Originally Posted by donny andi (Post 11618797)

Them there men in black crazy ass dudes are coming for you all , time to stockpile those bunkers and hide til the end of days......

It's a coming :lol1:

Originally Posted by hodgy0_2 (Post 11618776)

I can't understand why they get het up about CCTV

there was CCTV, it showed blurred images - but then that is what all the CCTV I have ever seen does, it is sh1t technology for capturing a slow moving mugger in a shop let alone a low flying object travelling at 500 MPH (the frame rate is sooo low)

and they have released CCTV footage, released under a FOI request - the ones from the Hotel over the road and the Garage - that conspiritards said would deffo prove it was a flying pig

and guess what they show fvck all for two really simple reasons,

1. they were not pointing at the sky, they usually point at the ground where people/cars usually are - to compensate for the fact that they are sh1t quality and

2. because CCTV is sh1t quality

and these conspiritards would not be convinced by high speed footage anyway - just like they haven't been with footage of the planes hitting the twin towers

they would simply say - "mmmm how come the Pentagon had high speed footage of a "plane" - isn't that a bit suspicious - I mean did they know something"

and why if CCTV is so crucial, why is there none of the planes hitting the towers, plenty of "tourist" videos (unsurprising as it is New York - and if you have ever been to New York you will see people looking up ALL the fvcking time)

but no CCTV footage, why? well

1. they were not pointing at the sky, they usually point at the ground where people/cars usually are - to compensate for the fact that they are sh1t quality and

2. because CCTV is sh1t quality

Originally Posted by gary77 (Post 11619249)

not all cctv points at the ground and is incapable of recording a plane . to remind you here is an example i posted beforehttp://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...pscb9cda44.jpg

Originally Posted by hodgy0_2 (Post 11619350)

what is the distance between that camera and the point of impact

what is the frame rate the CCTV was running at - would it have caught a plane

and that is before I simply took for granted that, that is a correct image anyway

post the source of the image

Originally Posted by bonesetter (Post 11619309)

Shocking List Of Official Proven False Flag Attacks

http://yournewswire.com/shocking-lis...-flag-attacks/

Originally Posted by gary77 (Post 11629880)

to give a better idea of the cctv that would have caught better footage than the one released

as for the motorway cam i dont know if it was there during the attack or not but it gives an example of the kind of cctv that could of captured footage of the plane, even if it would be blurry due to frame rates

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/i...howtopic=14873

Originally Posted by stipete75 (Post 11629922)

One day the complete truth will come out, not in our generation though unless Putin has great big balls.

Originally Posted by coupe_20vt (Post 11629924)

What's Putins link with 9/11?

Originally Posted by stipete75 (Post 11629951)

I'm not entirely sure, allegedly Putin may have evidence that 911 is not all it seems?
With the tensions worsening between Russia and the US regarding Ukraine Putin may have a back up plan?
Before anyone starts I know Putin expressed on record soon after 911 that it could not be kept a secret if it was an inside job so highly unlikely it was an internal job.

Like I said allegedly, like everything else regarding 911.

Originally Posted by Geezer (Post 11630386)

No doubt the source is some conspiracist site! You are correct, everyone is entitled their opinion, but you can have an opinion on who, the question of what is factual, there is no opinion. If you say a missile hit, but the evidence says a plane hit (as well as plenty of eye witness testimony) then that is not opinion, that is just simply denying the facts.

As I have said before, 'what happened' and 'how' are settled, 'who' is the only option left for opinion.

Originally Posted by stipete75 (Post 11630471)

zero photographic evidence to suggest either or.

Originally Posted by hodgy0_2 (Post 11630869)

Oh and Lots of photograph evidence, inside and outside - you just think it is faked

Originally Posted by Martin2005 (Post 11630883)

They flew planes into the WTC but then decided rather than doing the same to the Pentagon they use a missile instead, then pretend it was a plane?

Why not just fly a plane into it instead?

Pete, do you not see that this would be a rather strange way of carrying out such an attack?

Originally Posted by stipete75 (Post 11631027)

Who said anything about faked? Not me I'm afraid.
Show me conclusive photographic evidence that proves 100% a plane hit the pentagon! I want to see a plane, surely that should be easy enough if you have witnessed lots of photographic evidence proving it was a huge airliner.

Originally Posted by hodgy0_2 (Post 11631102)

You mean photos of the landing gear inside the pentagon, you mean photos of the engine inside the pentagon

You mean photos of wreckage on the lawn

I know you want to see a plane - great, but just because you want to see a plane; because that is the proof YOU need does not mean that a plane did not hit the pentagon

Originally Posted by stipete75 (Post 11631029)

Martin, read back what you have just stated.
Why not just use an airliner rather than a missile?
I can give you numerous reasons why using a missile instead of an airliner is easier.
I can give you one reason why using an airliner instead of a missile.

Originally Posted by Martin2005 (Post 11630883)

They flew planes into the WTC but then decided rather than doing the same to the Pentagon they use a missile instead, then pretend it was a plane?

Why not just fly a plane into it instead?

Pete, do you not see that this would be a rather strange way of carrying out such an attack?

Originally Posted by stipete75 (Post 11631108)

Photos of the plane pls, before(intact) and after.....definitive proof?

Originally Posted by markjmd (Post 11631113)

The truly absurd part isn't just that this plot would involve using a missile instead, it's that it would involve using a missile instead of a plane, and having to make a large airliner disappear, and all of the 157 crew and passengers who were supposed to have been on board the thing, without leaving a single trace as to their whereabouts.

The mind boggles at why a cabal of people supposedly so devious and well-connected would put themselves through such complex logistical hoops to carry out their nefarious deeds, but hey, who cares so long as it fits with our nutty theory, right? :wonder:

Originally Posted by Sad Weevil (Post 11631200)

The interesting thing about this thread is the fact that so many people seem to think the official story needs to be constantly repeated and reinforced. It really doesn’t need it, we've all heard it, it’s already in the history books. Also, why is it that sceptics are ridiculed and belittled for questioning this official story? There are many thousands of informed, experienced, and very intelligent people who are unhappy about the official story of the Pentagon attack. Pilots and military men included. My late father, an aeronautical engineer of international repute, was deeply disturbed by the official explanation, with it’s anomalies and contradictions. He was not alone amongst his colleagues. And my brother in law, currently a 747 Captain with a flagship carrier, with many years of flying 757s, and training people to fly them, says categorically that a 757 could not be flown into the pentagon at that location and height. Cruise missile yes, 757 no way. He is not alone amongst pilots for this opinion by any means. So, do all the people who question the official line hang out on nutty conspiracy sites and wear tin foil hats? Of course not. The atrocity of 9/11 killed 3000 people, and events that followed have killed literally millions more. It is our absolute duty to constantly scrutinise, criticise,and pass judgement on, the activities and explanations of our governments. Especially a government/establishment with a proven track record of lies and deceit.

Originally Posted by Sad Weevil (Post 11631200)

The interesting thing about this thread is the fact that so many people seem to think the official story needs to be constantly repeated and reinforced. It really doesn’t need it, we've all heard it, it’s already in the history books. Also, why is it that sceptics are ridiculed and belittled for questioning this official story? There are many thousands of informed, experienced, and very intelligent people who are unhappy about the official story of the Pentagon attack. Pilots and military men included. My late father, an aeronautical engineer of international repute, was deeply disturbed by the official explanation, with it’s anomalies and contradictions. He was not alone amongst his colleagues. And my brother in law, currently a 747 Captain with a flagship carrier, with many years of flying 757s, and training people to fly them, says categorically that a 757 could not be flown into the pentagon at that location and height. Cruise missile yes, 757 no way. He is not alone amongst pilots for this opinion by any means. So, do all the people who question the official line hang out on nutty conspiracy sites and wear tin foil hats? Of course not. The atrocity of 9/11 killed 3000 people, and events that followed have killed literally millions more. It is our absolute duty to constantly scrutinise, criticise,and pass judgement on, the activities and explanations of our governments. Especially a government/establishment with a proven track record of lies and deceit.