Analysis by Non-Commissioned Investigator Shows Plane Footage Doctored Up to Hide Clandestine Remote Controlled Anti-Gravity Ball Hitting World Trade Center Building 2
Disclaimer: Veterans Today does NOT endorse the conclusions in the video posted below. The post merely presents the questions and asks for readers to participate.
Yesterday Richard D. Hall posted his new 3-D video analysis of 9/11 showing that a top secret anti-gravity vehicle that hit World Trade Center Building 2.
Almost 10 years on, with no clear explanation why Building 7 collapsed after not being hit by anything but underground media scrutiny, we all seem to feel that something does NOT fit. 9/11 just does NOT pass the smell test. In fact it stinks.
Almost 10 years, we are still engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan and the Neo-Con wars of the first decade are still with us crawling their way into history books.
Whether the video analysis below is true or not, we have so many questions ie
Why did the Global Elite Force play this out?
Did they reach their objectives?
Who benefited? Who suffered?
Was this the only way to reach their nirvana?
Could there have been another way to reach their objectives?
What can, we the people, learn from this?
Do we really have any control, choice, or input or are we just pawns in the Global Elite Force Risk game?
Oh heck, watch this video and comment on the analysis below .
Analysis by Non-Commissioned Investigator Shows Plane Footage Doctored Up to Hide Clandestine Remote Controlled Anti-Gravity Ball Hitting World Trade Center Building 2
So that's what did it. LOL!
Hmm, I think I will be a "Non-Commissioned Investigator" and see what screwball "theory" I can come up with. It will involve naked women, UFOs, Bigfoot, green paint, and a fly swatter.
Think of all the niggers you could hate in 20 minutes.
And what is that supposed to mean? Is that some kind of canuckistani joke? You know what the problem with you people (canuckistanis) is, you're smug. You're smug with zero experience, and you have zero reason to be smug or arrogant about anything.
Mr. Walter says in this interview that he heard the roar of the engines of the plane over head and looked up to see, quite clearly, the AA logo of American Airlines on the side of the jet.
Then he says that the plane dove and increased speed toward the Pentagon. Well, if that is the case, then he must have seen the plane a mile or so out because according to the FAA and Norad, that plane was flying low for quite a ways before it struck the Pentagon. How did he hear the roar of the engines so far out?
Then he adds the new story-line that he saw the wings of the plane fold back into the body of the jet when it hit.
Look at the pictures from the only release 5 frames of the actual video from the attack.
How did someone see the wings fold back against the plane in that millisecond of impact that was obscured by the fireball? He couldnt have. Its impossible.
But even more telling than all of this
His original interview with CNN on the day of the attacks.
I mean it was like a cruise missile with wings, went right there and slammed into the Pentagon, eyewitness Mike Walter said of the plane that hit the military complex.
Huge explosion, great ball of fire, smoke started billowing out, and then it was just chaos on the highway as people either tried to move around the traffic and go down either forward or backwards, he said.
Nothing about the wings folding back. Nothing about the AA logo. In fact, he said it was like a cruise missile with wings.
Now here he is, pawning off the latest story from the administration that the wings folded in and that explains why the wings didnt break off and they didnt leave an outline of a plane in the side of the Pentagon, like what happened at the Trade Center.
Mike Walters is a pathetic liar. He is lying about a terrorist attack on U.S. soil which claimed thousands of lives. In the interest of national security, he should be held for questioning.
Now here he is, pawning off the latest story from the administration that the wings folded in
No, he says they folded back, not in. If they would have folded forward, at least physics could have supported that, but he says they folded backward, which would have been impossible if they didn't hit anything before the plane's nose hit the building.