See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: TSA: Terrorists win
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Jun 22, 2013
Author: yy
Post Date: 2013-06-22 09:09:48 by PSUSA2
Keywords: None
Views: 663
Comments: 21
(1 image)
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 17.
#4. To: PSUSA2, *No Planers* (#0)
That's funny. Imagine how much funnier it is in the real world as no planes were used on 9/11, no bomb in anyone's underwear or sneakers. Yeah, the terrorists won alright.
9/11 Fake: 1978 Movie Mocks 9/11 Plane Crash Physics: Newtons Laws still applied in 1978. It must have become uncool sometime after that. [2 1/4 minutes. Explicit language warning after 2:06.] Edited bracketed info.
It's much easier to fake a plane flying through a building like a hot knife through butter than it is to make it look like it crashed against the side of the building and exploded on impact. But hey, people believe what they're told. Most people anyway. Half the population has an iq below average.
How many experiments have you done to verify your theory? Ever consider the thousands of actual witnesses who watched it happen in real time? How would you create the entrance holes without anyone noticing? But hey, people believe what they're told. Most people anyway. Half the population has an iq below average. No wud. Intelligent people use observable facts, science, and common sense to form their view of an event. Then there are some people who believe anything they read on the Internet, because hey, it's the Internet so it MUST be true, especially if it comes from their chosen prophet.
Why they didn't use planes Well this has actually happened, but it seems that nobody takes any notice. The myth of "thousands of witnesses" to a big plane strike keeps getting trotted out on the basis of a circular assumption. "Because big jets were there, then people must have seen them - because people [allegedly] saw them, that proves they were there." [sic] A few witness reports go to air reporting missiles or small planes or no craft at all, but there is only an 18 minute window for this to occur before the whole world sees a big jet live on TV - using commercially available real time animation technology. This distracts the media from interviewing many witnesses to the second strike, because everyone is fixated on the video replay. [sic] Seeing the TV replay - which was instantly available - would make most people think that they just didn't see it properly. The few who remain unshakable in their belief that it was not a large plane are easily shouted down and drowned out by the endless replays. In addition the airlines release a statement saying that they've lost two big jets and any witness dissent is *instantly* - the moment the second strike happens - marginalized almost to the point of oblivion. This is not speculation. Read through the transcripts of broadcasts as they unfolded between about 8.47 and 9.30 and you will see that this is *exactly* what happened. From the moment the second strike occurred, anyone who tried to say that it was not a large jet immediately had a TV replay shoved in their face. What little witness evidence was gathered in the brief time available between the two strikes was not enough to do any real damage, and everything after that was corrupted by everybody having TV replays of the second jet shoved in their face as soon as they opened their mouths. Edited to include bracketed insert at paragraph 1.
Post #16 of 4um Title: Killers of Americans run Romney campaign, US courts and media ‘Rabbi Dov Zakheim, who was the Pentagon comptroller at the time of the 9/11 attacks, is now top foreign policy advisor to US presidential contender Mitt Romney.’ On the entrance hole issue. Edit to add: More info on that at the linked post reference.
If you believe that is possible, I have a bridge in Brooklyn that's up for sale. Seriously GL, are you that naive and gullible to swallow that crap?
Cui bono? Who benefits from planer-quips salespitching those NY premises so in derisive retort? The TSA Police State pushers, for one example.
huh? If I was to diagram that sentence, I wonder what it'd look like?
#18. To: PSUSA2 (#17)
huh? If I was to diagram that sentence, I wonder what it'd look like? I tried to make it easier for you by removing the word "so", which could have been read as "like that". Now let's see your diagram.
I would imagine that it looks like a good looking babe. Jamie lee Curtis Hot!
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#7. To: wudidiz, *No Planers* (#4)
(Edited)
#8. To: GreyLmist (#7)
#11. To: wudidiz (#8)
It's much easier to fake a plane flying through a building like a hot knife through butter than it is to make it look like it crashed against the side of the building and exploded on impact.
#13. To: wudidiz, *No Planers* (#11)
(Edited)
1) Witnesses might see that they were not planes and report it.
#14. To: All, *No Planers* (#13)
(Edited)
What are the odds that an avant garde Austrian art group was given access to the 91st floor of the North Tower of the World Trade Center to remove windows, erect platforms outside the structure and leave material that could only be viewed by a close passing helicopter on a clear day? Well they are 100%.
#15. To: GreyLmist (#14)
What are the odds that an avant garde Austrian art group was given access to the 91st floor of the North Tower of the World Trade Center to remove windows, erect platforms outside the structure and leave material that could only be viewed by a close passing helicopter on a clear day? Well they are 100%.
#16. To: All (#15)
#17. To: GreyLmist (#16)
Who benefits from planer-quips salespitching those NY premises so in derisive retort?
Replies to Comment # 17. Who benefits from planer-quips salespitching those NY premises
so in derisive retort?
#19. To: PSUSA2 (#17)
If I was to diagram that sentence, I wonder what it'd look like?
End Trace Mode for Comment # 17.