- Aug 1, 2008
- 15,149
- 25,678
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Banned
- #4,726
We are all strugglingFrom what i've read of your posts - I think you're struggling.
It's the system we live in
Get use to it
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 6 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
We are all strugglingFrom what i've read of your posts - I think you're struggling.
The hole or C ringCare to show me precisely where I am wrong?
Why is it wrong?The hole or C ring
Your explanation is fantastical
"Landing gear"
More likely to be Tesla death ray
Yes the hole in the sixth wallSorry - perhaps you misunderstood me.
I know what a cruise missile looks like, but I dont see any evidence of one at the Pentagon. Do you have any to show me?
I'm confused, do you think the landing gear isnt inside the aircraft when it not in "landing" mode?Yes the hole in the sixth wall
Which you believe was caused by landing gear
you think the terrorist pilot was preparing to land ?
http://www.google.com.au/url?url=ht...ggUMAA&usg=AFQjCNEfZUbvZU_y2kmQTXNK5RAYyUelgANumerous Fireman and survivors testifying the lobby of the north tower had suffered an explosion before the plane hit
All the windows shattered dead bodies
Others testifying huge explosions in the basement before the plane hits
Humans walking around with their skin burnt and hanging off their skeletons
Video footage of fireman and police asking everyone to move out of the wtc7 area because their were bombs expected to collapse the building
Israelis dancing and videoing the collapse
Arrested And held for 7 weeks
Dancing and ready to film prior to any collapse
So something caused the hole
What was it?
If it was the engines why did they not cause a hole at the front of the building at impact
as what ever caused the hole was intact sufficiently to cause the hole
Where is it?
It disintegrated only after impact
The footage we have shows it is a missile as it is not a plane
I have posted it
If you wish to use eyewitness accounts then we have use all the eyewitness accounts from the wtc
And those accounts are more extensive and not from government employees
Fireman police reporters live reports on tv of secondary explosions before the planes even hit
In lobby's and basements
Your whole OS defense falls to pieces with eyewitness testimony and live commentary
So suit your self
I have made 3 gift posts to board in the last 24 hours detail videos and sitesGot any evidence for these allegations?
Nice deflection
3 people can keep a secret if the other 2 are dead. This is the most amazing thing of all is that no one out of the hundreds hasn't come forward and spilt the beans.
Im sorry mate, but you're not playing ball here.I have made 3 gift posts to board in the last 24 hours detail videos and sites
Your capable enough to find them and more should you feel so inclined.
If your not aware of these then sorry I can't take you very seriously
As your research is one sided
What I suggest is that you immerse yourself for a couple of days into ae911, pilots9/11 and others and then go back to your debunking sites.
And see where you end up
You will find nonsense on both sides
But you can make up your own mind
Clearly if your asking for evidence of such basics as wtc testimony and footage you have not examined the available data.
I am not sure what I can sayI'm confused, do you think the landing gear isnt inside the aircraft when it not in "landing" mode?
Just because the plane isn't trying to land, doesn't mean the landing gear doesn't exist.
Again I ask. WHY and HOW am I wrong?
i have done the work in both debunk sites and conspiracy sitesIm sorry mate, but you're not playing ball here.
You asked for evidence. I duly gave it to you. Broke it down by category and everything.
You saying "go find it yourself, its out there" is effectively saying you dont have any evidence.
Im not being unreasonable here - asking you for proof of your claims is pretty standard stuff.
Certainly not. The engines did indeed penetrate the building.I am not sure what I can say
You are contending the hardest most solid part of the plane - the engines - penetrate nothing but the landing gear six walls in creates a circular hole near to the size of the **** pit?
Can you not see that in good conscience your treating one or both of us as fools?
But you're not. Why?i have done the work in both debunk sites and conspiracy sites
Dumping info from one side - I can do that
That's not presenting anything
What I would like is for you to stop pretending how even handed you are when the most basic video material is outside the scope of your interest
People in this thread need an opportunity to sort out the myths purported by so called truthers and the actual events. Here's another example of sorting out the myths.Nice deflection
But if they occurred prior to the plane impact - pure fantasy -
But you're not. Why?
I freely admit I didnt create this research. It is indeed the work of others. but I agree with it, it stands up to scientific scrutiny, so I present it as evidence. you're free to do the same, but just be aware that we will check it accuracy, and call out any inconsistencies we find. I invite you to do the same with mine.
Here is a picture of the landing gear right next to the hole you are so concerned about.I am not sure what I can say
You are contending the hardest most solid part of the plane - the engines - penetrate nothing but the landing gear six walls in creates a circular hole near to the size of the **** pit?
Can you not see that in good conscience your treating one or both of us as fools?
This conjecture makes the crazy truther no plane theory relatively sane by comparison. What do you think the landing gear consists of? An angle grinder?
Wonderful. How is this picture of a cruise missile in any way relevant to 9/11?
That's laughable.
It did indeed.For what its worth, a B-25 Mitchell hit the empire state building in 1945.Did not do much damage to the building. I am not sure if it had bombs on it, at the time or not; on a routine personnel transport mission from Bedford Army Air Field to Newark Airport
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-25_Empire_State_Building_crash
It did indeed.
tI was travelling at around 200 miles an hour vs. the 450 odd miles an hour for the planes on 9/11, it was a much smaller plane too....
View attachment 208378
And was carrying less fuel, being near the end of its journey, rather than at the beginning in 9/11.
Very different experience.
What you mean is, the heavily controlled mass media that you rely on to find out what's happening in the world does not give a voice to these people...
Susan Lindauer
In what universe isn't this woman's story front page news?
If they detonated of course, I believe bombs need to be armed before they detonate. Safety precaution to avoid accidental explosions.Very similar on one level; as it was a pretty big aircraft hitting a pretty big building in the same city. Yet it was indeed smaller, going slower, with less fuel. If the bomber was carrying bombs that make up some of the difference.