re: Full French filmmaker footage from 9/11 posted on Youtube

quote:

---

Wait, so you admit it hits the ground and the building at the same time, yet came at me because I said they flew it into the ground?

---

Come on, don't be childish. That's a successful strike, no matter what flew into it.

quote:

---

And I generally hate conspiracies, so I don't buy into any of the dumb shite. But I remember my biggest WTF about the Pentagon incident was that there was no actual camera footage of that crash. I remember all we got was the shite quality video frames showing a big metal thing and then fire or whatever. I always thought it was weird that we didn't have at least one decent video of that one.

---

I'm a huge sucker for em. Rabbit holes for days, but I understand Occam's Razor. The simplest explanation is we were lax on security, had overlapping exercises, and we got...got. 9/11 is like tinfoil hat crack. There are so many convenient instances you have to unplug your brain for to just blindly accept that we got...got. The Pentagon is a huge one. These guys were terrible pilots, but the Twin Towers I can accept they just lined it up and prayed to Allah. Pentagon, that turn is crazy and has SO much margin for error for awful pilots. Then you go down the rabbit hole of what hit it then? The Flight was real and they didn't just make it up. If it was a cruise missile (talk about precision) what happened to the flight? I just absolutely love debating these topics because you have to make some leaps to justify BOTH sides of the argument.

[img]I know the Pentagon is top secret shite, but it also seems like an area that would be fairly heavily videoed.[/img]

You would think. But that just adds to the allure of the mystery. Those cameras probably don't show anything of any substance, but what if they could?

quote:

---

Come on, don't be childish. That's a successful strike, no matter what flew into it.

---

Childish? What the frick are you talking about?

I was confused that you were confused by my initial comments that they essentially crashed the plane into the ground/Pentagon (because that's what they did). It feels like are both agreeing with me and disagreeing with me, and you are confusing the frick out of me in that regard.

quote:

---

I just absolutely love debating these topics because you have to make some leaps to justify BOTH sides of the argument.

---

CT shite can be fun, sure. But this is where you lose me though. It only takes leaps to justify one side of the argument. It's like the people who refuse to believe that a gigantic plane weighing who knows how many tons, FULL of jet fuel, slamming into a tall/slim building is enough to topple them. Any rational person would know and understand how that would be easily feasible. But then you have the stupid mouthbreathers shouting about "jet fuel can't melt steel!!" and dumb shite like that, even though it wouldn't have to melt anything. Just cause it enough damage to break the structural integrity of something that is basically thousands of feet tall.

quote:

---

Do you conspiracy nut jobs seriously think that every engineer on earth has been silenced by some inner government illuminati group to cover something up here? You can debate the governments culpability in failing to stop it all day, but what happened when the planes hit the buildings and after is pure physics and architectural engineering and it all tracks. They got smoked by big arse planes

---

Can you read? Im talking about tower 7. It fell as well. It did not get hit by any plane.

And plenty of engineers disputed the official government story. If you think every engineer on earth agreed on it you clearly have been misled.

quote:

---

hey hit the Pentagon, can we agree?

---

Of course. I've never said otherwise.

quote:

---

I'd like to see us move past this without you chortling like a school girl over this.

---

I don't even know what the frick this means. You seem to be reading way more into my posts than what is being said. This is weird at this point.

quote:

---

Remember, the model NIST used for the pancake theory was created 2 days after 9/11. It's never happened before, will never happen again, and happened 3 times within the same city block on the same calendar day(one wasn't hit by a plane). They couldn't recreate it in real life if they tried. Brother, that's a logical leap.

---

It's not really though. Nothing like that had really ever happened before (or since). So the fact that something abnormal may have happened on that day makes total sense to a rational person (and to be clear, I am talking about the towers collapsing, nothing more than that...I am not arguing about building 7 or any other stuff from that day).

quote:

---

An extremely inexperienced pilot did an extremely complicated maneuver to slam a jet airliner into the side of a heavily fortified mall. Brother, that's a logical leap.

---

Again, from a layperson's perspective he simply "made a turn and crashed the plane into the ground (Pentagon)." That's not a logical leap at all to me. It seems pretty easy to fly a plane into a building on the ground (aka crash it). And maybe he didn't hit the Pentagon where he was supposed to (or was even aiming at it at all). There's no way to know that for sure, obviously, but it doesn't take some huge leap to believe that someone can successfully fly a plane that was in the sky into something on the ground IMO.

But we can move on though. We clearly aren't even on the same page, as you seem to think I am "chortling like a school girl" when I am doing nothing of the sort. And I am quite certain that we won't see eye to eye on this conspiratorial bullshite either.

So I'm good.

quote:

---

tower 7. It fell as well. It did not get hit by any plane.

---

It was pummeled by debris and burned for a long time before it fell. The NIST report attributes the collapse to a buckled support column on a lower level which is also perfectly feasible for that kind of building. Its how you would collapse it if you were doing it on purpose.

quote:

---

And plenty of engineers disputed the official government story

---

If there was any proof to be found that the NIST report is implausible, it would have come out in the last 25 years. Nobody reputable can produce such proof.

quote:

---

shallo3

---

I never understand you people. Are y'all saying they knew days in advance the towers would fall and placed explosives in 7 to capitalize off of that? If it was pre planned, why not crash into 7. The simple truth is main waterlines were cut with the collapse and the building burned weakening it.

Are you one of the idiots also that says the towers were blown up? It's obvious they failed at the impact point. So are conspiracy theorist saying the explosives were planted ahead of time and the hijackers knew the exact floors to fly into, and have the explosives not detonate for an hour in the heat, or did secret people bring the explosives up after the crash and plant them? It's so illogical.

Simple truth is 767's crashed into buildings and they collapsed. Not everything is a conspiracy theory. It's so tiring.

quote:

---

Are y'all saying they knew days in advance the towers would fall

---

Several prominent people were contacted and told not to travel on September 11th (Willie Brown, Kamala's side piece). That's documented fact. Put options on airline stock skyrocketed the day before 9/11. That's documented fact. People had advanced knowledge, people not in a cave in Afghanistan. You guys are putting so much faith in the "official" word, when the officials have been selling you guys out to the highest bidder for decades. You want the official story to be true, then you don't have to deal with the harsh reality that your government sees you as chum in the water. Trusting the government only when it's convenient is utter hypocrisy.

Ignoring all of that, I said advance knowledge they would fall to, I guess what y'all are saying, cover up the demo of 7.

None of what you said takes into account anyone KNOWING they would fall.

quote:

---

hate to sound cynical, but they mostly just stood around the lobby until the towers fell, then stood around outside. I watched the whole video and was surprised to not see any firefighters make their way upstairs.

---

Plenty died going up and I'm sure only so much they could do. They needed some to stay together in the lobby with the high ranking chiefs. Imagine if they had lost all of NYC fire fighters and highest ranking personal.

quote:

---

The simple truth is main waterlines were cut with the collapse and the building burned weakening it.

---

Yeah, it burned in a totally even manner before collapsing like a controlled demolition. And the BBC reported that it collapsed before it collapsed, with building 7 in the background. And you call US stupid.

>