Ladiens and gentlemen! Welcome to the 11h round of the contest. In the red corner... 134556 ko's and ZERO losses.. theee mightyyyy Debunkeeeerrrrr!!! And the blue corner... 1 ko and 254329776578 losses and still capable to fight... theee unbelieavabllleeeee The Truuutthheeerrrr... LETS GET READY TO RUMBBBBLLLLLEEEEE!!!11
@TheEvilEvangelion Absolutely amazing conclusion:) 10 points. I kno my joke wasnt good but it's just a result of my frustration after talking with some obsessed debunker who believes in one and only truth. But the joke I told is actually as stupid as the WTC debating is. Debunkers are too obsessed, that's the problem. I have talked impartially about the case yet they still act moronic like I would be a truther. Brainless joke for brainless ppl. Simple.
If they were armed with box cutters and there was only a handful per plane then how didnt the passengers just kick them in the nuts and take control of the plane when the sand niggers stoodup and screamed alllllllllllah or what ever they say when they are being complete fags. I mean no offense to the passengers who died but do mean offense to the homos who hijacked the planes.
The Pentagon is the MOST secure building in the US. You're trying to convince people that THIS is all the video available of the event? What about the building itself? Um, maybe 1000 cameras?
911 was an inside job and a 757 did not hit the Pentagon. Prove it did!!! WHere are the rotors? 12foot dia TITANIUM rotors simply disappeared into vapor?
Oh yeah.....I'm believin' that. And by the way, I'm the King of Kashmir!
So....the conspiracy wasn't big enough to keep this top-secret video confiscated...and it was released due to a lawsuit. Conspiracy nutcases, are you kidding me?
@HelloGreedo note when it was finally released, by now majority won't even know or care, this way they can use this shitty video as another excuse to there being no false flag attack
@HelloGreedo What a waste of time!controlled demolition,missile on the pentagon,fake crash at skankville?why not concentrate on the more important and creepy aspects?like the fact that it's proven that secret intelligences had foreknowledge of a plan to bring down the towers?the fact that 1993 wtc bombing (6 dead,thousands of injured) was orchestrated by the fbi.google emad salem if u don't believe me.do research on "Operation gladio" and "Operation northwood".it's false flag terrorism
9/11 was an inside job for about 70 reasons, 1 reason alone can be considered coincidence, 2 is suspicious, 3 is inside job, 4 is a blatant inside job, but 70??? conspiracies happen, this was one of them, mass murder for personal gain! Oil, opium and bases in the middle east, better to take from the weak before other superpowers (russia, china) do! We may benefit in the long run when we fill up our cars, but it doesn't make 9.11 ok! Mass murder! the shills will attack me but i don't care!
@sychophantt You idoit, The planes exploded. There are millions of eyewitnesses to say they crashed, one of them is my Aunt that was in another side of the Pentagon when the plane hit. THINK BEFORE LEAVING A COMMENT FUCKING TARD.
@supercamishow Let's see the evidence? I guess a 747 fit into that tiny hole in the pentagon. What happened to the wings? Where are the wingmarks on the building? Keep believing everything the "mind machine" aka the tv tells you retard. Google Operation Northwoods and the Gulf of Tonkin then talk to me.
if you slow the video you can clearly see the plane,when 911 happened my first thought was inside job ,but the truther movement is so whacky with its denials of whats in front of them you start to think that the truther movement is actualy goverment lead, stick to facts would be your starting point if you want the truth
All I want to know is how an amateur pilot could have flown a 757 that low to the ground and accurately hit the side of a building. So many pilots say that would've been an impossible maneuver for the most seasoned vets. Oh yeah, and I want to know how 2 inconclusive videos is all we've ever seen of the most heavily guarded building in the entire world.
@gibby2433 Do you have quotes or links to the interviews with these "so many pilots" that told you how hard it would be to do this? I'd like to see some documentation before I make up my mind here.
@microchook dude stop, its so fuzzy u cant tell it thats a plane or a bird or a car, get real. all i know is that if a plane did hit we should see it in the air flying downwards....that i dont see.
@microchook You seriously believe that just anybody can fly a plane of that size let alone any type of plane that far off the ground that fast with a bunch of trees and bridges in the way? GET REAL!
@hiesen666 Since it did happen.., i guess you can get real! All the evidence is there showing what happened. The bent power poles, the plane debris, eye witness reports. Unless you really think its a giant cover up. I mean really, think about it.
@microchook Haha, okay so i guess one wheel is plane debris? not to mention every single reporter at the scene said they could see nothing of the sort? except a giant hole with absolutly no wing span impact....So you expect me what? to believe the plane just fell to little iddy biddy pieces? absolutly no wing marks, astonishing. i think you better check your "facts" again. Because the government always confiscates security video from everywhere within friggin 50 miles lol....GET REAL! NEXTTTT.
@hiesen666 You're an idiot. Plane didn't make a direct hit. It went in on an angle. The wings did leave an impact that run along the bottom of the Pentagon, something you can't see from pictures that are taken from far away. You're an idiot to say that it's a tiny hole. You need to know what depth perception is. The Pentagon is a huge building, so the hole does look tiny in comparison. I've seen it personally, the damage is extensive. Plain and simple. In your words: GET REAL! NEXTTTT
The Shills/Trolls/Disinfo (S.T.Ds) on here are under total control from their Handlers/Orderers/Masters/Owners (H.O.M.Os). Basically the HOMOs spread their STDs to try and infect free speech about 9/11 and stop people from spreading the truth, about 9/11 begging ppl to shut up, i wont do it, its so obvious and blatant, yet another false flag slaughtering 3000 innocent ppl, its disgusting, and the perps will burn in hell for it!
The reason you cannot see a lot of the plane ( you can see the tail section) is because there is a huge frickin pentagon right in front of it! And we know the plane was on a low flight course on approach because it knocked over lamposts on the highway. So that solves that.
If your basing your research on what you google and yahoo search then Its safe to say that you are all a bunch of retards and I am in the wrong line of work. I should be a sales man because I would be a trillionare.
its 'obvious' a plane hit, my mothers cousins sons uncle 'was there', he even saw the pilot, an arab guy, he lit a cigar while flicking a v-sign, he mouthed 'i hate america, you are all infidel bastards', before throwing his passport out the window before crashing, anyone who disagrees is an attention seeking twooftard.....how did i do shills? how did i do?
Ok so I have watched this video over a hundred times and I swear to god I can see the plane u have to look real close I can see the tail and the front if the plane
@blaknoizee a truck? why would a truck be driving on top of the pentagon's roof? I'm from DC and I can tell that is NOT a truck! Maybe you're not seeing what I'm talking about. Check it out 1 more time...
@TruthBTold2UnME Yea a truck. The highway is higher than the building. So the truck disappears behind the explosion. There are at least 5 vehicles that drive past in the frames before the explosion.
103 people saying something is not the same as 103 cameras. also, if the tapes showed nothing, why have they never been shown or returned. detained or not, you would see me being detained on the news from several angles. also, the 2 massive jet engines hitting windows at over 400mph didn't leave a scratch and gallons of burning fuel didn't manage to scorch wooden desks or paperwork inside the damaged building, compare that to the damage done to the wtc, that's very solid.
@thehoff1982 Yeah, I've seen all of that on "In Plane Site" and "Loos Change" as well. Here, I challenge you to do something, go back and look at the impact points at the WTC. The aircraft leave distinct outlines. There are books and paper and all sorts of wooden things that don't burn up around that outline. Until you can explain to me how 103 people say a plane hit while ZERO say anything other than a plane hit, then all you're doing is speculating.
i find it funny how they threw the news banner over the bottom that clearly indicates editing when the time counter changes a bunch. watch the cars. they slightly jump around a bit through the whole video. everything has been edited to give no detail about what it was that hit the pentacon.
I reject all the conspiracy theories (other than the terrorist conspiracy that was proven) but this is one element that does seem very odd to me that there would not be more security camera views of this. Maybe the camera covering that area was taken out by the crash?
That said there is the path of broken light polls, the aircraft wreckage on the lawn and in the building; as well as lots of eye witnesses. So I have no doubt it was AA 77 that hit the pentagon.
WHY DO YOU WANT TO DRAG EVERYONE IN TO COURT THAT DOESN'T AGREE WITH YOU.......I DIDN'T KNOW IT'S A CRIME ....WHAT DO YOU THINK YOU CAN DO TO US THAT THINK YOU ARE AN ASSHOLE...................NOTHING
@mdwlcx I want to drag you into court because your evidence SUCKS. Every heard of speculating? Every piece of 9/11 conspiracy bullshit evidence is speculative. Your evidence fails, your case fails. 9/11 was not conducted by the US government, but you assholes think you're all cruise missile damage or flying experts after you watch a few videos on youtube. The fact is, YOU AREN'T EXPERTS, and the majority of the true experts have ruled 9/11 happened as advertised.
@Kicker1981 SPECULATE THIS! THE EVIDENCE SPEAKS FOR ITSELF, THE GOVT FUCKED UP REAL BAD! NOW RETURN TO YOUR FAIRY TALE WORLD AND HAVE ANOTHER BITE OF BULLSHIT
THIS WAS A DISTRACTION....$2 MILLION DOLLARS DISAPEARED THE SAME DAY; THERE WAS MONEY LOST AND A (PLANE CRASH/BOMB) TO TURN OUR EYES BLIND SO WE COULDN'T SEE THE TRUTH! CORRUPTION AT IT'S BEST
Only two planes have completely disintegrated on impact in aviation history. Only three buildings have ever collapsed due to fire in architectural history. Only four planes have gone unnoticed in the most sophisticated air defense system's history. Whoever retorts with that "Oh, it's too emotional a topic" or "I had a loved one die that day" or "You're aiding the terrorists" or "You're not a patriot" needs to get smacked up side the head. Kosher-certified propaganda is all that remains.
ok first off.....that thing is going so fast u see a spec but nothing more....there is no way anyone saw what hit the pentagon, especially not paying attention
'Truthers" need to stop pissing out open-ended questions like "if the Pentagon is so well-guarded, then where is footage?" I'll educate you puppets on something, over 100 eyewitnesses saw a plane hit the Pentagon, ZERO saw anything other than a plane hit. 184 of the 189 victims were identified by over 100 forensic experts. Pshh, 9/11 Truth Movement, picking and choosing their own thruths since 2002. Embarrassing.
@Kicker1981 yeah? well guess what i didnt see any plane and i would like to confirm it because hey if they have nothing to hide then just show the plane and shut everyone up? the pentagons own employees admit that they didnt see any evidence of a plane within the rubble. your post fails assuming that you trust other peoples words and not your own eyes
@HVAC1337NJ LOL, you're complaining that my post fails because it trusts other people's words yet you doubt a plane hit the Pentagon because some of it's employees didn't see wreckage? Typical "truther" hypocricy. You know, I've never seen Paris in person, but I know it's there. Wind also exists, just to let you know. And so what if some employees didn't see wreckage, maybe they weren't in a position to see it. Again, typical "pick and choose" facts by the truther movement.
@HVAC1337NJ LOL, you're complaining that my post fails because it trusts other people's words yet you doubt a plane hit the Pentagon because some of it's employees didn't see wreckage? Typical "truther" hypocricy. You know, I've never seen Paris in person, but I know it's there. Wind also exists, just to let you know. And so what if some employees didn't see wreckage, maybe they weren't in a position to see it. Again, typical "pick and choose" facts by the truther movement.
@HVAC1337NJ So let me get this straight....you're saying I shouldn't trust other people's words, yet you cite Pentagon employees who didn't see plane wreckage. Way to argue yourself out of a point, I like it. You apparently aren't up to current events regarding plane wreckage. There is well-documented evidence of aircraft wreckage at the Pentagon. All but 5 of the victims on the passenger manifest were identified. Hard evidence > you not seeing a plane hit the Pentagon, sorry.
@Kicker1981 can i ask you question? do you think the pentagons high tech security video could at all produce a video of anything that resembled a plane? weve got planes hitting clear as day but what does grainy footage of nothing show. your assumption is black and white as if people wouldn't be capable of orchestrating something like this so that people like you and me argue. the govt is not a computer its people with faces and we have seen evil before. can we question it at least?
@HVAC1337NJ You're entitled to question anything you want, but when overwhelming evidence points to a 757 hitting the Pentagon, I'm then entitled to laugh at you for ignoring facts. What exactly is your theory? That ANYTHING other than a 757 hit it? That a missle hit it? That Santa Clause hit it? All of those are possible if you ignore the facts. Forgive me if I'm not interested in guessing games.
@Kicker1981 i agree with what your saying however overwhelming evidence in my book would be clear footage of a plane hitting the pentagon. we have plenty of footage of planes hitting the WTC as clear as day and those buildings have 1/100th of the amount of security and video footage that our governments buildings have. there are reports that a plane was there but there are also eye witnesses that DID say they saw a missle. shut me up for good and get more than 5 frames of a plane hitting
@HVAC1337NJ I have not heard ONE person say they saw a missile hit the Pentagon, not one. If you can find such an example, then by all means show me. And don't try and pull the footage of the reporter saying, "it was as if a cruise missile with wings came right over". That is not an eyewittness saying they saw a missile, that is someone making an allegory. Truther's have been misrepresenting such accounts for years now. No one saw a missile or anything other than a 757 hit.
@HVAC1337NJ As for the lack of security footage.....did you ever stop and think that a building as secure as the Pentagon doesn't need 10,000 cameras trained on it? It's the US military nerve center, its early warning systems doesn't require that many cameras. Have you considered that it could just be a coincidence that there wasn't a clear shot of the plane on that wing? It was abandoned for construction after all. Again, lack of video footage doesn't mean something didn't happen.
@Kicker1981 im not saying what it needs, im telling you its a fact that there are at least 50 cameras on that wing alone. im not a truther, republican, or democrat, im just someone who likes to logically bring together evidence for myself. yeah moon landings definetely happened, they proved it on mythbusters its cool. if i told you that a deer hit your car but i was the one that bumped it. your suspicious you say show me your car, i say nah your delusiounal. in court you will demand to see it
@Kicker1981 i thought we werent listening to what other people say? there really is no debate in this your going to blindly believe what the government says and im going to stick with raw unbiased evidence. its best to just end this probably
@HVAC1337NJ You're right, there is no debating this. I've provided over 100 people who saw a plane hit the Pentagon. You've provided none. the debate is over.
@Kicker1981 people lie, video doesnt. your point is moot not including you said not to believe what other people say. i guess you can but i cant. enjoy your stay on earth
@HVAC1337NJ So you're saying 136 people are lying about seeing a plane hit the Pentagon, at the same time you're flaunting a video that doesn't show anything? Wow, I'd love to get your ass in a court of law.
@Kicker1981 I'd like to get your ass in a court of law and use the same bullshit the Official Report uses. I think we could also use the fact that you type comments on Youtube - notorious for liars and foul-mouthed idiots who have no credibility at all! And while we're at it, I'll bring MY evidence and witnesses - and we'll see who wins! Of course, this is NOT a U.S. court, because they are all f-ing shills for corruption. We'll do the Netherlands!
@milackk7 Ooooh, look at you, tough guy. Feel better about yourself? The conspiracy case HAS NO case. Eyewtinesses? Give me a link for your eyewitnesses who saw anything OTHER than a plane hit the Pentagon. watch?v=t1wQ2BJsgx0 shows several eyewitnesses who saw a plane hit and their testimonies. 103 SAW It HIT, that's 103 to ZERO who saw a missile or anything else hit. Having a bunch of speculative evidence is NOT having a case.
@Kicker1981 Tough guy? Lol. You have witnesses with no credibly evidence to back them up. The FDR data is bogus. Here are your witnesses: /watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o You can start at 18:53 (watch it all if you like). It's not enough to have witnesses Kicker - you need credible evidence, and there is none. None. See anything wrong with this image? members.shaw.ca/freedomsix/pics/punchout-path.jpg No hole in D-Ring, No hole in back of E-Ring. Hmm. Amazing. It's just science, Kicker. Not personal
@milackk7 Your video proves my point, thank you. You're trying to discredit witnesses who's stories have slight variations. I hate to tell you this, junior, but that happens with ALL eyewitness accounts. Just because they vary doesn't mean they are lying or are that they are not credible; vantage point, attention to detail, description skills....these are just a few variables to consider, which you obviously haven't. Nobody saw anything other than a 757 hit the Pentagon, your argument=fail.
@Kicker1981The video simply a partial response to your request. The variance of the direction of a Boeing has significant consequences. The Official Report provides an impossible scenario for a plane of that size - therefore, it cannot be ruled as fact until proven possible: but there is no credible evidence available. It is not my intention to argue with you on this - you're comprehension is set and unavailable. Again, no evidence exists to support the flight path, or Al-Qaeda involvement.
@milackk7 Well, I'm glad we got that straightened out. I'm glad you're not arguiing with me because when you say things like, "no evidence exists to support the flight path" or "no Al-Qaeda involvement" you are flat out wrong. I really don't care how you come to such inaccurate conclusions, but I have no desire to argue with someone who deals primarily with speculation. The 757 was tracked by ATC until it crashed. It was seen by over 100 people, including a C-130 crew who SAW IT HIT.
@Kicker1981 Sorry to jump in here, but no, the C-130 pilot did NOT see the 757 hit. So if he states that now, he's lying, as evidenced in an earlier interview. The FDR points do not line up as stated in the OR - that has been proven, AND the g-forces stated are too high for that aircraft to level out. Where are the marks on the grass? I have the photos. A Global Hawk might do it...but who cares, right? 100 people are liars/wrong. And THAT is perfectly possible - speculation on your side.
@milackk7 Lol, you think a Global Hawk took out the Pentagon? Ok, if you're considering that as a possibility, then no offense, but you're an idiot. In order for a GH to take out the 'Gon, the 757 that hundreds of people saw heading RIGHT FOR THE PENTAGON had to have gone somewhere. It would have to have pulled up and away, WHICH NO ONE SAW. Are you really getting your panties in a wad over eyewitness accounts not matching the FDR data? THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. No conspiracy, pal.
@Kicker1981 No, I'm not convinced a Global Hawk took out the Pentagon - but it's more relevant to the data presented, and could carry a warhead at that time. Most witnesses are shills; those that saw a large plane coming from the Northerly route (important)t did not actually SEE the impact. The plane missed. The mass destruction was created later (plan didn't go perfectly) and the punch out hole is impossible - clearly noted in photographs and testimony. You can see that for yourself, clearly!
@milackk7 Haha!, listen to you and your wacky theory. Ok, so you think the plane might have missed, Again, NO ONE SAW THE PLANE FLY AWAY FROM THE PENTAGON. That really sucks for your theory. Also, if the "plan" went wrong, and the US government had to use a Global Hawk at the last moment, THEN WHY IS THERE AIRCRAFT WRECKAGE AT THE PENTAGON? You think a bunch of agent Smiths threw it out on the lawn at the last moment? LOL, grow up man, start living in the real world.
@Kicker1981 You're right - my 'theory' is wacky. Completely implausible, and unscientific. I have no evidence to contradict the Official Report and YOU are correct. Fine. So...just out of curiosity, what do you gain or benefit from believing the Official Report and arguing with people who want to know the truth? What is your purpose on here? And do you have ANY facts, or just arguments? No. I don't really care - just asking.
@milackk7 My MO? Well, it really irritates me when people who are searching for the truth ignore so many blatant facts and common sense. Take you for example, you're SPECULATING in your quest to find the truth, never a good idea. You can't explain how your theories work, so there's little objective in your intent. A 757 hit the Pentagon on a Tuesday morning, it was very, VERY busy at that time, eyewitnesses everywhere. If a plane didn't hit the Pentagon, then why did NO ONE see it fly away?
@Kicker1981 First, I take the position that LIARS (FBI/CIA/Administration) are not to be trusted. Secondly, there are witnesses who saw the plane from a different path AND one saw a plane fly over the parking lot. There are other witnesses, but why is it so hard for you to accept that TRUTH is SUPPRESSED...continuously! Look at motive, then credibility, then science. If there is evidence to the contrary then an investigation must be conducted. An impartial one! That is my position.
@milackk7 Impartial investigations have been conducted, and they all came to the same conclusion; a 757 crashed into the Pentagon. Purdue University, led by impartial scientists, used computer models to illustrate why the Pentagon was damaged the way it was by the 757. No one saw the plane miss the Pentagon, NO ONE. That is a damning fact my friend. The fact is, you won't accept any other possbility than a government comspiracy, so another investigation is useless on you.
@Kicker1981 Kicker1981 *sigh* why do this to yourself? Again, what's your addiction to Official garbage? The Purdue study merely simulates the impact - it does NOT explain the collapse, or the explosive expansion of debris: watch?v=iQdJuQLNFCk (flawed science). There is NO proof the jets were Flights 11 or 175, per ATC gaps in radar coverage and transponder code switches. And enough with the witnesses! Their testimony is NOT FACT, merely persuasive to a jury: like TED OLSON - a LIAR (FBI)
@milackk7 Blah blah blah. Until you explain to me how a 757 can head for a building, miss it, and NO ONE see it, then I'm done with you. All of the rest of your drivel is speculation, which bores me to tears.
@Kicker1981 Only to those who refuse to keep an open mind and refuse to view the evidence that is more credible than the Official Report. CIT provides the witness who watched the plane fly over the parking lot. This coincides with those that saw the place lift up, banking to the right (their left) and the FDR data analyzed by REAL PILOTS. Just because someone says they saw a plane hit the Pentagon doesn't make their words FACT - stop being stupid. NO credible plane parts found! Period.
@milackk7 No credible plane parts found huh? Glad you cleared that up for me, now you can stop comparing FDR data to eyewitnesses. You know, since no credible plane parts were found. Keep on shooting yourself in the foot, this is fun to watch.
@Kicker1981 Yessir - no credible plane parts at Pentagon. You see a few pieces here and there, but those images were ported to the public 'years' after - not on the day. The parts were never identified (by serial number) as being from Flight 77. Like I said, no investigation. The punch-out hole from landing gear (it is shown by a hole) how did it get there? You can clearly see no HOLE in back side of E-Ring, or D-Ring. Can you explain that Mr. Laughable? Want the photo -it's from the Navy?
@milackk7 No, I don't want your photo from the Navy. They belong to the US government so they can't be trusted. Plus, their photo was ported to the public several years after the incident, not the day of, so it's credibility is shot. See how this works, truther? I can play the denounce everything with no evidence game also. The way you guys form a case is pathetic.
@Kicker1981 Let's be clear, I am not producing a case, and I am not interested in changing your mind. I've merely provided common-knowledge info. But I won't waste your time or mine with details that are rejected intentionally. Nor do I care to entertain a willful ignorance that permeates our country. Takes a lot of condemnation to work that way Kicker1981. That WILL catch up to you, as invincible as you find yourself. Remember that.
@milackk7 Calling you out on BS claims isn't intentional rejection, but you claiming that the aircraft parts at the Pentagon were planted by the government IS intentional rejection. Where is your proof that they were planted? Like I said earlier, you "truthers" build all of your claims on SPECULATION. Just as you are now speculating that parts were planted. Prove it, where is your evidence? You have none, keep making blind accusations, that works pretty well.
@Kicker1981 fair comment, but there must be footage of a plane, so why not release the tapes and shut all the so called loony conspiracy theorists up?
@thehoff1982 Not necessarily. Many people assume that the 757 that hit the Pentagon slowly cruised into a building that had a bazillion cameras trained on it. Yes, there are lots of cameras watching the Pentagon, but not the skies around it. Also, it is extremely difficult to catch something on camera traveling over 300 mph. When you consider these facts, then the poor video quality we have of the plane hitting the Pentagon is completely consistent with reality.
@Kicker1981 so there are no outward facing cameras? no other cameras trained on that wall? what about the confiscated cctv footage taken from places en-route which were never released or returned? i am not a conspiracy theorist, but i would like to know the truth. nobody can tell me that if i were to run across that lawn, the only camera which would pick me up is that shit one at the entrance to the car park!
@thehoff1982 For all we know, the confiscated tapes didn't yield any information. We simply don't know, but that doesn't mean there is a conspiracy. Also, there is a difference between you running up to the Pentagon and a plane flying into it. I'm quite certain you'd be detained long before you reached the building. Finally, 103 people saw a plane hit the Pentagon. That is essentially 103 "cameras" that saw a plane crash into it. Nobody saw anything but a plane hit it, that's pretty solid.
@Kicker1981 yeah...because 136 people and more were paid to lie....you haven't got that yet? twin towers was a controlled demolition.....WAKE UP PS THERE ARE A LOT MORE THAN 136
@Kicker1981 HEY BUCKO YOU SIT DOWN AND SHUT THE FUCK UP, WHAT WERE YOU PAID TO TROLL THE INTERNET AND WRITE BULLSHIT COMMENTS? BUZZ OFF BUG DICK...PEOPLE LIKE YOU WILL BE SO ASTONISHED WHEN THIS SHIT TAKES IT UP A NOTCH....WHAT WILL YOU DO WHEN YOU FIND OUT THAT YOU ARE "W R O N G" ASS BITE, BICYCLE SEAT SNIFFER (IN THE SUMMER, TOO). GO JERK OFF IN FRONT OF YOUR MOTHER ASSHOLE
@mdwlcx Man who writes in all caps is making up for size difficiencies in other areas. So where's that proof of witnesses being paid off, junior? You're doing very little to impress me right now.
@Kicker1981 DONT YOU KNOW THAT MOST OF THE PEOPLE THAT DISAGREE WITH THE BIG GUYS GET WHACKED....HOW OLD ARE YOU, WHY DO YOU INSULT MY ANATOMY ASS MONKEY. EVERY COMMENT YOU MAKE HERE SHOWS EVERYBODY WHAT A DICK SNIFFER YOU REALLY ARE. GO SHOVE A SALAMI IN YOUR PANTS ASSHOLE, OR BETTER YET SHOVE IT UP YOUR ASS, TAKE THE ONE THAT IS IN THERE OR JUST CRAM ANOTHER ONE BUCKO!
@Kicker1981 i know youve already made up your mind on the subject just as sure you would have been one of the people telling Copernicus "your crazy if you think the earth isnt the center of the universe, you've got no evidence"
Ummm... I see the airplane, it's plain (Distasteful unintentional pun) as day. You can see it in the beginning and at the end, it's in front of the truck. It's there 3 times. You can see the left wing and tail fin easily if you take the time to look.
Maybe it's just me, but I DEF see a flash of light and what looks like a tail glinting in the sunlight them second prior to the explosion... you can see an aircraft in a nose up position... watch as the truck comes into view on the freeway... it's there. 0:23-0:25.... but maybe it's just me seeing what the evil USA wants me too!
You do see the tail. Of something. not a Boeing. the real Boeing's had super tuff wings, they left cartoon cut outs at the WTC when they melted seamlessly, wing tips, edges, tail, fuselage, all of it, melting into the WTC. Then it exploded. That Pentagon "plane" did explode inside but its wings folded back. Must be a Cessna 140 or something
@IExposeMormonism You might want to consider the different building materials. Steel columns and glass at 500mph vs reinforced concrete at 500mph. Consider the thickness as well.
@ODN67 Oh, Maybe I missed something in 35 years of research. You think your comment explains folding wings and super rigid wings that melt seamlessly through 200 ft of steel and steel reinforced concrete? I have a playlist of "WTC Construction Techniques" Have a look. It's a eye opener
@IExposeMormonism ur on the right path.. but do not argue what is aguable only what is not ...ask ur disagreers, why is it that the pentagon tape, the marriott hotel tape and the restaurant tape all seem to omit a good pic of the plane?.....that my dear is what they cant and wont argue cuz they know onyy fabrication explains it .
@oriaston67 good point, shills need to be hemmed and boxed in. There is an excellent documentary with some 12 witnesses Proving the decoy plane was on the Other side of the Citgo station. The almost invisible missile came in where the Pentagon Perps claim the Boeing came in. The Doc' is on my Pentagon Play list.
@oriaston67 Because they are meant for close views not for 1080p crystal clear quality views. Companies are also cheap and when you buy close to 100 cameras you aren't going to choose the ones that produce a high quality image at $600 a piece.
@Grey4920You're trying to tell me that one of the highest security buildings in the world only got footage from one camera.. which happened to film at 1 frame per second and not get a clear picture of the "plane". Then within minutes all other videos of the attack are confiscated by the FBI. Its not about conspiracy theorists. Its just people who aren't retarded
@KeshaIsHot808 You're idiot. Lets think a little bit here, I'll help you out because obviously you can't do it. Alright lets see here, why would the government take every possible available footage of a potential terrorists attack. -begin sarcasm- I mean because obviously they wouldn't want to examine it from every possible perspective they could, that's just ignorant, why would the Government want to know everything that happened on a day that thousands of Americans died?
Also, are you trying to say a plane did not hit the pentagon? I really don't believe that they make 3 story tall missiles with jet fuel the primary explosive.
You can see a plane clearly hitting the Pentagon, but no where near wear you claim with the arrow. It's seen best at 0:23-0:26. I don't know how ya'll aren't seeing that plane...
Obviously we should see the entire plane because captain dumb shit posts this video with an arrow saying we should. Exactly what study of low flying planes that should be visible at this camera angle while smashing into The Pentagon did you get this from? You talk as if this happens all the time and you know exactly what the camera should capture. Typical conspirator. What i say is the truth....I dont need to rationalize my claims.....blah blah blah.
wait, what? At :25 what is that white triangle you see for a second that appears to dive down, followed by an explosion.
Poor quality obviously, but couldnt that be the tail fin or whatever? And yeah we cant see the plane body, but whatever that thing was looked like it was behind something. As in...we wouldnt be able to see it.
@tiki2188 I agree with you on the fact that whatever the object was, we wouldn't be able to see it in this video, obviously the object was on the other side. The tail fin however, was actually a truck driving on a bridge...
I find the 911 conspiracies harder to believe than god himself. There is something psychologically wrong with conspiracy theorists and religous people.
The plane is visible in this video. It's coming in from the left side, not the right side. Looks like it hit the ground prior to hitting the building. Looks like several hundred feet prior.
@dougzilla33 you are on crack or just delusional if you think this shows a 767,,,,,,,and you claim it llooks like it hit the ground??,,,,,,,,you can't even see the ground in this video,,,,,,epic fail by the schills to try and prove the lie,,,,,,,,you cannot prove a lie,,,,,,,that is where your problems will be forever,,,,,,,people do not believe the official bullshit anymore,,,,,,,are you aware that you are in a major minority now???
the pentigon has 86 video cameras just in the sec.were the plane hit, and all they can show us is some grainy video of???dont see it,Im sure they will release some fake video of it later
What we need is a group called Statisticians for 9/11 Truth. Why? Because what are the chances that two buildings fall exactly the same way even though they were hit at different angles and the one hit last falls first. What are the chances that two planes knock down three buildings when neither plane hits the third building? What are the chances that the country with the most jet fighters can't even one up on target when it really counts?
@NEKO2BOT The funniest part is that they COULD Intercept 50+ planes in the last year before the incident and never came late. Well, Cheney did not revoke the orders like the insider told us already.
@OsamaBinKathr: The more a person learns about the real facts of 9/11 the harder it gets to talk to people who insist the official story is reasonable because not one thing about the official is reasonable and it looks so obvious once you know a few facts.
@NEKO2BOT I find the very same thing Sir, that is why we must continue to educate those who don't know. We owe it to the innocents who were murdered by the shadow US govt that day and the time following. I now just come right out and say it was fake, all of it, and then point them at the youtube videos. Once they see the videos of WTC7 collapsing clearly in controlled demolition and the testimony of firefighters and the lack of planes at the Pentagon they look shocked.
@sausagedogheaven: I have asked a few people which single video they feel is most convincing when of comes to helping "non-believers" see the light. What would be your pick? BTW, have you ever read the information on Philip Zelikow or watched video on him? A few years before he became the director of the 9/11 commission he wrote a paper on how to use disasters to change public opion. Wish I was joking but I am not.
Nice try but the usual misleading words from a gov. sheep.
.
Jim Hoffman wrote this article. He is NOT the truth movement. He is one man proposing ideas and he has proven nothing about the Pentagon crash. His claim is that there were lots of witnesses and that's why we have to believe it was a plane. BUT....he wrote this article in 2004. Since then, many witnesses, especially the USA Today journalists, have been proven liars.
Nope, you fail, that link doesn't work (and yes, I deleted what I was supposed to), but I have a picture here that settles this issue:
/watch?v=bMZ-nkYr46w#t=38s
No columns, and the Chief Engineer confirms this, you cannot overule what he says, he DESIGNED it.
This issue is done, and you will shut up about it, as this is NOT a WTC video, this is the PENTAGON, either talk about the PENTAGON, or get out. If you want tot alk about the Towers so bad, go to one of THEIR videos.
@Alaskaslim Seriously... Pictures of construction overrule everyones talking. WTC had a core and it disappeared almost completly which is not very likely to happen without any additional, well placed, force.
I can see that 18 wheeler pretty good but no 737.
mrh785 3 weeks ago
Ladiens and gentlemen! Welcome to the 11h round of the contest. In the red corner... 134556 ko's and ZERO losses.. theee mightyyyy Debunkeeeerrrrr!!! And the blue corner... 1 ko and 254329776578 losses and still capable to fight... theee unbelieavabllleeeee The Truuutthheeerrrr... LETS GET READY TO RUMBBBBLLLLLEEEEE!!!11
Scumbot404 1 month ago
@Scumbot404 Your name says it all..... Grow a brain or stop posting (please)
TheEvilEvangelion 3 weeks ago
@TheEvilEvangelion Absolutely amazing conclusion:) 10 points. I kno my joke wasnt good but it's just a result of my frustration after talking with some obsessed debunker who believes in one and only truth. But the joke I told is actually as stupid as the WTC debating is. Debunkers are too obsessed, that's the problem. I have talked impartially about the case yet they still act moronic like I would be a truther. Brainless joke for brainless ppl. Simple.
Scumbot404 3 weeks ago
@Scumbot404 idiot... still defending the indefensible....
TheCF221 3 weeks ago
@TheCF221 o.0 say what? Im not defending anybody or anything.
Scumbot404 3 weeks ago
worse than the bad black and white JFK photos of the knoll......history repreats...
MrNoblemanoflove 1 month ago
If they were armed with box cutters and there was only a handful per plane then how didnt the passengers just kick them in the nuts and take control of the plane when the sand niggers stoodup and screamed alllllllllllah or what ever they say when they are being complete fags. I mean no offense to the passengers who died but do mean offense to the homos who hijacked the planes.
drsmoney12 4 months ago
i saw the plane
bos0223 4 months ago
The Pentagon is the MOST secure building in the US. You're trying to convince people that THIS is all the video available of the event? What about the building itself? Um, maybe 1000 cameras?
911 was an inside job and a 757 did not hit the Pentagon. Prove it did!!! WHere are the rotors? 12foot dia TITANIUM rotors simply disappeared into vapor?
Oh yeah.....I'm believin' that. And by the way, I'm the King of Kashmir!
foonyah 4 months ago 6
@foonyah prove it didnt you stupid uneducated asshole
pocomedy 1 day ago
So....the conspiracy wasn't big enough to keep this top-secret video confiscated...and it was released due to a lawsuit. Conspiracy nutcases, are you kidding me?
HelloGreedo 4 months ago
@HelloGreedo note when it was finally released, by now majority won't even know or care, this way they can use this shitty video as another excuse to there being no false flag attack
JJbones88 4 months ago
@HelloGreedo What a waste of time!controlled demolition,missile on the pentagon,fake crash at skankville?why not concentrate on the more important and creepy aspects?like the fact that it's proven that secret intelligences had foreknowledge of a plan to bring down the towers?the fact that 1993 wtc bombing (6 dead,thousands of injured) was orchestrated by the fbi.google emad salem if u don't believe me.do research on "Operation gladio" and "Operation northwood".it's false flag terrorism
geiuy 3 months ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
9/11 was an inside job for about 70 reasons, 1 reason alone can be considered coincidence, 2 is suspicious, 3 is inside job, 4 is a blatant inside job, but 70??? conspiracies happen, this was one of them, mass murder for personal gain! Oil, opium and bases in the middle east, better to take from the weak before other superpowers (russia, china) do! We may benefit in the long run when we fill up our cars, but it doesn't make 9.11 ok! Mass murder! the shills will attack me but i don't care!
wellifthemediasaysit 4 months ago
911 the only day where buildings fell to "fire" and where there's no planes at plane crash sites.
sychophantt 4 months ago
@sychophantt You idoit, The planes exploded. There are millions of eyewitnesses to say they crashed, one of them is my Aunt that was in another side of the Pentagon when the plane hit. THINK BEFORE LEAVING A COMMENT FUCKING TARD.
supercamishow 4 months ago
@supercamishow Let's see the evidence? I guess a 747 fit into that tiny hole in the pentagon. What happened to the wings? Where are the wingmarks on the building? Keep believing everything the "mind machine" aka the tv tells you retard. Google Operation Northwoods and the Gulf of Tonkin then talk to me.
sychophantt 4 months ago
if you slow the video you can clearly see the plane,when 911 happened my first thought was inside job ,but the truther movement is so whacky with its denials of whats in front of them you start to think that the truther movement is actualy goverment lead, stick to facts would be your starting point if you want the truth
imj3nks 4 months ago
No skid marks, wing marks, wings or engines at the crash site LOL
sychophantt 4 months ago
@sychophantt Apart from the pieces that where scattered all over the lawn area in front of the impact area...
microchook 4 months ago
All I want to know is how an amateur pilot could have flown a 757 that low to the ground and accurately hit the side of a building. So many pilots say that would've been an impossible maneuver for the most seasoned vets. Oh yeah, and I want to know how 2 inconclusive videos is all we've ever seen of the most heavily guarded building in the entire world.
gibby2433 4 months ago
@gibby2433 Do you have quotes or links to the interviews with these "so many pilots" that told you how hard it would be to do this? I'd like to see some documentation before I make up my mind here.
GBev2K 4 months ago
/watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o
megamogx 4 months ago
You can see the tail of the plane, just above the horizon... the white triangle
...
microchook 4 months ago
@microchook dude stop, its so fuzzy u cant tell it thats a plane or a bird or a car, get real. all i know is that if a plane did hit we should see it in the air flying downwards....that i dont see.
hiesen666 4 months ago
@hiesen666 well you'd be wrong. The plane flew flat with the horizon and then impacted. Have a look a the reports and debris.
microchook 4 months ago
@microchook You seriously believe that just anybody can fly a plane of that size let alone any type of plane that far off the ground that fast with a bunch of trees and bridges in the way? GET REAL!
hiesen666 4 months ago
@hiesen666 Since it did happen.., i guess you can get real! All the evidence is there showing what happened. The bent power poles, the plane debris, eye witness reports. Unless you really think its a giant cover up. I mean really, think about it.
microchook 4 months ago
@microchook Haha, okay so i guess one wheel is plane debris? not to mention every single reporter at the scene said they could see nothing of the sort? except a giant hole with absolutly no wing span impact....So you expect me what? to believe the plane just fell to little iddy biddy pieces? absolutly no wing marks, astonishing. i think you better check your "facts" again. Because the government always confiscates security video from everywhere within friggin 50 miles lol....GET REAL! NEXTTTT.
hiesen666 4 months ago
@hiesen666 You're an idiot. Plane didn't make a direct hit. It went in on an angle. The wings did leave an impact that run along the bottom of the Pentagon, something you can't see from pictures that are taken from far away. You're an idiot to say that it's a tiny hole. You need to know what depth perception is. The Pentagon is a huge building, so the hole does look tiny in comparison. I've seen it personally, the damage is extensive. Plain and simple. In your words: GET REAL! NEXTTTT
Maxochist90 4 months ago
@hiesen666 *face palm* you really think that is some massive government conspiracy? I mean really?
microchook 4 months ago
@microchook "punch a baby" you really believe everything they tell you??? i mean really??? ITS A GIANT HOLE!!!!!
hiesen666 4 months ago
@hiesen666 yo moms a Giant hole.
microchook 4 months ago
@microchook oh so your conceding defeat?
hiesen666 3 months ago
@microchook All im saying is that what theya re saying happened is not physically possible. period.
hiesen666 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Shills/Trolls/Disinfo (S.T.Ds) on here are under total control from their Handlers/Orderers/Masters/Owners (H.O.M.Os). Basically the HOMOs spread their STDs to try and infect free speech about 9/11 and stop people from spreading the truth, about 9/11 begging ppl to shut up, i wont do it, its so obvious and blatant, yet another false flag slaughtering 3000 innocent ppl, its disgusting, and the perps will burn in hell for it!
wellifthemediasaysit 4 months ago
The reason you cannot see a lot of the plane ( you can see the tail section) is because there is a huge frickin pentagon right in front of it! And we know the plane was on a low flight course on approach because it knocked over lamposts on the highway. So that solves that.
Kuchikukan666 5 months ago
what about the people driving by? why the fuck have they not said anything
jimmymuzza 5 months ago
@jimmymuzza I have wondered that too. Did any witnesses come forward and say 'I saw this' or 'I heard that"?
pattybbb1 5 months ago
If your basing your research on what you google and yahoo search then Its safe to say that you are all a bunch of retards and I am in the wrong line of work. I should be a sales man because I would be a trillionare.
cesar333 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
its 'obvious' a plane hit, my mothers cousins sons uncle 'was there', he even saw the pilot, an arab guy, he lit a cigar while flicking a v-sign, he mouthed 'i hate america, you are all infidel bastards', before throwing his passport out the window before crashing, anyone who disagrees is an attention seeking twooftard.....how did i do shills? how did i do?
wellifthemediasaysit 5 months ago
Ok so I have watched this video over a hundred times and I swear to god I can see the plane u have to look real close I can see the tail and the front if the plane
reape1987 5 months ago
Pentagon official story plus video = EPIC FAIL
Lolololol
Remember your going to have to lie in the bed your making America.
GoodyWillPwnJ00 5 months ago
am i the only one who spot's an unusual object/plane flying from left to right moment before the explosion? look for yourselves!!! any guesses?
TruthBTold2UnME 6 months ago
@TruthBTold2UnME U must be the only one, because I see a truck and a truck driving by left to right at the moment before the explosion.
blaknoizee 5 months ago
@blaknoizee a truck? why would a truck be driving on top of the pentagon's roof? I'm from DC and I can tell that is NOT a truck! Maybe you're not seeing what I'm talking about. Check it out 1 more time...
TruthBTold2UnME 5 months ago
@TruthBTold2UnME Yea a truck. The highway is higher than the building. So the truck disappears behind the explosion. There are at least 5 vehicles that drive past in the frames before the explosion.
blaknoizee 5 months ago
The pentagon is ringed by cameras. If they had any footage of a 757 hitting the building, they would have released it.
Maybe the cameras were turned off, like the pentagon's anti-aircraft missles.
OldUncleDave 6 months ago
103 people saying something is not the same as 103 cameras. also, if the tapes showed nothing, why have they never been shown or returned. detained or not, you would see me being detained on the news from several angles. also, the 2 massive jet engines hitting windows at over 400mph didn't leave a scratch and gallons of burning fuel didn't manage to scorch wooden desks or paperwork inside the damaged building, compare that to the damage done to the wtc, that's very solid.
thehoff1982 6 months ago 2
@thehoff1982 Yeah, I've seen all of that on "In Plane Site" and "Loos Change" as well. Here, I challenge you to do something, go back and look at the impact points at the WTC. The aircraft leave distinct outlines. There are books and paper and all sorts of wooden things that don't burn up around that outline. Until you can explain to me how 103 people say a plane hit while ZERO say anything other than a plane hit, then all you're doing is speculating.
Kicker1981 6 months ago
i find it funny how they threw the news banner over the bottom that clearly indicates editing when the time counter changes a bunch. watch the cars. they slightly jump around a bit through the whole video. everything has been edited to give no detail about what it was that hit the pentacon.
KymeraGR7 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
if the United States was behind this attack, why did Osama and many other terrorist oppratives admit they they staged the attacks on 9/11
kma123ify 8 months ago
I reject all the conspiracy theories (other than the terrorist conspiracy that was proven) but this is one element that does seem very odd to me that there would not be more security camera views of this. Maybe the camera covering that area was taken out by the crash?
That said there is the path of broken light polls, the aircraft wreckage on the lawn and in the building; as well as lots of eye witnesses. So I have no doubt it was AA 77 that hit the pentagon.
IamtheBurceDickenson 9 months ago
WHY DO YOU WANT TO DRAG EVERYONE IN TO COURT THAT DOESN'T AGREE WITH YOU.......I DIDN'T KNOW IT'S A CRIME ....WHAT DO YOU THINK YOU CAN DO TO US THAT THINK YOU ARE AN ASSHOLE...................NOTHING
mdwlcx 10 months ago
@mdwlcx I want to drag you into court because your evidence SUCKS. Every heard of speculating? Every piece of 9/11 conspiracy bullshit evidence is speculative. Your evidence fails, your case fails. 9/11 was not conducted by the US government, but you assholes think you're all cruise missile damage or flying experts after you watch a few videos on youtube. The fact is, YOU AREN'T EXPERTS, and the majority of the true experts have ruled 9/11 happened as advertised.
Kicker1981 10 months ago
@Kicker1981 SPECULATE THIS! THE EVIDENCE SPEAKS FOR ITSELF, THE GOVT FUCKED UP REAL BAD! NOW RETURN TO YOUR FAIRY TALE WORLD AND HAVE ANOTHER BITE OF BULLSHIT
mdwlcx 10 months ago
@Kicker1981 CHECK THIS OUT AND EXPLAIN IT....REALLY! YOUTUBE VIDEO "9/11 CONSPIRACY???" BY davechandler. EXPLAIN THIS ONE!
mdwlcx 10 months ago
Stupid terrorists aimed at a part that was under construction, how unlucky or were they??
So dumb, the government did it, to start a war, to make money, and they were stupid enough to think the whole of us are dumber than them.
CptSmokeAlot 10 months ago
THIS WAS A DISTRACTION....$2 MILLION DOLLARS DISAPEARED THE SAME DAY; THERE WAS MONEY LOST AND A (PLANE CRASH/BOMB) TO TURN OUR EYES BLIND SO WE COULDN'T SEE THE TRUTH! CORRUPTION AT IT'S BEST
mdwlcx 10 months ago
how do u not see a boeing airplane in that shot? makes ya wonder..
Coachrob36 10 months ago
Only two planes have completely disintegrated on impact in aviation history. Only three buildings have ever collapsed due to fire in architectural history. Only four planes have gone unnoticed in the most sophisticated air defense system's history. Whoever retorts with that "Oh, it's too emotional a topic" or "I had a loved one die that day" or "You're aiding the terrorists" or "You're not a patriot" needs to get smacked up side the head. Kosher-certified propaganda is all that remains.
tadpoleposition 10 months ago
ok first off.....that thing is going so fast u see a spec but nothing more....there is no way anyone saw what hit the pentagon, especially not paying attention
praetorian2150 10 months ago
I dont think I ever want to know the truth about 9/11. I think id vomit repulsively .
Bondie11 11 months ago
'Truthers" need to stop pissing out open-ended questions like "if the Pentagon is so well-guarded, then where is footage?" I'll educate you puppets on something, over 100 eyewitnesses saw a plane hit the Pentagon, ZERO saw anything other than a plane hit. 184 of the 189 victims were identified by over 100 forensic experts. Pshh, 9/11 Truth Movement, picking and choosing their own thruths since 2002. Embarrassing.
Kicker1981 11 months ago
@Kicker1981 yeah? well guess what i didnt see any plane and i would like to confirm it because hey if they have nothing to hide then just show the plane and shut everyone up? the pentagons own employees admit that they didnt see any evidence of a plane within the rubble. your post fails assuming that you trust other peoples words and not your own eyes
HVAC1337NJ 11 months ago
@HVAC1337NJ LOL, you're complaining that my post fails because it trusts other people's words yet you doubt a plane hit the Pentagon because some of it's employees didn't see wreckage? Typical "truther" hypocricy. You know, I've never seen Paris in person, but I know it's there. Wind also exists, just to let you know. And so what if some employees didn't see wreckage, maybe they weren't in a position to see it. Again, typical "pick and choose" facts by the truther movement.
Kicker1981 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@HVAC1337NJ LOL, you're complaining that my post fails because it trusts other people's words yet you doubt a plane hit the Pentagon because some of it's employees didn't see wreckage? Typical "truther" hypocricy. You know, I've never seen Paris in person, but I know it's there. Wind also exists, just to let you know. And so what if some employees didn't see wreckage, maybe they weren't in a position to see it. Again, typical "pick and choose" facts by the truther movement.
Kicker1981 11 months ago
@HVAC1337NJ So let me get this straight....you're saying I shouldn't trust other people's words, yet you cite Pentagon employees who didn't see plane wreckage. Way to argue yourself out of a point, I like it. You apparently aren't up to current events regarding plane wreckage. There is well-documented evidence of aircraft wreckage at the Pentagon. All but 5 of the victims on the passenger manifest were identified. Hard evidence > you not seeing a plane hit the Pentagon, sorry.
Kicker1981 11 months ago
@Kicker1981 can i ask you question? do you think the pentagons high tech security video could at all produce a video of anything that resembled a plane? weve got planes hitting clear as day but what does grainy footage of nothing show. your assumption is black and white as if people wouldn't be capable of orchestrating something like this so that people like you and me argue. the govt is not a computer its people with faces and we have seen evil before. can we question it at least?
HVAC1337NJ 11 months ago
@HVAC1337NJ You're entitled to question anything you want, but when overwhelming evidence points to a 757 hitting the Pentagon, I'm then entitled to laugh at you for ignoring facts. What exactly is your theory? That ANYTHING other than a 757 hit it? That a missle hit it? That Santa Clause hit it? All of those are possible if you ignore the facts. Forgive me if I'm not interested in guessing games.
Kicker1981 11 months ago
@Kicker1981 i agree with what your saying however overwhelming evidence in my book would be clear footage of a plane hitting the pentagon. we have plenty of footage of planes hitting the WTC as clear as day and those buildings have 1/100th of the amount of security and video footage that our governments buildings have. there are reports that a plane was there but there are also eye witnesses that DID say they saw a missle. shut me up for good and get more than 5 frames of a plane hitting
HVAC1337NJ 11 months ago
@HVAC1337NJ I have not heard ONE person say they saw a missile hit the Pentagon, not one. If you can find such an example, then by all means show me. And don't try and pull the footage of the reporter saying, "it was as if a cruise missile with wings came right over". That is not an eyewittness saying they saw a missile, that is someone making an allegory. Truther's have been misrepresenting such accounts for years now. No one saw a missile or anything other than a 757 hit.
Kicker1981 11 months ago
@HVAC1337NJ As for the lack of security footage.....did you ever stop and think that a building as secure as the Pentagon doesn't need 10,000 cameras trained on it? It's the US military nerve center, its early warning systems doesn't require that many cameras. Have you considered that it could just be a coincidence that there wasn't a clear shot of the plane on that wing? It was abandoned for construction after all. Again, lack of video footage doesn't mean something didn't happen.
Kicker1981 11 months ago
@Kicker1981 im not saying what it needs, im telling you its a fact that there are at least 50 cameras on that wing alone. im not a truther, republican, or democrat, im just someone who likes to logically bring together evidence for myself. yeah moon landings definetely happened, they proved it on mythbusters its cool. if i told you that a deer hit your car but i was the one that bumped it. your suspicious you say show me your car, i say nah your delusiounal. in court you will demand to see it
HVAC1337NJ 11 months ago
@HVAC1337NJ So where's that person who said they saw a cruise missile hit the Pentagon?
Kicker1981 11 months ago
@Kicker1981 i thought we werent listening to what other people say? there really is no debate in this your going to blindly believe what the government says and im going to stick with raw unbiased evidence. its best to just end this probably
HVAC1337NJ 11 months ago
@HVAC1337NJ You're right, there is no debating this. I've provided over 100 people who saw a plane hit the Pentagon. You've provided none. the debate is over.
Kicker1981 11 months ago
@Kicker1981 people lie, video doesnt. your point is moot not including you said not to believe what other people say. i guess you can but i cant. enjoy your stay on earth
HVAC1337NJ 11 months ago
@HVAC1337NJ So you're saying 136 people are lying about seeing a plane hit the Pentagon, at the same time you're flaunting a video that doesn't show anything? Wow, I'd love to get your ass in a court of law.
Kicker1981 11 months ago
@Kicker1981 I'd like to get your ass in a court of law and use the same bullshit the Official Report uses. I think we could also use the fact that you type comments on Youtube - notorious for liars and foul-mouthed idiots who have no credibility at all! And while we're at it, I'll bring MY evidence and witnesses - and we'll see who wins! Of course, this is NOT a U.S. court, because they are all f-ing shills for corruption. We'll do the Netherlands!
milackk7 10 months ago
@milackk7 Ooooh, look at you, tough guy. Feel better about yourself? The conspiracy case HAS NO case. Eyewtinesses? Give me a link for your eyewitnesses who saw anything OTHER than a plane hit the Pentagon. watch?v=t1wQ2BJsgx0 shows several eyewitnesses who saw a plane hit and their testimonies. 103 SAW It HIT, that's 103 to ZERO who saw a missile or anything else hit. Having a bunch of speculative evidence is NOT having a case.
Kicker1981 10 months ago
@Kicker1981 Tough guy? Lol. You have witnesses with no credibly evidence to back them up. The FDR data is bogus. Here are your witnesses: /watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o You can start at 18:53 (watch it all if you like). It's not enough to have witnesses Kicker - you need credible evidence, and there is none. None. See anything wrong with this image? members.shaw.ca/freedomsix/pics/punchout-path.jpg No hole in D-Ring, No hole in back of E-Ring. Hmm. Amazing. It's just science, Kicker. Not personal
milackk7 10 months ago
@milackk7 Your video proves my point, thank you. You're trying to discredit witnesses who's stories have slight variations. I hate to tell you this, junior, but that happens with ALL eyewitness accounts. Just because they vary doesn't mean they are lying or are that they are not credible; vantage point, attention to detail, description skills....these are just a few variables to consider, which you obviously haven't. Nobody saw anything other than a 757 hit the Pentagon, your argument=fail.
Kicker1981 10 months ago
@Kicker1981The video simply a partial response to your request. The variance of the direction of a Boeing has significant consequences. The Official Report provides an impossible scenario for a plane of that size - therefore, it cannot be ruled as fact until proven possible: but there is no credible evidence available. It is not my intention to argue with you on this - you're comprehension is set and unavailable. Again, no evidence exists to support the flight path, or Al-Qaeda involvement.
milackk7 10 months ago
@milackk7 Well, I'm glad we got that straightened out. I'm glad you're not arguiing with me because when you say things like, "no evidence exists to support the flight path" or "no Al-Qaeda involvement" you are flat out wrong. I really don't care how you come to such inaccurate conclusions, but I have no desire to argue with someone who deals primarily with speculation. The 757 was tracked by ATC until it crashed. It was seen by over 100 people, including a C-130 crew who SAW IT HIT.
Kicker1981 10 months ago
@Kicker1981 Sorry to jump in here, but no, the C-130 pilot did NOT see the 757 hit. So if he states that now, he's lying, as evidenced in an earlier interview. The FDR points do not line up as stated in the OR - that has been proven, AND the g-forces stated are too high for that aircraft to level out. Where are the marks on the grass? I have the photos. A Global Hawk might do it...but who cares, right? 100 people are liars/wrong. And THAT is perfectly possible - speculation on your side.
milackk7 10 months ago
@milackk7 Lol, you think a Global Hawk took out the Pentagon? Ok, if you're considering that as a possibility, then no offense, but you're an idiot. In order for a GH to take out the 'Gon, the 757 that hundreds of people saw heading RIGHT FOR THE PENTAGON had to have gone somewhere. It would have to have pulled up and away, WHICH NO ONE SAW. Are you really getting your panties in a wad over eyewitness accounts not matching the FDR data? THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. No conspiracy, pal.
Kicker1981 10 months ago
@Kicker1981 No, I'm not convinced a Global Hawk took out the Pentagon - but it's more relevant to the data presented, and could carry a warhead at that time. Most witnesses are shills; those that saw a large plane coming from the Northerly route (important)t did not actually SEE the impact. The plane missed. The mass destruction was created later (plan didn't go perfectly) and the punch out hole is impossible - clearly noted in photographs and testimony. You can see that for yourself, clearly!
milackk7 10 months ago
@milackk7 Haha!, listen to you and your wacky theory. Ok, so you think the plane might have missed, Again, NO ONE SAW THE PLANE FLY AWAY FROM THE PENTAGON. That really sucks for your theory. Also, if the "plan" went wrong, and the US government had to use a Global Hawk at the last moment, THEN WHY IS THERE AIRCRAFT WRECKAGE AT THE PENTAGON? You think a bunch of agent Smiths threw it out on the lawn at the last moment? LOL, grow up man, start living in the real world.
Kicker1981 10 months ago
@Kicker1981 You're right - my 'theory' is wacky. Completely implausible, and unscientific. I have no evidence to contradict the Official Report and YOU are correct. Fine. So...just out of curiosity, what do you gain or benefit from believing the Official Report and arguing with people who want to know the truth? What is your purpose on here? And do you have ANY facts, or just arguments? No. I don't really care - just asking.
milackk7 10 months ago
@milackk7 My MO? Well, it really irritates me when people who are searching for the truth ignore so many blatant facts and common sense. Take you for example, you're SPECULATING in your quest to find the truth, never a good idea. You can't explain how your theories work, so there's little objective in your intent. A 757 hit the Pentagon on a Tuesday morning, it was very, VERY busy at that time, eyewitnesses everywhere. If a plane didn't hit the Pentagon, then why did NO ONE see it fly away?
Kicker1981 10 months ago
@Kicker1981 First, I take the position that LIARS (FBI/CIA/Administration) are not to be trusted. Secondly, there are witnesses who saw the plane from a different path AND one saw a plane fly over the parking lot. There are other witnesses, but why is it so hard for you to accept that TRUTH is SUPPRESSED...continuously! Look at motive, then credibility, then science. If there is evidence to the contrary then an investigation must be conducted. An impartial one! That is my position.
milackk7 10 months ago
@milackk7 Impartial investigations have been conducted, and they all came to the same conclusion; a 757 crashed into the Pentagon. Purdue University, led by impartial scientists, used computer models to illustrate why the Pentagon was damaged the way it was by the 757. No one saw the plane miss the Pentagon, NO ONE. That is a damning fact my friend. The fact is, you won't accept any other possbility than a government comspiracy, so another investigation is useless on you.
Kicker1981 10 months ago
@Kicker1981 Kicker1981 *sigh* why do this to yourself? Again, what's your addiction to Official garbage? The Purdue study merely simulates the impact - it does NOT explain the collapse, or the explosive expansion of debris: watch?v=iQdJuQLNFCk (flawed science). There is NO proof the jets were Flights 11 or 175, per ATC gaps in radar coverage and transponder code switches. And enough with the witnesses! Their testimony is NOT FACT, merely persuasive to a jury: like TED OLSON - a LIAR (FBI)
milackk7 9 months ago
@milackk7 Blah blah blah. Until you explain to me how a 757 can head for a building, miss it, and NO ONE see it, then I'm done with you. All of the rest of your drivel is speculation, which bores me to tears.
Kicker1981 9 months ago
@Kicker1981 Lol.
milackk7 9 months ago
@milackk7 Keep lauging buddy. Every time you don't explain how an invisible plane flew away from the Pentagon, your argument looks weaker and weaker.
Kicker1981 9 months ago
@Kicker1981 Only to those who refuse to keep an open mind and refuse to view the evidence that is more credible than the Official Report. CIT provides the witness who watched the plane fly over the parking lot. This coincides with those that saw the place lift up, banking to the right (their left) and the FDR data analyzed by REAL PILOTS. Just because someone says they saw a plane hit the Pentagon doesn't make their words FACT - stop being stupid. NO credible plane parts found! Period.
milackk7 9 months ago
@milackk7 No credible plane parts found huh? Glad you cleared that up for me, now you can stop comparing FDR data to eyewitnesses. You know, since no credible plane parts were found. Keep on shooting yourself in the foot, this is fun to watch.
Kicker1981 9 months ago
@Kicker1981 Yessir - no credible plane parts at Pentagon. You see a few pieces here and there, but those images were ported to the public 'years' after - not on the day. The parts were never identified (by serial number) as being from Flight 77. Like I said, no investigation. The punch-out hole from landing gear (it is shown by a hole) how did it get there? You can clearly see no HOLE in back side of E-Ring, or D-Ring. Can you explain that Mr. Laughable? Want the photo -it's from the Navy?
milackk7 9 months ago
@milackk7 No, I don't want your photo from the Navy. They belong to the US government so they can't be trusted. Plus, their photo was ported to the public several years after the incident, not the day of, so it's credibility is shot. See how this works, truther? I can play the denounce everything with no evidence game also. The way you guys form a case is pathetic.
Kicker1981 9 months ago
@Kicker1981 Let's be clear, I am not producing a case, and I am not interested in changing your mind. I've merely provided common-knowledge info. But I won't waste your time or mine with details that are rejected intentionally. Nor do I care to entertain a willful ignorance that permeates our country. Takes a lot of condemnation to work that way Kicker1981. That WILL catch up to you, as invincible as you find yourself. Remember that.
milackk7 9 months ago
@milackk7 Calling you out on BS claims isn't intentional rejection, but you claiming that the aircraft parts at the Pentagon were planted by the government IS intentional rejection. Where is your proof that they were planted? Like I said earlier, you "truthers" build all of your claims on SPECULATION. Just as you are now speculating that parts were planted. Prove it, where is your evidence? You have none, keep making blind accusations, that works pretty well.
Kicker1981 9 months ago
@Kicker1981 fair comment, but there must be footage of a plane, so why not release the tapes and shut all the so called loony conspiracy theorists up?
thehoff1982 6 months ago
@thehoff1982 Not necessarily. Many people assume that the 757 that hit the Pentagon slowly cruised into a building that had a bazillion cameras trained on it. Yes, there are lots of cameras watching the Pentagon, but not the skies around it. Also, it is extremely difficult to catch something on camera traveling over 300 mph. When you consider these facts, then the poor video quality we have of the plane hitting the Pentagon is completely consistent with reality.
Kicker1981 6 months ago
@Kicker1981 so there are no outward facing cameras? no other cameras trained on that wall? what about the confiscated cctv footage taken from places en-route which were never released or returned? i am not a conspiracy theorist, but i would like to know the truth. nobody can tell me that if i were to run across that lawn, the only camera which would pick me up is that shit one at the entrance to the car park!
thehoff1982 6 months ago
@thehoff1982 For all we know, the confiscated tapes didn't yield any information. We simply don't know, but that doesn't mean there is a conspiracy. Also, there is a difference between you running up to the Pentagon and a plane flying into it. I'm quite certain you'd be detained long before you reached the building. Finally, 103 people saw a plane hit the Pentagon. That is essentially 103 "cameras" that saw a plane crash into it. Nobody saw anything but a plane hit it, that's pretty solid.
Kicker1981 6 months ago
@Kicker1981 yeah...because 136 people and more were paid to lie....you haven't got that yet? twin towers was a controlled demolition.....WAKE UP PS THERE ARE A LOT MORE THAN 136
mdwlcx 10 months ago
@mdwlcx Hey Bucko, that's a pretty serious accusation. Do you have proof? No? Then sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up.
Kicker1981 10 months ago
@Kicker1981 HEY BUCKO YOU SIT DOWN AND SHUT THE FUCK UP, WHAT WERE YOU PAID TO TROLL THE INTERNET AND WRITE BULLSHIT COMMENTS? BUZZ OFF BUG DICK...PEOPLE LIKE YOU WILL BE SO ASTONISHED WHEN THIS SHIT TAKES IT UP A NOTCH....WHAT WILL YOU DO WHEN YOU FIND OUT THAT YOU ARE "W R O N G" ASS BITE, BICYCLE SEAT SNIFFER (IN THE SUMMER, TOO). GO JERK OFF IN FRONT OF YOUR MOTHER ASSHOLE
mdwlcx 10 months ago
@mdwlcx Man who writes in all caps is making up for size difficiencies in other areas. So where's that proof of witnesses being paid off, junior? You're doing very little to impress me right now.
Kicker1981 10 months ago
@Kicker1981 DONT YOU KNOW THAT MOST OF THE PEOPLE THAT DISAGREE WITH THE BIG GUYS GET WHACKED....HOW OLD ARE YOU, WHY DO YOU INSULT MY ANATOMY ASS MONKEY. EVERY COMMENT YOU MAKE HERE SHOWS EVERYBODY WHAT A DICK SNIFFER YOU REALLY ARE. GO SHOVE A SALAMI IN YOUR PANTS ASSHOLE, OR BETTER YET SHOVE IT UP YOUR ASS, TAKE THE ONE THAT IS IN THERE OR JUST CRAM ANOTHER ONE BUCKO!
mdwlcx 10 months ago
@Kicker1981 i know youve already made up your mind on the subject just as sure you would have been one of the people telling Copernicus "your crazy if you think the earth isnt the center of the universe, you've got no evidence"
HVAC1337NJ 11 months ago
@HVAC1337NJ oooo yeah backfire his ass!!
KeshaIsHot808 11 months ago
@KeshaIsHot808 its nothing to even be proud of at all, id rather him become a critical thinker rather than roll over like most Americans.
HVAC1337NJ 11 months ago
Ummm... I see the airplane, it's plain (Distasteful unintentional pun) as day. You can see it in the beginning and at the end, it's in front of the truck. It's there 3 times. You can see the left wing and tail fin easily if you take the time to look.
Grey4920 1 year ago
@Grey4920 FUCKING DUMBASS
KeshaIsHot808 1 year ago
Maybe it's just me, but I DEF see a flash of light and what looks like a tail glinting in the sunlight them second prior to the explosion... you can see an aircraft in a nose up position... watch as the truck comes into view on the freeway... it's there. 0:23-0:25.... but maybe it's just me seeing what the evil USA wants me too!
JSav07 1 year ago
the pentagon is the most protected building in the world.FACT.
KeshaIsHot808 1 year ago
@KeshaIsHot808 *Most protected publicly know building in the world
Grey4920 1 year ago
yea,how the hell are you missing the plane at :23 and :26 hell i saw it on the first view
mrtuttle76 1 year ago
You do see the tail. Of something. not a Boeing. the real Boeing's had super tuff wings, they left cartoon cut outs at the WTC when they melted seamlessly, wing tips, edges, tail, fuselage, all of it, melting into the WTC. Then it exploded. That Pentagon "plane" did explode inside but its wings folded back. Must be a Cessna 140 or something
IExposeMormonism 1 year ago
@IExposeMormonism You might want to consider the different building materials. Steel columns and glass at 500mph vs reinforced concrete at 500mph. Consider the thickness as well.
ODN67 1 year ago
@ODN67 Oh, Maybe I missed something in 35 years of research. You think your comment explains folding wings and super rigid wings that melt seamlessly through 200 ft of steel and steel reinforced concrete? I have a playlist of "WTC Construction Techniques" Have a look. It's a eye opener
IExposeMormonism 1 year ago
@IExposeMormonism ur on the right path.. but do not argue what is aguable only what is not ...ask ur disagreers, why is it that the pentagon tape, the marriott hotel tape and the restaurant tape all seem to omit a good pic of the plane?.....that my dear is what they cant and wont argue cuz they know onyy fabrication explains it .
oriaston67 1 year ago
@oriaston67 good point, shills need to be hemmed and boxed in. There is an excellent documentary with some 12 witnesses Proving the decoy plane was on the Other side of the Citgo station. The almost invisible missile came in where the Pentagon Perps claim the Boeing came in. The Doc' is on my Pentagon Play list.
IExposeMormonism 1 year ago
@oriaston67 Because they are meant for close views not for 1080p crystal clear quality views. Companies are also cheap and when you buy close to 100 cameras you aren't going to choose the ones that produce a high quality image at $600 a piece.
Grey4920 1 year ago
@Grey4920You're trying to tell me that one of the highest security buildings in the world only got footage from one camera.. which happened to film at 1 frame per second and not get a clear picture of the "plane". Then within minutes all other videos of the attack are confiscated by the FBI. Its not about conspiracy theorists. Its just people who aren't retarded
KeshaIsHot808 1 year ago
@KeshaIsHot808 You're idiot. Lets think a little bit here, I'll help you out because obviously you can't do it. Alright lets see here, why would the government take every possible available footage of a potential terrorists attack. -begin sarcasm- I mean because obviously they wouldn't want to examine it from every possible perspective they could, that's just ignorant, why would the Government want to know everything that happened on a day that thousands of Americans died?
Grey4920 11 months ago
Also, are you trying to say a plane did not hit the pentagon? I really don't believe that they make 3 story tall missiles with jet fuel the primary explosive.
Grey4920 11 months ago
This plane's stealth capabilities are outclassing the B2 by quite a margin. It's not even visible on film.
stalex34 1 year ago
You can see a plane clearly hitting the Pentagon, but no where near wear you claim with the arrow. It's seen best at 0:23-0:26. I don't know how ya'll aren't seeing that plane...
Gethsemaneful 1 year ago
@Gethsemaneful thats a car on thhe bridge inbetween pentagon and hotel
xxcowsxx 1 year ago
@xxcowsxx Yeah, only I'm not talking about that car, I'm talking about the plane.
Gethsemaneful 1 year ago
have you ever seen a 747 coming in for a landing? they are HUUUUUUUUUUGE!!!!!!
there is NO plane in this video. its a fast moving missile
DSCW33 1 year ago
Why the shit were all the 9/11 cameras worse quality than a 93 camera?
gamemaster905 1 year ago
looks more like one of the cars passing by parallel to the explosion
TheBelligerentPanda 1 year ago
Obviously we should see the entire plane because captain dumb shit posts this video with an arrow saying we should. Exactly what study of low flying planes that should be visible at this camera angle while smashing into The Pentagon did you get this from? You talk as if this happens all the time and you know exactly what the camera should capture. Typical conspirator. What i say is the truth....I dont need to rationalize my claims.....blah blah blah.
DucknCoverin 1 year ago
Im pretty sure those trucks on the bridge would've stopped if they saw a huge passenger airliner flying below them, the response seems to ridiculous
XxHamudxX 1 year ago
ITS FROM THE OTHER SIDE OFCOURSE YOU COULDNT SEE IT!!
wizzair1313 1 year ago
wait, what? At :25 what is that white triangle you see for a second that appears to dive down, followed by an explosion.
Poor quality obviously, but couldnt that be the tail fin or whatever? And yeah we cant see the plane body, but whatever that thing was looked like it was behind something. As in...we wouldnt be able to see it.
tiki2188 1 year ago
@tiki2188 I agree with you on the fact that whatever the object was, we wouldn't be able to see it in this video, obviously the object was on the other side. The tail fin however, was actually a truck driving on a bridge...
XxHamudxX 1 year ago
I find the 911 conspiracies harder to believe than god himself. There is something psychologically wrong with conspiracy theorists and religous people.
SexSteakSoda 1 year ago
The plane is visible in this video. It's coming in from the left side, not the right side. Looks like it hit the ground prior to hitting the building. Looks like several hundred feet prior.
dougzilla33 1 year ago
@dougzilla33 you are on crack or just delusional if you think this shows a 767,,,,,,,and you claim it llooks like it hit the ground??,,,,,,,,you can't even see the ground in this video,,,,,,epic fail by the schills to try and prove the lie,,,,,,,,you cannot prove a lie,,,,,,,that is where your problems will be forever,,,,,,,people do not believe the official bullshit anymore,,,,,,,are you aware that you are in a major minority now???
bigbopper993 1 year ago
Ah, and the site does work...
OsamaBinKathr 1 year ago
@OsamaBinKathr
The site might, but your link does not.
Alaskaslim 1 year ago
@Alaskaslim
And I will tell you only once more, if you want to talk about the WTC so bad, go to THEIR videos, here, you are off-topic.
Either start talking about the Pentagon attack, or go away.
Alaskaslim 1 year ago
Going one frame at a time, you do see the plane.
Good work johndoe.
purpleblood93 1 year ago
i don't think the video is clear enough to tell either way.
Tekmatic 1 year ago
the pentigon has 86 video cameras just in the sec.were the plane hit, and all they can show us is some grainy video of???dont see it,Im sure they will release some fake video of it later
todclown 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Government knew about Corrosion inside Twin Towers and had to Fast-Track their
de-commissioning by 2007. NYC council forbid Controlled Demolition and the people who tendered the
corrosion and de-commissioning research have destroyed all their files and had people sign
forms saying they will never talk about this as per Thomas-Scott Gordon 1989
Search Thomas Scott Gordon and corrosion of the Twin Towers
keep posting this link
vv vv vv dot 911oz dot c om and search Thomas Scott Gordon
blavatsky3 1 year ago
fbi spelling usama bin laden the anagram of that is and blame in U.S.A......makes you wonder eh....
aifammafiaaifam 1 year ago
Twit
hunterliggett 1 year ago
What we need is a group called Statisticians for 9/11 Truth. Why? Because what are the chances that two buildings fall exactly the same way even though they were hit at different angles and the one hit last falls first. What are the chances that two planes knock down three buildings when neither plane hits the third building? What are the chances that the country with the most jet fighters can't even one up on target when it really counts?
NEKO2BOT 1 year ago
@NEKO2BOT The funniest part is that they COULD Intercept 50+ planes in the last year before the incident and never came late. Well, Cheney did not revoke the orders like the insider told us already.
OsamaBinKathr 1 year ago
@OsamaBinKathr: The more a person learns about the real facts of 9/11 the harder it gets to talk to people who insist the official story is reasonable because not one thing about the official is reasonable and it looks so obvious once you know a few facts.
NEKO2BOT 1 year ago
@NEKO2BOT I find the very same thing Sir, that is why we must continue to educate those who don't know. We owe it to the innocents who were murdered by the shadow US govt that day and the time following. I now just come right out and say it was fake, all of it, and then point them at the youtube videos. Once they see the videos of WTC7 collapsing clearly in controlled demolition and the testimony of firefighters and the lack of planes at the Pentagon they look shocked.
sausagedogheaven 1 year ago
@sausagedogheaven: I have asked a few people which single video they feel is most convincing when of comes to helping "non-believers" see the light. What would be your pick? BTW, have you ever read the information on Philip Zelikow or watched video on him? A few years before he became the director of the 9/11 commission he wrote a paper on how to use disasters to change public opion. Wish I was joking but I am not.
NEKO2BOT 1 year ago
@sausagedogheaven
Problem, the truth movement AGREES Flight 77 crashed there:
911research(.)wtc7(.)net/essays/pentagontrap(.)html
You've been debunked by your own side, you're arguement on this matter is done.
Alaskaslim 1 year ago
@Alaskaslim WRONG!!!!!! haaaaaaa
.
Nice try but the usual misleading words from a gov. sheep.
.
Jim Hoffman wrote this article. He is NOT the truth movement. He is one man proposing ideas and he has proven nothing about the Pentagon crash. His claim is that there were lots of witnesses and that's why we have to believe it was a plane. BUT....he wrote this article in 2004. Since then, many witnesses, especially the USA Today journalists, have been proven liars.
.
You fail, again. :)
sausagedogheaven 1 year ago
@sausagedogheaven
WRONG!!!! Haaaaa
No one has been proven liar, in fact, time has only proven all the more right, and the truth moveent agrees:
911research(.)wtc7(.)net/essays/pentagontrap(.)html
Th video evidence, showing an object over 140 feet long, also proves anyone who think what hit Penatgon as a missile, is an idiot.
You fai.
Alaskaslim 1 year ago
@Alaskaslim
Fail
sites(.)google(.)com/site/wtc7lies/wtccoreconstruction
OsamaBinKathr 1 year ago
@OsamaBinKathr
Nope, you fail, that link doesn't work (and yes, I deleted what I was supposed to), but I have a picture here that settles this issue:
/watch?v=bMZ-nkYr46w#t=38s
No columns, and the Chief Engineer confirms this, you cannot overule what he says, he DESIGNED it.
This issue is done, and you will shut up about it, as this is NOT a WTC video, this is the PENTAGON, either talk about the PENTAGON, or get out. If you want tot alk about the Towers so bad, go to one of THEIR videos.
Alaskaslim 1 year ago
@Alaskaslim Seriously... Pictures of construction overrule everyones talking. WTC had a core and it disappeared almost completly which is not very likely to happen without any additional, well placed, force.
OsamaBinKathr 1 year ago
@OsamaBinKathr
Yes, pictures do, and the pictures show no core.
Anyone who claims there's a core, doesn't know what they're looking at.
The Chief Engineer over rules anything you say, as does the picture I showed, so this discussion is finished
Alaskaslim 1 year ago
@NEKO2BOT
Problem, the truth movement AGREES Flight 77 crashed there, and they came up with their own evidence:
911research(.)wtc7(.)net/essays/pentagontrap(.)html
You've been debunked by your own side, you're arguement on this matter is done.
Alaskaslim 1 year ago
You can definitely see something going right before the crash.
JohnnieNaked 1 year ago
But you can see a plane though?
Jinxy11 1 year ago