragedy, fool. Also, they've been proven with declassified documents. This is common knowledge now. Try doing some research instead of riding on everything you've heard from other morons you know.
@HPislegend248 (continued) What did 9/11 achieve? Are you serious? How about billions of dollars for many insiders? Silverstein made billions off of the NEW insurance policy he took on the buildings only a few months prior to 9/11. One convenient new protection was terrorist attacks. Also, wars in three countries were achieved. You really are naive if you don't know the billions made from that. There's also the patriot act and the many rights they were able to take from Americans, etc.
@corruptedsilence Right and what has these wars achieved? Did you get more oil out of it? No. Political power? No. They hate you over there. The only people who made money were people who made weapons. They didn't need a war for that. Half the weapons America builds are never even used. Now you've got a massive recession and China has a hold over you like no other. Score(sarcasm again).
And I'm pretty sure you get paid by insurance when someone blows up your property, be they terrorists or not
@HPislegend248 Wow, I'm not sure why I'm responding anymore. I tried being nice, but you really are coming across as an idiot now. The global elite want a depression in the U.S. The recession doesn't effect the rich. It effects everyone else. You're a fool if you think we don't control Iraq and other parts of the Middle East. We have control over billions in drugs over there.
You're also wrong about the insurance. He got specific protection insurance against terrorist attacks. Research it, kid.
@HPislegend248 Now you're just being silly, kid. Immune to sunlight? You're watching too many cartoons. However, it is curious that in a majority of the videos available the plane does seem to not reflect the sun when it should. Most of the time it's seen as the dark, black shape of a plane. On a cloudless day. It has also been found that there is an extra piece of equipment on the belly of the plane. More pilots than not will tell you the plane shouldn't have been allowed to take off with it.
@corruptedsilence You clearly have no appreciation for sarcasm. You didn't think I was actually suggesting the plane was immune to sunlight, did you? It was a joke.
OK and I suppose this extra piece of equipment makes the plane black when viewed at a distance, does it? Or maybe its an alien probe(again sarcasm).
@HPislegend248 LOL. Sarcasm is picked up through tone of voice. It doesn't work as well in text form, so when you put something idiotic like that, people are just going to assume you're an idiot.
Now you're just being immature because you have no valid evidence, proof or even points to provide a decent argument.
@corruptedsilence No rational person could actually think I was honestly suggesting it was immune to sunlight.
You're accusing me of no evidence!?! Are you serious? You're the one saying "Ooooooh look the plane is black!!! That means.........well, I don't know what it means but it proves the official story is bullshit and the govt. is out to kill us all." You haven't even told me what you think happened. You're just intent on saying we're being lied to and saying little else.
@HPislegend248 LOL. You really are naive, kid. Everything I say you take out of context and throw it in to some loony one. Yes, I'm accusing you of no evidence, because you have zero to dispute anything I say. You're argument so far has been little more than, "nuh uh!!"
@corruptedsilence OK and I suppose you're a well of evidence disproving anything I say, are you? You're not. All you've done is call me a kid(I'm 20 btw), accuse the govt. of every mass tragedy that ever happened involving America and say the plane is black. That's not really evidence, you know.
@HPislegend248 So far, yes it's easy to disprove everything you say. Mainly because you've shown you have limited to zero knowledge other than the fact that the buildings fell down. I never accused the government of every tragedy involving America. That's you putting words in my mouth because you don't have a valid argument.
@HPislegend248 Lol, seriously? The people at the scene. What's so confusing about that?
I don't know what the government did, no one does but a select few, I'm sure. But they needed the planes to make it seem like a terrorist attack. No one would ever believe terrorists planted bombs throughout three entire buildings. 3 of the most secure buildings in the world for that matter.
Yes, there is light in THAT video. But in many others the plane is black when it clearly should be reflecting light.
eat that conspiracy theorists.. so every single one of these people edited these photos everywere with the same plane same design same stuff on the bottom? haha you truthers fail
@benry200 Idiot, people who think the planes were faked are a very small percentage of the truth movement. The facts still remain that there are no visible windows on this plane, and there is a pod attached to the bottom that pilots agree should NOT be there.
These "planes" are fakes . At 05:53 do a frame by frame and you will see that the video shown on national TV was faked . The wing just disapears ? What kinda idiot would make a video like this and proove himself wrong ? LOL thanks for the laugh
9/11 Commission quoted time of 9:03:11 - which is terribly wrong. Palisades NY seismic recording claims 9:02:54. NIST used 9:02:59 in keeping with videos like ABC LIVE.
@CTV911 ..In the shot that starts @ 6:37,the plane comes in going straight forward & having been that way for who knows how long,is well below the top of the bldgs & takes 8-9 seconds to impact.In the Live chopper 4 shot the plane is goin downward at a steep angle and by 2:29 when it is at top of the bldg,it still hasnt stopped going downward & straightened up & takes only 4-5 seconds to impact.
@CTV911 ..In the shot that starts @ 6:37,the plane comes in going straight forward (possibly even slightly upward) & having been flyin that way for who knows how long,is well below the top of the bldgs & takes 8-9 seconds to impact.In the Live chopper 4 shot the plane is goin downward at a steep angle and by 2:29 when it is at top of the bldg,it still hasnt stopped going downward & straightened up & takes only 4-5 seconds to impact.The shot b4 that it takes 2-3secs from str8 forward to impact.
its the bird!!!!!!
Disco2013 5 days ago
Honestly, how dumb can you conspiracy theorists be? You see an airplane hit a building and refuse to believe it happened. Go get professional help idiots.
astar334 6 months ago
77 angles!!!
TuesdayMorningInSept 6 months ago
@TuesdayMorningInSept dont u mean angels
aghball909 5 months ago
@aghball909 That was interesting what you said.. for real.
TuesdayMorningInSept 5 months ago
@TuesdayMorningInSept what
aghball909 5 months ago
Comment removed
TuesdayMorningInSept 6 months ago
The same plane is photographed from different angles and conspiracy liars want to pretend that the PLANE attacked the building from different angles. Such agenda-driven stupidity is sad rather than funny.
RonaldWieck 6 months ago
It's odd that in every newscast none of the reporters ever see the plane approaching... None of them ever react until a few moments AFTER the explosion.
Hmmm...
corruptedsilence 8 months ago
@corruptedsilence Of course they didn't. Its called technology. The ffed is delayed a by a second or 2. That happens in all live footage.
HPislegend248 5 months ago
@HPislegend248 No shit, but in many of the videos the plane is visible for over 2 seconds. Not only that, there is not one video of a person present at the scene who sees the plane incoming, even though 1000's of eyes are staring up at the sky after the first impact. Oh, I suppose seeing an event in person has a 2 second delay as well...
corruptedsilence 5 months ago
@corruptedsilence Oh gimme a break. In any wide shot video, the plane is a pinprick in the beackground. Seeing as most people are looking at the plume of smoke and gaping hole in the South Tower, it is natural that they didn't register it. They weren't scanning the background for more planes.
OK there has literally been 50 TV specials this week on 9/11. Are you serious;y suggesting that not one of them has an account from an eyewitness in New York that day. Are you serious?
HPislegend248 5 months ago
@HPislegend248 LOL. Pinprick in the background? Not true at all. Maybe you're that oblivious to your surroundings, but most people are not. Surely someone would have heard the plane and looked around for it.
No, I'm not suggesting that. You're misinterpreting what I said. There is no video or audio footage, civilian or newscast, that shows a witness seeing or hearing the incoming plane. If you can find one, I'll gladly admit I'm wrong. Until then, it's still strange.
corruptedsilence 5 months ago
@corruptedsilence Have you been watching the news? Generally when the news anchor is speaking, the footage is muted so you can hear them. So no, they couldn't have heard it in the news room. Watch the news sometime.
youtube.com/watch?v=L5gERa8jhIc
youtube.com/watch?v=zMseIGe-YvE
Both show people hearing, seeing and reacting to plane before it hit, both by civilians and CNN.
HPislegend248 5 months ago
@HPislegend248 Once again, no shit. But when I talked about hearing the plane, I clearly meant witnesses present at the scene, as a news anchors' surroundings wouldn't include the towers or an incoming plane. :P
Your first link is sounds valid, but has obvious visual problems. Notice how lit up the towers are by the sun, yet the plane is black and appears to not be hit by sunlight.
In the second clip it seems to me that the crowd was reacting to the fireball, not the plane.
corruptedsilence 5 months ago
@corruptedsilence Of course the plane is dark. As you can see from any footage of the 2nd plane, it curves in to the left as it hits the WTC. So they would be seeing the bottom of the plane as the footage is taken from the plane's right side. And plus you can see the sun reflect off the wing just as it impacts.
You can clearly hear people yelling "My God" and shouting as the plane approaches. They only scream when it hits.
Are you suggesting that the plane is some sort of an optical illusion?
HPislegend248 5 months ago
@HPislegend248 LOL! It doesn't matter if the plane turned to the left before impact. I don't know about you, but anytime I look up and see a plane on a cloudless day, I can see the sun lighting it up and can almost always identify whether is AA, UA, Continental, etc. The lighting of the plane just does not match up with the lighting of the surroundings.
I hear maybe 2 or 3 voices and they seem more calm than the later shouts. To me the first voices are reacting to the damage of the 1st impact.
corruptedsilence 5 months ago
@corruptedsilence I apologize for not having bionic vision. I think u need to try that again. You cannot see the letter on an object 200m+ away, unless its huge, which a plane is not.
You hear 2 or 3 voices. the low number does not eradicate the fact that the voices are there. And, as you said, a plane makes a lot of noise. You're only going to hear voices exclaiming loudly, which people weren't until it hit. They're confused, not realizing what it meant. Who could have predicted what happened?
HPislegend248 5 months ago
@HPislegend248 You don't need bionic vision to recognize the paint job on an aircraft, which is usually very distinct per each airline. Not to be mean, but do you even think before posting? :
As I said before, to me the voices before the impact don't seem to be reacting to an approaching plane, but to the damage and aftermath of the first impact. However, this argument is futile, as I don't believe that nothing was there, only that this subject is strange.
corruptedsilence 5 months ago
@corruptedsilence Yes I do think. I think I live in the country where lots of planes have flown over my house and I can tell shit about them. Stop making stupid points. You cannot tell anything about a plane form that distance. Period. There's prob some more up-close footage you could find but I've done more digging than I ever cared to do
As I've already said. A few people start shouting as the plane approaches. What else would they be shouting about? Its a frickin' plane hurtling toward them.
HPislegend248 5 months ago
@HPislegend248 Maybe YOU can't, but speaking for everyone else just makes you look like an ass. I surely can, though. I live a couple miles from a major airport, so planes fly over my house much lower than what you're accustomed to seeing, but still higher than the planes on 9/11. Don't be so naive. The planes were only about a 1000 ft up. Not hard to see, kiddo.
That's your opinion. The 1st voices sounded more like bewilderment, than shouts. I still think they were reacting to the building.
corruptedsilence 5 months ago
@corruptedsilence I'm still confused. Who exactly are you saying didn't react to the plane that should have reacted to the plane?
Are you saying the government fabricated the plane? Is it a hologram or something? Why would they go to that much trouble? Why not just blow it up like they tried to in 1993?
youtube.com/watch?v=TJOwttgBpzE
Look. There's light on the plane this time.
HPislegend248 5 months ago
@HPislegend248 Lol, seriously? The people at the scene. What's so confusing about that?
I don't know what the government did, no one does but a select few, I'm sure. But they needed the planes to make it seem like a terrorist attack. No one would ever believe terrorists planted bombs throughout three entire buildings. 3 of the most secure buildings in the world for that matter.
Yes, there is light in THAT video. But in many others the plane is black when it clearly should be reflecting light.
corruptedsilence 5 months ago
@corruptedsilence People at the scene DID see it. Watch 1 of 50 shows on 9/11 that was on last week. There's plenty of eyewitnesses who'll account the whole thing. Unless they're all CIA operatives and not one regular joe citizen was in NY that day(lol).
They had security in 1993 and that didn't stop them. All they would have to do is make a massive bomb and walk in the front door.
So THAT plane is real but the ones in far away shots are fake? I'm still confused as to what u're saying exactly.
HPislegend248 5 months ago
@HPislegend248 I'm not saying nothing was there necessarily. My main point is that what hit the WTC was not a normal UA Boeing 767.
Do you even know what happened in 1993? That was ONE truck bomb.
corruptedsilence 5 months ago
@corruptedsilence So what was it? A United Airlines Boeing 767 with stealth capabilities? You're not doing a very good job of clarifying what you think.
Yes it was a truck bomb. What's your point?
HPislegend248 5 months ago
@HPislegend248 LOL. That's because unlike you, I don't come to conclusions based on brittle evidence and limited knowledge. I don't know what it was, but like I said, I do know it was not a normal UA Boeing 767, as the story you follow claims. Just because I ask questions doesn't mean I subscribe to every "truther" theory out there.
My point is that a truck bomb is a billion times easier to plant that it is to rig the whole building with explosives. Use your brain.
corruptedsilence 5 months ago
@corruptedsilence I never said they should rig the building with explosives. You did. i said they should just get some huge bombs(s) and blow up the bottom the tower. It still falls. It would make way more sense for the govt. to do that than.........do whatever it is you're accusing them of doing(I'm not really sure what you're accusing them of, seeing as you won't tell me).
So what was special about the plane? Was it immune to sunlight?
HPislegend248 5 months ago
@HPislegend248 LOL. It may make more sense to YOU, but that doesn't mean it's correct. They tried that before and it barely damaged the building at all. No, it made more sense for them to do it this way. This method put much more fear in to the minds of people. It turned Manhattan into a war zone for a day. Also, they needed to be sure to actually take the buildings down this time, only one way to be sure, and that's a demolition.
corruptedsilence 5 months ago
@corruptedsilence Oh right so now the 1993 bombing was by the govt. too, was it? And I suppose terrorists are figments of our imagination.Or maybe they're all CIA agents planted within Al-Queda to take responsibility for 9/11. Is there any terrorist event on American soil you don't think was done by the govt?
And my point is the same. There were simpler ways to demolish the towers than to fake planes flying into them
HPislegend248 5 months ago
@HPislegend248 I never said that. "They" is a general term that meant anyone who was behind it. It is a fact that Al Qaeda and such was funded and helped to start by our own government, so they could've been behind it, who knows.
It's not about simple. It was supposed to be big and flashy. The whole point of it was to scare the hell out of the American people as much as possible. It worked just how they wanted and they were able to use that fear to achieve goals they couldn't have before.
corruptedsilence 5 months ago
@corruptedsilence They were funded by the Americans in the 70s/80s, when you were still in the Cold War and wanted to help repel Communism from the Middle East. I'm pretty sure crashing planes into iconic buildings in one of America's busiest cities was not what they had in mind when they funded them.
Enlighten me. What exactly did 9/11 achieve, apart from a whole lot of troops in the Middle East and a lot of dead people. AL Queda didn't achieve any goals in 9/11, apart from pissing off America
HPislegend248 5 months ago
@HPislegend248 Seriously, you are very naive... Are you 13 or 14? You're pretty sure? LOL. You're some kid in Ireland. You would know less about "their" intentions than just about anyone. Towers can be rebuilt, people can be replaced. They allowed Pearl Harbor to happen without warning. They attacked our own ship in the Gulf of Tonkin to justify killing 58000+ Americans in the Vietnam war. And you're thinking they won't kill 3000 Americans? You're silly.
corruptedsilence 5 months ago
@corruptedsilence What has my nationality got to do with anything? OK so the Japs were allowed to being your navy to its knees and your govt. is cool with Communism and just invaded Vietnam for the hell of it. Is there any tragedy you're govt. didn't do? Just cos shit happens doesn't mean the govt. let it happen.
HPislegend248 5 months ago
@HPislegend248 You must be a moron. Those things are only TWO tragedies in our history. Not every tragedy, fool. Also, they've been proven with declassified documents. This is common knowledge now. Try doing some research instead of riding on everything you've heard from other morons you know.
corruptedsilence 5 months ago
@HPislegend248 (continued) What did 9/11 achieve? Are you serious? How about billions of dollars for many insiders? Silverstein made billions off of the NEW insurance policy he took on the buildings only a few months prior to 9/11. One convenient new protection was terrorist attacks. Also, wars in three countries were achieved. You really are naive if you don't know the billions made from that. There's also the patriot act and the many rights they were able to take from Americans, etc.
corruptedsilence 5 months ago
@corruptedsilence Right and what has these wars achieved? Did you get more oil out of it? No. Political power? No. They hate you over there. The only people who made money were people who made weapons. They didn't need a war for that. Half the weapons America builds are never even used. Now you've got a massive recession and China has a hold over you like no other. Score(sarcasm again).
And I'm pretty sure you get paid by insurance when someone blows up your property, be they terrorists or not
HPislegend248 5 months ago
@HPislegend248 Wow, I'm not sure why I'm responding anymore. I tried being nice, but you really are coming across as an idiot now. The global elite want a depression in the U.S. The recession doesn't effect the rich. It effects everyone else. You're a fool if you think we don't control Iraq and other parts of the Middle East. We have control over billions in drugs over there.
You're also wrong about the insurance. He got specific protection insurance against terrorist attacks. Research it, kid.
corruptedsilence 5 months ago
@HPislegend248 Now you're just being silly, kid. Immune to sunlight? You're watching too many cartoons. However, it is curious that in a majority of the videos available the plane does seem to not reflect the sun when it should. Most of the time it's seen as the dark, black shape of a plane. On a cloudless day. It has also been found that there is an extra piece of equipment on the belly of the plane. More pilots than not will tell you the plane shouldn't have been allowed to take off with it.
corruptedsilence 5 months ago
@corruptedsilence You clearly have no appreciation for sarcasm. You didn't think I was actually suggesting the plane was immune to sunlight, did you? It was a joke.
OK and I suppose this extra piece of equipment makes the plane black when viewed at a distance, does it? Or maybe its an alien probe(again sarcasm).
HPislegend248 5 months ago
@HPislegend248 LOL. Sarcasm is picked up through tone of voice. It doesn't work as well in text form, so when you put something idiotic like that, people are just going to assume you're an idiot.
Now you're just being immature because you have no valid evidence, proof or even points to provide a decent argument.
corruptedsilence 5 months ago
@corruptedsilence No rational person could actually think I was honestly suggesting it was immune to sunlight.
You're accusing me of no evidence!?! Are you serious? You're the one saying "Ooooooh look the plane is black!!! That means.........well, I don't know what it means but it proves the official story is bullshit and the govt. is out to kill us all." You haven't even told me what you think happened. You're just intent on saying we're being lied to and saying little else.
HPislegend248 5 months ago
@HPislegend248 LOL. You really are naive, kid. Everything I say you take out of context and throw it in to some loony one. Yes, I'm accusing you of no evidence, because you have zero to dispute anything I say. You're argument so far has been little more than, "nuh uh!!"
corruptedsilence 5 months ago
@corruptedsilence OK and I suppose you're a well of evidence disproving anything I say, are you? You're not. All you've done is call me a kid(I'm 20 btw), accuse the govt. of every mass tragedy that ever happened involving America and say the plane is black. That's not really evidence, you know.
HPislegend248 5 months ago
@HPislegend248 So far, yes it's easy to disprove everything you say. Mainly because you've shown you have limited to zero knowledge other than the fact that the buildings fell down. I never accused the government of every tragedy involving America. That's you putting words in my mouth because you don't have a valid argument.
corruptedsilence 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@HPislegend248 Lol, seriously? The people at the scene. What's so confusing about that?
I don't know what the government did, no one does but a select few, I'm sure. But they needed the planes to make it seem like a terrorist attack. No one would ever believe terrorists planted bombs throughout three entire buildings. 3 of the most secure buildings in the world for that matter.
Yes, there is light in THAT video. But in many others the plane is black when it clearly should be reflecting light.
corruptedsilence 5 months ago
eat that conspiracy theorists.. so every single one of these people edited these photos everywere with the same plane same design same stuff on the bottom? haha you truthers fail
benry200 8 months ago
@benry200 Idiot, people who think the planes were faked are a very small percentage of the truth movement. The facts still remain that there are no visible windows on this plane, and there is a pod attached to the bottom that pilots agree should NOT be there.
corruptedsilence 8 months ago
These "planes" are fakes . At 05:53 do a frame by frame and you will see that the video shown on national TV was faked . The wing just disapears ? What kinda idiot would make a video like this and proove himself wrong ? LOL thanks for the laugh
SAYYOURROSARY 11 months ago
@SAYYOURROSARY ITS CALLED 2001 FAIL VIDEO QUALITY YOU SUCK FUCK YOU YOU STUPID ASSHOLE
benry200 8 months ago
stop the video at 5:55 just before crash,WTF! , a wing that can disappear ??????????????
pierrotboy13 11 months ago
0:23 High altitude aircraft and 500KNOTS?
rodrigogta02 1 year ago
Thankyou for sharing.
Are you sure of the time?
Supersynapsis 1 year ago
@Supersynapsis
9/11 Commission quoted time of 9:03:11 - which is terribly wrong. Palisades NY seismic recording claims 9:02:54. NIST used 9:02:59 in keeping with videos like ABC LIVE.
CTV911 1 year ago
@CTV911 ..In the shot that starts @ 6:37,the plane comes in going straight forward & having been that way for who knows how long,is well below the top of the bldgs & takes 8-9 seconds to impact.In the Live chopper 4 shot the plane is goin downward at a steep angle and by 2:29 when it is at top of the bldg,it still hasnt stopped going downward & straightened up & takes only 4-5 seconds to impact.
youngdrodeau 1 year ago
@CTV911 ..In the shot that starts @ 6:37,the plane comes in going straight forward (possibly even slightly upward) & having been flyin that way for who knows how long,is well below the top of the bldgs & takes 8-9 seconds to impact.In the Live chopper 4 shot the plane is goin downward at a steep angle and by 2:29 when it is at top of the bldg,it still hasnt stopped going downward & straightened up & takes only 4-5 seconds to impact.The shot b4 that it takes 2-3secs from str8 forward to impact.
youngdrodeau 1 year ago