Occam's Razor
Striker
Fuck off.
Well this plane crash/shooting down knacks the 9/11 nutters
- Thread starter dangermows
- Start date
- Status
Fuck off.
jedi_toaster
Striker
Well, wasn't that a handy coincidence.
Bishop Mackem
Striker
I was never aware that there were 4 planes, only learned it In this thread.
Surely the White House was the number one target, wouldn't you give your best 'pilot' that mission?
monkeytassle
Striker
not forgetting it was 2001. I recall some fucknuts on here asking why there wasn't more mobile phone footage. in 2001 my cutting edge mobile was just able to handle snake.
Presumably you have some sort of link to the locations of all of the cameras and the directions they were pointing at the time of the crash then....
ProfessionalMackem
Striker
Mmmmmmm........
Just a few without even looking properly.
Brilliant.
Logon or register to see this image
Logon or register to see this image
Just a few without even looking properly.
Brilliant.
monkeytassle
Striker
august 06 one of those was taken. 5 years after 9/11. just because cameras were there doesn't mean they were pointed at the poit of impact or flightpath. security cameras don't usually point at the sky.
Occam's Razor
Striker
Other posters might happen to repeat claims they’ve seen on conspiracy websites without having read the numerous threads on here which have taken those theories to pieces, or ask genuine questions about 9/11, and I’m happy to respond to them.
You just come back with the same tired lies - and you know they’re lies - about 9/11 again and again and again. It doesn’t matter how many times the lunacy you pretend to believe gets comprehensively exposed as utter shite, you just wait a few months and then post exactly the same things. It’s dishonest, it’s trolling and it’s boring.
I’ll gladly engage with you on any other subject, and I even agree with you on a couple of them, but until such time as you come up with something new, i.e. something which hasn’t been debunked already on here at least three f***ing times then there really isn’t any point. If 9/11 was all you posted about I'd be tempted to put you on ignore.
Come up with something new and I'll respond. Otherwise, fuck off.
ProfessionalMackem
Striker
What a steaming pile of shit you write. I'm sorry but who asked you to respond in the 1st place? Keep picking at that strawman fella, that's the only thing you're good for. If I had you on ignore, what would I miss? Nowt.
What about the rest? Look at the trajectory, the plane didn't come from the sky, FFS.
"In the land of the blind, the one eye'd man is king."
Last edited:
monkeytassle
Striker
like I said, security cameras have a purpose. not sky-watching. the ones that underhang can't even look at the sky....
ProfessionalMackem
Striker
Jeesus. It's like you're being thick on purpose. Did the 'Plane' come from directly overhead? No. The supposed plane flew in the f***ing side of the building not on the roof. If it had I would happily concede the point that the cameras would catch sweet FA. As it is we should have concrete footage of said plane.
By concrete footage do you mean single frames from a couple of cameras? Several of the cameras in the photos above are so far away from the Pentagon that they wouldn't be trained on it so at best you'd get something very vague in the distance but more likely nothing as they're looking down on carparks etc. The remaining cameras would then have to be (a) pointing in the right direction at the right time (the spherical looking ones don't tend to be fixed on one location) and (b) have frame rates (not sure if that's the correct term) that coincided with something travelling extremely fast (much faster than the cameras are designed to film) passing through their area of coverage.
dangermows
Striker
Big Sharp Teeth
Striker
3 frames of an explosion don't constitute a release. Show me the plane then if they are that conclusive.
Your other two points are just plain bollocks. Don't know where to even start. You obviously haven't got the foggiest how many cameras are in and around the Pentagon. Last time I looked the plane didn't just drop out of the sky, it flew in a convoluted loop then approached metres from the ground for nearly a mile before it smashed into the building, so cameras wouldn't have to point into the sky. Cameras from petrol stations and shops etc in and around were all confiscated, why would that be?
What about all the eye witnesses, the overwhelming majority of whom, say they saw the plane fly into the Pentagon? Are they all in on it?
(Yes, this is where you cherry pick from the minority of witness accounts that differ)
greedminds
Striker
have that
dangermows
Striker
Ah so as soon as your 'banker' (the pentagon attack is debunked) you switch to another
No it wouldn't shut people like you up. We have clear footage of the attacks on the towers and yet you doubt those to
Let me guess, you think planes towers and they decided to use something other than a plane on the pentagon? (If it wasnt a plane how comes the people who boarded flight 77 ended up in bits at the crash site?).
Last edited:
HebburnMackem
Striker
Debunked by who? The only official investigation by NIST was completely flawed, even self admission at one point.No, they have a load of other nutcase points which have all been debunked
ProfessionalMackem
Striker
Ah so as soon as your 'banker' (the pentagon attack is debunked) you switch to another
No it wouldn't shut people like you up. We have clear footage of the attacks in the towers and yet you doubt those too.
I don't doubt that 767's hit them, just the cause and effect of the 3 for 2 demolition of the skyscrapers in the aftermath. There's a difference.
People talk about debunking, but all that I can hear is hot air being exuded from a cow's arse. Sorry how is the Pentagon hoax de-bunked again?
dangermows
Striker
Jesus Christ. Well all the insiders needed to go was frame some muzzie passengers, get flight instructors to say they attended flight schools but never wanted to practice landing, plant their passports, switch planes for drones and missiles, get the passengers to ring their loved ones from the hijacked planes, get air stewardesses to contact the ground, have air traffic control either in on it or fooled to track the fake flights, plant explosives throughout the towers, fire a missile at the pentagon, plant bodies matching those on the missing flight at the pentagon,,have bin laden and al Qaeda duped into saying the dud it on hidden cameras, have actors acting as eye witnesses on the streets of manhattan and Washington.....
But you are doubting a 767 hit the pentagon aren't you? So did they think well we could use planes on the towers and then fuck it, just use a missile on the pentagon rather than another plane?
You doubt a plane hit the pentagon. Well the passengers who got in flight 77 were found at the crash site where a load people saw a plane hit it (a missile wasn't seen hitting it, a plane was, and coincidentally it was at the exact time flight 77 was tracked to the pentagon by air traffic control).
3 frames of an explosion don't constitute a release. Show me the plane then if they are that conclusive.
Your other two points are just plain bollocks. Don't know where to even start. You obviously haven't got the foggiest how many cameras are in and around the Pentagon. Last time I looked the plane didn't just drop out of the sky, it flew in a convoluted loop then approached metres from the ground for nearly a mile before it smashed into the building, so cameras wouldn't have to point into the sky
Why did 100s of eyewitness on the streets say they saw it was a plane?
Where do you think the 4th was heading?
Last edited:
Bishop Mackem
Striker
- Status
