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.
Again you willfully resort to half-truths and disinformation.
Start by proving there were no planes involved.Again you willfully resort to half-truths and disinformation.
Please provide detail as to these alleged "half-truths" ( etc.... ) and lets have a discussion about it, obviously you believe that I have posted something basically inaccurate or misleading...... So please do, by all means, show me the logic of your official explanation of the events of 9/11/2001
Start by proving there were no planes involved.Again you willfully resort to half-truths and disinformation.
Please provide detail as to these alleged "half-truths" ( etc.... ) and lets have a discussion about it, obviously you believe that I have posted something basically inaccurate or misleading...... So please do, by all means, show me the logic of your official explanation of the events of 9/11/2001
look, parts from a plane ...Start by proving there were no planes involved.Again you willfully resort to half-truths and disinformation.
Please provide detail as to these alleged "half-truths" ( etc.... ) and lets have a discussion about it, obviously you believe that I have posted something basically inaccurate or misleading...... So please do, by all means, show me the logic of your official explanation of the events of 9/11/2001
on that topic, since the mainstream media was the first to assert that hijacked airliners were used as weapons, and has indeed failed to substantiate that claim, I would say that the work is already done in this matter. Where is the proof that any of the 4 airliners even existed at all? How much of any one of the airliners was recovered and by what means examined to determine its validity as an actual bit of the aircraft in question and not simply a random scrap of metal?
look, parts from a plane ...Start by proving there were no planes involved.Again you willfully resort to half-truths and disinformation.
Please provide detail as to these alleged "half-truths" ( etc.... ) and lets have a discussion about it, obviously you believe that I have posted something basically inaccurate or misleading...... So please do, by all means, show me the logic of your official explanation of the events of 9/11/2001
on that topic, since the mainstream media was the first to assert that hijacked airliners were used as weapons, and has indeed failed to substantiate that claim, I would say that the work is already done in this matter. Where is the proof that any of the 4 airliners even existed at all? How much of any one of the airliners was recovered and by what means examined to determine its validity as an actual bit of the aircraft in question and not simply a random scrap of metal?
You're failing to prove no planes were involved.
Again you willfully resort to half-truths and disinformation.
Please provide detail as to these alleged "half-truths" ( etc.... ) and lets have a discussion about it, obviously you believe that I have posted something basically inaccurate or misleading...... So please do, by all means, show me the logic of your official explanation of the events of 9/11/2001
That's pretty fucking retarded, even for a truther. Plane parts don't just fall out of the sky without a plane.look, parts from a plane ...Start by proving there were no planes involved.Again you willfully resort to half-truths and disinformation.
Please provide detail as to these alleged "half-truths" ( etc.... ) and lets have a discussion about it, obviously you believe that I have posted something basically inaccurate or misleading...... So please do, by all means, show me the logic of your official explanation of the events of 9/11/2001
on that topic, since the mainstream media was the first to assert that hijacked airliners were used as weapons, and has indeed failed to substantiate that claim, I would say that the work is already done in this matter. Where is the proof that any of the 4 airliners even existed at all? How much of any one of the airliners was recovered and by what means examined to determine its validity as an actual bit of the aircraft in question and not simply a random scrap of metal?
You're failing to prove no planes were involved.
And exactly what makes you so certain that this was guaranteed for sure a part from either "FLT11" or "FLT175"? critical bits of airliners have serial numbers and was any serial numbered part recovered from the wreckage ever verified as to belonging to any one of the alleged hijacked airliners?
That's pretty fucking retarded, even for a truther. Plane parts don't just fall out of the sky without a plane.look, parts from a plane ...Start by proving there were no planes involved.Please provide detail as to these alleged "half-truths" ( etc.... ) and lets have a discussion about it, obviously you believe that I have posted something basically inaccurate or misleading...... So please do, by all means, show me the logic of your official explanation of the events of 9/11/2001
on that topic, since the mainstream media was the first to assert that hijacked airliners were used as weapons, and has indeed failed to substantiate that claim, I would say that the work is already done in this matter. Where is the proof that any of the 4 airliners even existed at all? How much of any one of the airliners was recovered and by what means examined to determine its validity as an actual bit of the aircraft in question and not simply a random scrap of metal?
You're failing to prove no planes were involved.
And exactly what makes you so certain that this was guaranteed for sure a part from either "FLT11" or "FLT175"? critical bits of airliners have serial numbers and was any serial numbered part recovered from the wreckage ever verified as to belonging to any one of the alleged hijacked airliners?
Not to mention ... that's landing gear. If that landing gear didn't come from either flights 11 or 175, then post a link to an article about a plane crashing that day upon trying to land without landing gear. Or an engine...
You're failing miserably. And I'm not done yet.
trashed and burned - including death threats
The burden of proof is yours. There are eyewitnesses who saw the plane fly into the south tower, there were networks who televised it live as it happened, there were dozens upon dozens of people who video taped it. Given that, there is no logical explanation for how plane parts ended up in lower Manhattan other than the official narrative. You have the burden to prove those plane parts came from elsewhere since the evidence they came from flight 11 or 175 is overwhelming.That's pretty fucking retarded, even for a truther. Plane parts don't just fall out of the sky without a plane.look, parts from a plane ...Start by proving there were no planes involved.
on that topic, since the mainstream media was the first to assert that hijacked airliners were used as weapons, and has indeed failed to substantiate that claim, I would say that the work is already done in this matter. Where is the proof that any of the 4 airliners even existed at all? How much of any one of the airliners was recovered and by what means examined to determine its validity as an actual bit of the aircraft in question and not simply a random scrap of metal?
You're failing to prove no planes were involved.
And exactly what makes you so certain that this was guaranteed for sure a part from either "FLT11" or "FLT175"? critical bits of airliners have serial numbers and was any serial numbered part recovered from the wreckage ever verified as to belonging to any one of the alleged hijacked airliners?
Not to mention ... that's landing gear. If that landing gear didn't come from either flights 11 or 175, then post a link to an article about a plane crashing that day upon trying to land without landing gear. Or an engine...
You're failing miserably. And I'm not done yet.
How do you know for sure
that somebody didn't drive by in a pickup truck
and drop the engine or other part, while all eyes were on the exploding tower? Do you have proof that this did not happen?
The burden of proof is yours. There are eyewitnesses who saw the plane fly into the south tower, there were networks who televised it live as it happened, there were dozens upon dozens of people who video taped it. Given that, there is no logical explanation for how plane parts ended up in lower Manhattan other than the official narrative. You have the burden to prove those plane parts came from elsewhere since the evidence they came from flight 11 or 175 is overwhelming.How do you know for sure
that somebody didn't drive by in a pickup truck
and drop the engine or other part, while all eyes were on the exploding tower? Do you have proof that this did not happen?
So what have you got besides supposition and inuendo?
The burden of proof is yours. There are eyewitnesses who saw the plane fly into the south tower, there were networks who televised it live as it happened, there were dozens upon dozens of people who video taped it. Given that, there is no logical explanation for how plane parts ended up in lower Manhattan other than the official narrative. You have the burden to prove those plane parts came from elsewhere since the evidence they came from flight 11 or 175 is overwhelming.That's pretty fucking retarded, even for a truther. Plane parts don't just fall out of the sky without a plane.look, parts from a plane ...on that topic, since the mainstream media was the first to assert that hijacked airliners were used as weapons, and has indeed failed to substantiate that claim, I would say that the work is already done in this matter. Where is the proof that any of the 4 airliners even existed at all? How much of any one of the airliners was recovered and by what means examined to determine its validity as an actual bit of the aircraft in question and not simply a random scrap of metal?
You're failing to prove no planes were involved.
And exactly what makes you so certain that this was guaranteed for sure a part from either "FLT11" or "FLT175"? critical bits of airliners have serial numbers and was any serial numbered part recovered from the wreckage ever verified as to belonging to any one of the alleged hijacked airliners?
Not to mention ... that's landing gear. If that landing gear didn't come from either flights 11 or 175, then post a link to an article about a plane crashing that day upon trying to land without landing gear. Or an engine...
You're failing miserably. And I'm not done yet.
How do you know for sure
that somebody didn't drive by in a pickup truck
and drop the engine or other part, while all eyes were on the exploding tower? Do you have proof that this did not happen?
So what have you got besides supposition and inuendo?
The burden of proof is yours. There are eyewitnesses who saw the plane fly into the south tower, there were networks who televised it live as it happened, there were dozens upon dozens of people who video taped it. Given that, there is no logical explanation for how plane parts ended up in lower Manhattan other than the official narrative. You have the burden to prove those plane parts came from elsewhere since the evidence they came from flight 11 or 175 is overwhelming.How do you know for sure
that somebody didn't drive by in a pickup truck
and drop the engine or other part, while all eyes were on the exploding tower? Do you have proof that this did not happen?
So what have you got besides supposition and inuendo?
Irrationality, desperation, shrillness and insipidity. 'Nuff said?
The burden of proof is yours. There are eyewitnesses who saw the plane fly into the south tower, there were networks who televised it live as it happened, there were dozens upon dozens of people who video taped it. Given that, there is no logical explanation for how plane parts ended up in lower Manhattan other than the official narrative. You have the burden to prove those plane parts came from elsewhere since the evidence they came from flight 11 or 175 is overwhelming.That's pretty fucking retarded, even for a truther. Plane parts don't just fall out of the sky without a plane.look, parts from a plane ...
You're failing to prove no planes were involved.
And exactly what makes you so certain that this was guaranteed for sure a part from either "FLT11" or "FLT175"? critical bits of airliners have serial numbers and was any serial numbered part recovered from the wreckage ever verified as to belonging to any one of the alleged hijacked airliners?
Not to mention ... that's landing gear. If that landing gear didn't come from either flights 11 or 175, then post a link to an article about a plane crashing that day upon trying to land without landing gear. Or an engine...
You're failing miserably. And I'm not done yet.
How do you know for sure
that somebody didn't drive by in a pickup truck
and drop the engine or other part, while all eyes were on the exploding tower? Do you have proof that this did not happen?
So what have you got besides supposition and inuendo?
Without hard evidence, the supporters of the official narrative should just throw in the towel and admit that they can NOT prove the validity of the hijacked airliners story, for all anyone knows the images on the videos ( Evan Fairbanks Vid. etc.... ) are all totally fake, where is the hard evidence?
why hasn't anyone accounted for the aircraft?
Umm, I guess it needs to be said ... not a single video has ever proven to be fraudulent. Not one.The burden of proof is yours. There are eyewitnesses who saw the plane fly into the south tower, there were networks who televised it live as it happened, there were dozens upon dozens of people who video taped it. Given that, there is no logical explanation for how plane parts ended up in lower Manhattan other than the official narrative. You have the burden to prove those plane parts came from elsewhere since the evidence they came from flight 11 or 175 is overwhelming.That's pretty fucking retarded, even for a truther. Plane parts don't just fall out of the sky without a plane.look, parts from a plane ...
You're failing to prove no planes were involved.
And exactly what makes you so certain that this was guaranteed for sure a part from either "FLT11" or "FLT175"? critical bits of airliners have serial numbers and was any serial numbered part recovered from the wreckage ever verified as to belonging to any one of the alleged hijacked airliners?
Not to mention ... that's landing gear. If that landing gear didn't come from either flights 11 or 175, then post a link to an article about a plane crashing that day upon trying to land without landing gear. Or an engine...
You're failing miserably. And I'm not done yet.
How do you know for sure
that somebody didn't drive by in a pickup truck
and drop the engine or other part, while all eyes were on the exploding tower? Do you have proof that this did not happen?
So what have you got besides supposition and inuendo?
Without hard evidence, the supporters of the official narrative should just throw in the towel and admit that they can NOT prove the validity of the hijacked airliners story, for all anyone knows the images on the videos ( Evan Fairbanks Vid. etc.... ) are all totally fake, where is the hard evidence?
why hasn't anyone accounted for the aircraft?
Umm, I guess it needs to be said ... not a single video has ever proven to be fraudulent. Not one.
This is more absurdity from you. Since a commercial jet had never been flown into a skyscraper at more than 400 MPH, the reality is, you have absolutely no idea what such an event would look like. So to declare that every single version recorded that day are faked because it does not meet your seal of approval is beyond ridiculous. But then, ridiculous is all you've ever been armed with.Umm, I guess it needs to be said ... not a single video has ever proven to be fraudulent. Not one.
Do you need for some "expert" to speak up and declare it fraudulent, or can you LOOK with open eyes and an open mind and understand what you are looking at? The fact is that ALL of the videos that show the south wall of the South tower being penetrated by the alleged "FLT175" show an alleged airliner penetrating without slowing down.
now do you get it?
Meanwhile, you also need to ignore the multitude of eyewitnesses who also saw a plane fly into the south tower.
And what proof would be good enough for you? If we supplied an identification number that ties the part to the plane, all you would do is claim the government made it up. It's never ending. We supply evidence, you claim it's faked.How do you know for sure
that somebody didn't drive by in a pickup truck
and drop the engine or other part, while all eyes were on the exploding tower? Do you have proof that this did not happen?
Meanwhile, you also need to ignore the multitude of eyewitnesses who also saw a plane fly into the south tower.
Just for you own info, I'm not asking you to post to this forum what you find, but look up the number of witnesses who made statements that they saw an airliner strike the South Tower.
There is at least one eye witness in Manhattan that morning who said "it was not a plane, it was a bomb" and the reporter, rather than staying and actually interviewing the guy, moved on very quickly.
"you have absolutely no idea what such an event would look like."
YES I DO, and so does everybody else with a bit of common sense,
the crash of an airliner would have to be by the very nature of the event
very violent and involve breaking the aircraft, in the scenario shown on 9/11
the aircraft keeps its shape as it penetrates, and does not slow down in response
to having hit a wall. This is looney toons physics!
