Author Topic: Just more conspiracy cranks?  (Read 5046 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Tim Invictus

Just more conspiracy cranks?
« on: July 02, 2014, 07:43:24 PM »
I too thought it would just be a bunch of nutters and cranks common to all major world events. I watched a few videos expecting David Icke type nutjobs who are always good for a laugh! Not only did the evidence for a 911 conspiracy become more compelling the more I read, but slowly I realised those seeking the truth are very serious people and include 1000's of highly qualified professionals from numerous backgrounds and professions.

As 341 firefighters were killed in the Twin Towers, I think most people would agree they would hardly be involved in some crank plot, would they?

http://web.archive.org/web/20110911032318/firefightersfor911truth.org/

 

Offline Tim Invictus

Re: Just more conspiracy cranks?
« Reply #1 on: July 02, 2014, 08:58:35 PM »
Architects and Engineers

2,207 + highly qualified architects and engineers have joined http://www.ae911truth.org giving their testimony that the 3 skyscrapers that collapsed on 9/11 (the only 3 such occurrences in history)must have been brought down by controlled demolitions.

The following video produced by AE911Truth is to me PROOF POSITIVE WTC 7 was brought down by a controlled explosion. If this is true then it must follow the whole of 911 was one huge and quite incredible inside job!

Please watch : https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hZEvA8BCoBw (15 mins)

Offline Tim Invictus

Re: Just more conspiracy cranks?
« Reply #2 on: July 03, 2014, 12:01:20 AM »
Pilots & Aviation Professionals

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/core.html

Have a look at the members list. 100's of Captains, military pilots, etc. who do not believe the official story!

Offline Andrea

Re: Just more conspiracy cranks?
« Reply #3 on: July 03, 2014, 10:11:29 AM »
Nah then, Tim.

Sorry if you have already answered this but..am I correct in understanding that WTC7 was not hit by a plane? But somehow it caught fire?

I will keep an open mind on the conspiracy, but yes it does look like it was brought down in a controlled demolition. Its hard to deny that really.

The 'plane' that hit the Pentagon has always bothered me, the size of the hole just doesn't tally with the size of a plane!
The plane that came down in the field, the debris didn't resemble a plane, no wing, fuselage or engines.

The Pan am flight which blew up over Lockerbie was still recognisable as a plane!


Offline Tim Invictus

Re: Just more conspiracy cranks?
« Reply #4 on: July 03, 2014, 12:26:14 PM »
Nah then, Tim.

Sorry if you have already answered this but..am I correct in understanding that WTC7 was not hit by a plane? But somehow it caught fire?

I will keep an open mind on the conspiracy, but yes it does look like it was brought down in a controlled demolition. Its hard to deny that really.

The 'plane' that hit the Pentagon has always bothered me, the size of the hole just doesn't tally with the size of a plane!
The plane that came down in the field, the debris didn't resemble a plane, no wing, fuselage or engines.

The Pan am flight which blew up over Lockerbie was still recognisable as a plane!

Correct Andi WTC 7 was hit by no plane and had no significant damage from debris from the collapse of the Twin Towers. It was over 100 meters away and there were other buildings between it and the Towers.

Did you know the Pentagon has it's own extensive weapons systems including surface to air missiles that can shoot down the fastest jet fighters but it still got hit by an airliner! And the Pentagon is covered inside and out, every inch, by the most sophisticated CCTV systems yet still there is no film of the plane strike!

The 'plane' in the field is a joke! They 'find' a terrorists passport and bandana and yet 6 ton Rolls Royce engines disappear? Ludicrous!

Offline Andrea

Re: Just more conspiracy cranks?
« Reply #5 on: July 03, 2014, 12:38:09 PM »
Well..the terrorist that flew into the Pentagon must have been a fantastic pilot, but I hear they just used flight simulators to train them?

I saw a video on Youtube years ago saying it would be impossible for a plane of that size to be able make those kind of manouvers.

Offline Tim Invictus

Re: Just more conspiracy cranks?
« Reply #6 on: July 03, 2014, 01:08:50 PM »
Well..the terrorist that flew into the Pentagon must have been a fantastic pilot, but I hear they just used flight simulators to train them?

I saw a video on Youtube years ago saying it would be impossible for a plane of that size to be able make those kind of manouvers.

The 'terrorists' supposedly had flight training on small prop planes. Many experienced pilots have testified the supposed manoeuvres of the Pentagon plane would be next to impossible for even the most experienced of pilots. It's a mute point though really as, gin my opinion, it's impossible for any airliner to have caused that damage to the Pentagon! 

Offline John

Re: Just more conspiracy cranks?
« Reply #7 on: July 05, 2014, 01:51:04 PM »
Pentagon Attack Errors Explained

www.911review.com/errors/pentagon/index.html

« Last Edit: July 05, 2014, 01:56:21 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline Tim Invictus

Re: Just more conspiracy cranks?
« Reply #8 on: July 05, 2014, 02:05:28 PM »
Very interesting attachment John. Are you beginning to see what all the suspicion and doubt is all about?

The 'plane crash' at Shanksville is equally as incredible!

Offline Aunt Agatha

Re: Just more conspiracy cranks?
« Reply #9 on: May 23, 2020, 02:26:28 AM »
I'm spending the third anniversary of the Manchester "bombing" watching "Manchester - The Night Of The Bang", by Richard D Hall. True to form, Richard scrutinises every little detail that was reported in the press and shows it up to be another absolute shitshow of a psyop.

Brilliant stuff, Richard, as always... 😊

https://youtu.be/0jlZAZ8eWIw