Added: 3 years ago
From: 911inplanesight
Views: 163,081
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (384)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • NOSE LANDING GEAR HYDRAULIC FLUID WAS THE FLASH IN BOTH AIRCRAFT . SAME PLACE COS THEY ALL HAVE NLG  in THE SAME PLACE !!!!!!

  • Truthers are fucking idiots. Retarded monkeys are smarter than Truthers.

  • planz woz not reel all ggi fakery govenrment obama flaseflag inside job for sure. need da truth now

  • @iwillshityourcorpse um, we didn't all learn how to speak ghetto so could you please type in english.

  • Comment removed

  • Reflection off the plane onto the building.

  • @Nondairyreamer: In other words, you didn't bother actually watching the video, but you thought you'd share an enlightening comment anyway.

  • So typical of the sleeper comment by jmitts whatever. All four letter words except the one you stole. Never any facts, just your fanatical BELIEF system refusing to SEE the truth. You are whats WRONG with this crazy world. Your minds so pliable and gullible you swallow the poison and attack those who want YOU to wake up and help save yourself and the world. Crucify the truth. How did building three fall down. Just the facts......

  • Explosions going off on the ground floor and floors below proves them wrong. Witnesses have film of explosions on ground floor proves it. Tower 3 dropping from a fire at one end of the building with no plane hitting it proves it...not putting that info in investigation proves it.. . Thermite proves it....steele building turned to dust proves it... the put option trading proves it...the insurance policy proves it(owners)...preponderance of evidence PROVES IT!

  • @AirFiveR Preponderance of your and others bullshit proves you are all wrong.

  • Esta muchas bullshitas.

  • Comment removed

  • What a load of shit

  • September clues does have its compelling moments about the missile, fake plane scenarios. to many people saw small to medium military type planes or just outright say a missile.

    Check out the harley guy ".... it collapse mostly due to structual failure because the fire was just too intense?" lol .. grt stuff research it. 911 was an inside job .

  • mr bush shit we all know its all government set up this is what you guys do to get your way i hope you got your oil. lol.......

  • QUESTION TO PONDER: If it was an inside job, wouldn't they hide the plane's missile activity from the public's cameras since this would be the second plane seen? I'm sure this would've been an important issue for them to consider.

    FYI: 95% of YouTube's amateur video claims are fake.

  • Everyone should look close at the video of the second plane hit.From every angle they can find.

    Look at the slow motion ones also,and the real time.Look at the energy that comes out of the blow out hole that the plane makes.

    Look how many floors that son of a bitch covers.I'd like any military person ,that has seen a missile actually shot,tell me just how much does that compare to a real missile in energy?

    That was a plane.Ask anyone in New York.It was a plane.

    I think the pentagon is solved.

  • @stayinstock nobody saw planes cause there wasnt any to see,the only people to see planes were actors and the media.the plane going into the south tower is a cartoon portraying impossible physics.

  • @mphasis1983 yeah ok. I'm sure you know physics.

  • @stayinstock enough to know planes dont slice through steel structures.

  • @mphasis1983 You don't even know what they sliced thru.All you know is steel structure.

    You don't understand inertia,kinetic energy,shear force,shear resistance.......

  • @stayinstock watch september clues to see how fake the planes are,the plane has 5 different trajectories.there is no decelaration,no explosion when the plane hits,none of the plane is ripped off,its so fake lol.i understand cartoon physics perfectly and that is what these planes portrayed.

  • @mphasis1983 Saying it was a cartoon is like saying "I don't know what the hell it was and I'm too lazy to research so I'm throwing cartoon out there"

  • @stayinstock well cartoons can run through rocks can they not lol?and this plane went into a steel structure like it was jello,so how is it like just throwing a cartoon out there if thats what it looked like?

  • @mphasis1983 Looked and sounded like a plane flying into buildings to every one else.

    Plenty of people saw it.New York has a lot of people.

    Where were you?

  • @stayinstock nobody saw a plane they were all actors and part of the media who witnessed no plane.they saw a plane that went through the whole building and out the other side with its nose intact though lol.

    "Where were you?"

    watching september clues ;)

  • @mphasis1983 So you just throw out what anyone in New York says and just make up something of your own, out of your own head.And everyone is supposed to believe it.

    Aight Chief.

    Good Luck With that.

  • @mphasis1983 OH! September Clues.

    That's that batshit crazy video isn't it?

    I been seeing you video whores peddling that thing like a whore on payday.

    Following never has been that great has it?

  • @stayinstock "OH! September Clues"

    yes september truth

    "I been seeing you video whores peddling that thing like a whore on payday."

    and ive been seeing fools ignore clear media fakery

    "Following never has been that great has it?"

    im not a sheep so i wouldnt know,can you tell me what its like?

  • @mphasis1983 I don't need anyone to make a video to help me research.I just use all the videos as research tools.I don't even have the sound on while watching because I don't need to hear the bullshit.Apparently you need someone else to research and tell you what to think.

    Kinda sheep like if you ask me.

  • @stayinstock "Apparently you need someone else to research and tell you what to think."

    what kind of bullshit statement is that lol?so you think that after watching september clues i havent reasearched anymore?if i didnt agree with the fakery i wouldnt believe it simple as.i dont believe it for the sake of it as you imply i believe it cause it makes sense and gives clear evidence unlike the official fairytale,now if you believe that you are certainly a sheep lol.

  • @mphasis1983 And your research has brought you to the conclusion that all...ALL of the videos of the plane hitting the tower are fake and the planes edited in...That's your statement.

    You sure about that Watson?

  • @stayinstock yes lol all planes are added!!!they contradict each other with the flight paths for a start and once again a plane would not just mold into a building and explode inside lol,that is fucking ludicrous to the extreme.

    tell me why the planes were real even though nobody saw a plane?

  • @mphasis1983 All the experiences i've had and research i've done to get me to this point in my life tells me either #1 You are joking and just trying to argue.

    or #2 You've been in a potato cellar with a ham radio eating spam wearing a war helmet and waiting for the invasion.

    Batshit crazy!

    aight?

  • @mphasis1983

    If the planes were added in afterwards why add/leave the flashes?

    They had to get rid of the 4 airplanes anyways, why not just fly them into the buildings.

  • @mphasis1983 /watch?v=TJOwttgBpzE&feature=r­elated

    what's that?

  • @mphasis1983 You want everyone to think that every video recorded that day,(network and personal) was a fake and the planes were edited in?

    I don't use the words "batshit crazy" often. I think this time is justified.

  • The flash is the transfer of kinetic energy from the plane to the building.

  • @stayinstock Or it came from the inside and there was no plane at all.

  • @MaRTiiaNN Yeah...That's it...cool story broseph.

  • @stayinstock Really? Explain this to me then. /watch?v=rOX-sVyPu54

  • @MaRTiiaNN

    Seems to me,everything in the pictures,buildings,sky,planes.­..ect are all in gray scale.

    In higher resolution pictures,you can see shading indicating color difference.

    

  • @stayinstock But the planes should at least follow the scale which they are shown in. One is black, one is grey, one is white, non of which are United Airline colors.

  • @MaRTiiaNN Grey scale is just that..Scales of gray,from black to white.

    The cameras were portable news cameras.They were not high definition film cameras.

    Some cameras were good enough you could just make out a blue tint in the darker areas of the plane.

    True color at distance requires high definition cameras.

    Where the sun was also effects quality.

  • @stayinstock Or this. /watch?v=BztotD5hXw0&feature=r­elated

  • @MaRTiiaNN I've seen all the videos dude. How do you explain all the other cameras that show a full plane? You pick one shitty video out and call it proof.

  • @stayinstock They were from a different news network. No I call it a flaw in the proof that planes hit the buildings. You realize the gov't also reported a plane hit the pentagon when one did NOT correct?

  • @MaRTiiaNN That's the problem with the video based theories.

    One camera sees one thing,and another camera sees another.It's the quality of the camera,lighting,resolution,amo­unt of shaking...ect.

    A personal camera will not see the same quality as a news camera which will not see the same quality as a studio camera.

  • @MaRTiiaNN The size of the object changes visible color. A large building has more color information than a plane because of size.The building may show some color and the plane is black because there is not enough color information in the plane for the camera to see.

  • @stayinstock Well unless you were there to witness it first hand, all you get is video evidence and it won't matter how many people tell you there weren't planes or how many tell you there were.

  • @MaRTiiaNN I understand that. Nothing wrong with asking questions that bother you or seem suspicious.The hard part is understanding the information you find.There are many people who were there and saw the planes,they all saw them.The details of what they saw differ,but they all saw the planes. Windows,no windows,type of plane.It differs from person to person,some even knew the airline names,but that's another discussion.Video evidence only takes you so far also. 

  • @stayinstock That's what I'm saying man, I'm just trying to find out the consistent things so I know what happened. I wasn't there and I can't really trust just the news report.

  • i can understand why people would want to believe in this, but anybody who is somewhat educated knows this is bullsnot. Not saying that it isn't right to as questions, cause well hey its great to ask questions and to clear up what you don't know. However, to make assumptions on rocket science, which this is, i do however do no see any accreditations or any bibliography. I see true, real, hard footage with ad libbed bullsnot with no backbone to prove what you're preaching.

  • what this vid. is saying is it is NOT U175(PilotsFor911Truth)has proof that flt.was texting Harrisburg, PA 20min. after alledgedly crashing into No. tower(WTC2). Platform was GUIDED to impact zone w/out crew or passengers. LOOK at angle of attack(32-37% bank turn). This TURN was initiated over one mi. away and if TURNED one second before or after initiation point, would MISS target

  • Amazing leap of faith. 

  • all i'm saying....... we're talking about the physics of thousands of tons of steel with gas lines, wires, and other shit .. and a fucking airplane. it's a motherfucking airplane colliding into the largest building in the US. Unless you're a motherfucking explosives expert and master physicist.. i don't want to hear you're fucking retarded explanations. ..it's a fucking AIR PLANE. colliding with a BUILDING. you don't know SHIT about the mechanics, effects, and physics behind it. fucking retard

  • @WordplaySmith2 w/out profanities ur comment means nothing in relation to this vid.,w/profanitiesitdescribesu

  • @trex9008 i'll forgive you're pathetic attempt to sound intelligent and demean me. really. it doesn't bother me a bit. what does bother me is whenpeopletypelikethis. go fuck yourself, with the sharpest of objects you can find around your studio apartment. thanks for playing. 

  • @WordplaySmith2 oops. your*. i'm a stickler for spelling. 

  • @WordplaySmith2

    "it's a fucking AIR PLANE colliding with a BUILDING"....

    Really Skippy? Where does UA 175 crash and explode AGAINST the outer load bearing, steel framed wall of WTC 2? This video clearly shows UA 175 flying THROUGH the outer wall without crashing AGAINST it. Even the fragile wingtips slice through steel, load bearing box columns. IMPOSSIBLE.

    The only fucking retard here is you.

  • @lmfecher cool story bro, tell me more. Seriously! Tell me all about how dumb I am, how unintelligent I am, the mechanics and physics of burning and crashing steel, and about how our government secretly blew up some buildings in a giant conspiracy to get oil. Go ahead. And watch me continue to not give a fuck about anything you say about anything, ever.

    /

    /

    /

    *and not a single fuck was given that day*

  • @WordplaySmith2

    Ahhh, but you must give a fuck about what I say Skippy, otherwise, you wouldn't have commented. But don't let me take up any more of your time. I know you've got video games to play and kiddie porn to watch.

    Fuck off.

  • The only continuous TWO HOUR VIDEO of the 9/11 wtc attacks that is known to exist. 130 minute WTC ATTACK VIDEO: 'Tuesday Morning in September'. It is something from that day you have NOT seen. You may have seen other posts about it on Youtube. It is not like so much other crap that has been put out since 9/11; it is not a propaganda, and or opinion piece. It has no fair comparison. It is 9/11 like you have never seen. You can preview the whole 130 chronicle. There is an upload on my channel

  • 'mysterious flash occuring as the plane comes into contact with the building' - Mysterious? The nose of a commercial aircraft is packed with all sorts of equipment which would most likely have exploded on impact. Anyone who thinks this is faked, a missile or some sort of conspiracy is either retarded or mentally ill. It happened, it was real, now get on with your lives.

  • @333kiz

    you turned the world away from you.

  • You guys are retarded

  • Total nonsense

  • The tips of the wings went into the building as though they were made of the same or stronger material than the outside of the building. The wings should have stayed behind or broken off. I doubt there was even a plane. Editing more like it.

  • @cheekyoziechick a weaker material can break a stronger material very easily. it depends on the velocity of impact and not on the strength of the materials. for example: a rubber bullet or a bird hitting a cockpit window.

  • @bellijklh oh yeah..true.

  • @cheekyoziechick i'm glad you changed your mind.

  • @bellijklh

    It should be clear that no footage shows a real plane.

    these rather seems to be animations.

    depening on which footage you use the plane also have different

    entry angles. one shows horizontal flight direction and slope.

    another shows a diving turn and no slope.

    it will not have happened both.

  • @bellijklh

    Further more on 1:03 in this video,

    you see a plane that is nearly 90° over opposing the other footge

    where the plane is shown with 10 to 20° slope.

    I also saw footage where a wing was missing.

  • @Inception1338 the plane is so fake there is so many conflictions lol.the people who done september clues are on to the real truth.

  • Comment removed

  • @mphasis1983

    you are one of the first americans i see on the net that got that

    thing with the plane.

    now check this one: /watch?v=LFgxqYI28Wc&t=5m

  • @Inception1338 hi,im actually from sunny england :)

    i cant be the first person youve come across that thinks there wasnt a plane surely?

    thanks for the link to the video,i actually dont believe that what we saw on tele was the real collapse,i think that that was fake aswell.when you think about it the south tower tipped over but didnt fall in the street below lol,if that was really real those 30 floors would of taken out many blocks,all the footage is fake in my eyes.

  • stupid conspiracy nuts but you ignore obama hanging with william ayres top 10 wanted terrorist for bombing the pentagon and who was pardoned by bill clinton obamy s granny was eye witness to his birth in kenya fu@# nuts get a clue demoncrats are bad republicans are good demoncrats are liars republicans are honest mostly that flash was upon contact no matter how u look at it

  • It's pretty damn obvious that the buildings were taken down. And not by muslim terrorists. By powerful people who want to gain a strangle-hold on the population. Case closed.

  • i just think if you put the 2 objects together, plane and building, the plane is just a speck. with the ammount of fuel on-board its like using a kool-aid bottle with gasolene in it to burn a ten storey appartment block, TO THE GROUND.not happening.

  • The footage is BLURRED!! Dude, get a fucking grip. The whole shadow, yeah its called a shadow and it casted correctly on the building. For fuck sake, you dumbass's live in fantasy world, YOU WANT THE GOV to be as fucked up as you think it is. If you dont like America, get the fuck out and live in the middle east for awhile. Im sure you'll be back begging to come back. I dare you to protest in the middle of the memorial saying it was a conspiracy. Try it, I fucking dare you.

  • @korn4422 Don't be an idiot. Stop thinking that the government loves you. You are nothing more than an ant to you, period!!

  • @bottomfeeder73 To them, I meant to say.

  • I dont want to offend anyone but there are few Questions that am most Curious about 1.World Trade Center Built To Bear Heat More then From A Aeroplanes Fuel Why melted in a short time.2 After this much disaster you still find the terrorists ids how ?.America's been in Afghanistan Since am Born And they did'nt even Know a Terrorist Attack Been Planned ?.3 If the plane was crashed on top how come the bottom fell off it self ?? =)

  • @huzaifacool

    1. It didn't melt, it weakened. at 500 Degrees, steel loses half its strength.

    2. I'm not sure what you're asking here, but we haven't found all the conspirators responsible.

    3. The WTC collapsed from the Top, downward, the bottom did not give out first.

  • @huzaifacool

    all 3 buildings where nuked down. placed around 100 meters under the ground.

    this turns the building into dust except the upper part,

    which is why the top falls down with no resistance.

    start with the fascist takeover 1933 in the whitehouse

    look up smetley butler wo prevent a takeover

    but the movement was still there acting in secret.

    watch?v=ISOs_GXEL40

    9/11 was planed in the 60ths before they build the Towers.

    i have tons of material to prove just ask...

  • @huzaifacool Because it's all bullshit!! Planned BS! They are still in Afghanistan. Why? Natural gas pipeline and an endless supply of poppies for their oxycontin and perk meds. Nuff said. Iraq and oil. If they cared about the way people are treated, they would be all over countless African countries. Those countries have nothing to offer so, Fuck em. That is the US government agenda.

  • This is Bullshit! The terrorists stole a fucking airport plane! they don't have any damn missiles unless they brought some onboard, and when getting close to the towers, opened the plane door and threw it.<-------------not possible because missiles are too heavy to throw.

  • @jesusfreak3831 Just like Iraq had WMD'S, get real

  • Fuck, I dont like what happened to all those people, BUT ITS FUCKING AWESOME SEEING A PLANE GOING THROUGH A BUILDING LIKE THAT.

  • Comment removed

  • bullshit, there were planes, and there were muslims terrorists.

  • @bellijklh

    yeah buddy illusion...

    if you see the wing disappearing in the tower

    the tower remains undamaged for 3 frames.

    then explodes.

    which means that there were no planes.

    but explosives in the office of the company "kroll"

    a zionist company...

    how about that?

  • @Inception1338

    Witnesses who saw planes hit the WTC: 100,000

    Witnesses who saw a missile: ZERO

    911 TRUTH = 911 LIES

  • @ctcole77

    watch the september clues.

    you're obviously not even interested in the truth.

    otherwise you wouldn't think in a black white fashion...

  • @Inception1338

    LMAO!

    September Clues was debunked YEARS AGO.

    Most 911 twoofers dispise Simon Shack's mockumentary because he takes statements out of context, fact picks, and just plain lies.

    You're obviously only interested in fairy tales and NOT the truth.

    911 TRUTH = STRAWMAN

  • @ctcole77

    there was the trial of a massive debunking and it did obviously work for

    uneducated lutscher like you.

  • @Inception1338

    10 years and absolutely no evidence to support 911 twoofer magical theories.

    Only conspiracy books, DVDs, and pay per view conferences.

    911 TRUTH = SCAMMING GULLIBLE MORONS OUT OF THEIR MONEY

  • @ctcole77

    i can tell you from people that saw a missle.

  • @ctcole77 nobody saw planes you zombie!!!

    the only people to see planes were actors and people working with the media.

    there wasnt 100'000 news crews and actors lol

  • @Inception1338 three frames are only one eighth of a second and that is a reasonable time to wait for the fuel to explode.

  • @bellijklh

    I sayed that the plane disappeared in the building without causing any damage to the front of the building.

    what has this to do with fuel ?

  • @Inception1338 i guess i didn't understand you. did you see it in this video? in videos i saw there was a severe damage to both buildings when the planes hit.

  • @bellijklh

    If you compare the videos from the second strike,

    you will see, that depending on which footage you look at,

    the "plane" comes from a different angle.

    further more i said that the wing of the "plane" did disappear

    in the building but with an untouched frontline of the building for a few frames.

    then the building explodes and all the plastic parts before the stell frames are blown out not pulled in. then we can see an undamaged nose that comes out at the opposite side...

  • @Inception1338 like i said, a few frames are exactly the amount of time it takes for the damage and the explosion to appear, considering the very low resolution and the significant magnification of the video.

  • @bellijklh

    does that mean it is possible to show a plane that disappears in an undamaged building ?

    to that the wing is already in the building, and the front is displayed undamaged ?

  • @Inception1338 "a plane that disappears in an undamaged building" is a very dramatic description and that is not the case with this video or any other video i saw showing the impact. just to make things clear, what is the exact moment in this video that you claim to see the tower intact and the plane inside it?

  • @bellijklh

    /watch?v=ek-Q0T9wK2g in this footage (don't care for the title) you will see,

    that the wings suddenly disappear and the place where the towers should be hit by the wings remains undamaged.

    The plane should face plenty of resistence. The Steelframes hat only one meter distance to another and are bigger than those of tanks. it should be impossible for the wings to enter.

    instead we see an undamaged front.

    after the explosion that blows "OUT!? we see the form of A plane...

  • @bellijklh Not.

  • open your eyes fluoride heeds! dark times aheed for sheeple!

  • Not sure If troll, or just uneducated?

  • Sense, this video makes none of it.

  • I DONT TRUST THE US GORVERMENT AT ALL!@

  • @evalsoftserver Hell yea brother... I live here, and i get a bubble up of hate whenever i pass a city hall.

  • Uh...Earth to Tin Foilers!

    The JFK conspiracy theorists just called....they want their shitty, pixelized footage back.

  • @justkeepinitrealyo ...its called zoom, and poor video quality... only rich people could afford those fucking totally hip cameras :D hell i was still using disposables wen those rich bastards wer bubbling up the country like a bong.

  • HOW DOSE A >PASSENGER< plane CARRY MISSILES! IT COULD HAVE BEEN DEBRIS FROM THE TOWER! ASSWIPE!

  • Jajajajaja: Leslie Raphael, Serendipity.li

    9/11 WAS A FRAUD

  • idk the facts of how big and how fast a boeing jets is/goes, but id imagine something doing atleast 300mph and its atleast 200ft long....id imagine when it hurls into a giant steel structure thered be a little big of a boom at initial impact

  • obviously 911 is a lie if all of these clips are blurred

  • @quez76 not all of them, the upload of this vid is a copy which is why its blurry

  • duh, two french film makers enough said

  • yeah, yeah, and building 7 "was drunk" and fellt apart too... without beeing hitted. and who was the only one flying after the hits? family laden. wake the fuck up.

  • @ 0:18 it's clear that the light is shining on the building, not at the front of the plane. If they are trying to say that that is an explsion, it's the flatest blast I've ever seen. The red halo seen on the left, more than the right, is most likely an area where the two headlamps don't overlap, making the light to dim to appear white in the bright of day, but still luminous enough to discolor the steel columns, accounting for the reddish hue. and linear nature of the blurred image.

  • Hey, it's not an explsion nor a reflection, Although reflections shine in arcs, allowing them to be seen from multiple angles. The light is part of the navigation system of ALL commericial airlplanes. There are a set of brilliant, always on, headlights on the wings. They're set so that at a landing angle, they meet when the plane is exactly one hundred feet above the tarmac, giving the pilot a clear indication of their hieght, regardless of altitude above sealevel.

  • I agree 100 pct, 911 was an inside job.But I mean this is just ridiculous!

  • That light at the nose, is heat and light from the powerful impact, friction is called you stupid morons ! If you slam hard enough two pieces of metal, you get heat and light.

  • The second problem with this 'evidence' is that a missle is nothing but a way of delivering an explosive charge to a destination. If there is an explosive charge on the plane, why, scientifically, would you launch it 1/4 of a second before it was going to get there anyway? The premise of this vid is that the missle was already on the plane right??? The plane could carry far more explosives than any missle.

    See BadBoy300568 response below on Kinetic energy. That is what you see on the vid.

  • Was there more to 9/11 than the American public knows? YES, absolutely.

    Did 2 planes fly into the World Trade Center? YES, absolutely.

    Now get on with exploring the real problems with the story, like who was involved? Why did Trade Center #7 fall down all by itself later that night with zero structural or fire damage?

    Conspiracy? hell YES.

    Missle? hell.NO.

    It wasn't aliens, ghosts, demons, fate, or the tooth fairy either, it was people flying planes into buildings, investigate the rest.

  • @bigbossimmotal when i saw the part of ur comment that said there was no structural damage, i didnt even have to read the rest of ur comment to know u are bsing

  • @M11ty he meant no structural damage on building 7 of the world trade center. not the towers. It fell without any heavy damage. fires do not bring down buildings.

  • @eseoficial i dont understand what he's saying because its a known fact that building 7 had around 40% structeral damage. then again i shouldnt be suprised a truther made up a "fact"

  • @M11ty 40% structural damage. i wouldnt call the top floors, on one side of the building being on fire a 40% structural damage... Fires dont cause buildings to collapse, history proves this fact... funny how it happened 3 times in one day. and if YOU dont beleive me, look it up. how many buildings collapsed because of a fire, or plane impact? and imt talking highrises, massive behemoths of the city.

  • @eseoficial the falling debri caused the collapse, the fire just added to it. your using history to prove point? when was the last time a 757 loaded with fuel and cargo crashed at near the speed of sound into a skyscraper? exactly, that just made you look like a fool

  • @M11ty ok. a "collapse" vs a demolition....u know what i'm not even going to explain this. search "Blue Print for Truth - Richard Gage" on youtube and i do not need to explain myself. Watch it ALL.. hard proof. From an ARCHITECT... dont drink the medias lies. False statements. Watch the video, you could learn something and if not then hey its just a great documentary on architecture.

  • Comment removed

  • @eseoficial im not waisting 2 hours on another refered vid, so your going to have to explain it if your so confident

  • @M11ty Lol, ok mate... basically collapse vs demolition.. collapse it topples over... now in the case of the towers. they fell symetrically. into a pile of rubble... heres an excerpt from the 2 hour vid... /watch?v=0ptvvbaR0-U

  • @M11ty hard to explain apparently for me ;)

  • @M11ty also ignore the repeating voice, its annoying

  • Comment removed

  • We are talking about people who strap bombs to their chests and drive into traffic. What makes you think... Oh nevermind.... sorry brick wall... you can't comprehend the simple things.

  • so all 4 video footages were filmed with a potato?

  • I can help you all now. Dont look at any of the "amatuer" footage for answerd. There are far too many anomolies for it to be used as evidence. Look at how the media planted the story in spite of the evidence. You were given a full explanation of collapse and the perpetrators on the day it happened. Case close