Architects and engineers 9/11

[phart]

6 minutes ago, Kirk said:

I'd argue a plane went nowhere near the pentagon as there is no evidence for it, no debris of a plane and no bodies. the cameras just happened to not catch anything either.

Have been a big believer of the inside job since early on, Scotty was just OTT with some of it.

What's the evidence of a missle then? The evidence can't be there was no evidence of plane, cause even if there were no evidence that wouldn't be evidence of a missle just evidence of no plane.

[Kirk]

8 hours ago, phart said:

What's the evidence of a missle then? The evidence can't be there was no evidence of plane, cause even if there were no evidence that wouldn't be evidence of a missle just evidence of no plane.

Didnt mention a missile??

 

 

[phart]

26 minutes ago, Kirk said:

Didnt mention a missile??

 

 

Apologies i made an assumption, i was wrong.

What hit it then?or caused the damage and where did the passengers on flight 77 go?

Edited December 12, 2016 by phart

[Eisegerwind]

22 minutes ago, phart said:

Apologies i made an assumption, i was wrong.

What hit it then?or caused the damage and where did the passengers on flight 77 go?

You know fine well that the passengers were forcibly held to be used as playthings by the recently born antichrist.

[aljay]

So, I might regret asking this...but...

Assuming this was an inside job.  Jointly by the CIA and Mossad.  Why?  

[phart]

21 minutes ago, aljay said:

So, I might regret asking this...but...

Assuming this was an inside job.  Jointly by the CIA and Mossad.  Why?  

To provide a political will for all the destruction going on in the middle east with the dismantling of regional power bases. PNAC wrote dozens of papers on why the US needs to take out Saddam, Assad, Hezbollah and Iran. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century

Israeli policy papers go back even further https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yinon_Plan

Some basic background reading.

[aljay]

Could they not have done that without such a spectacular loss of life and property damage in NY?

[Scotty CTA]

14 hours ago, phart said:

What hit it then?or caused the damage and where did the passengers on flight 77 go?

1. A 'disguised' Global Tomahawk Missile

2. Westover Air Reserve base

1 hour ago, aljay said:

So, I might regret asking this...but...

Assuming this was an inside job.  Jointly by the CIA and Mossad.  Why?  

Militarily, it was to destabilise Israel's enemies. (5 of 7 planned wars already up and running.)

Domestically, it was to erode our rights and civil liberties.

Financially, it was to control things like the oil, gas, lithium, and heroin in that region.

Prophetically, it was the 'flare' for setting the stage for the arrival of the antichrist (and a one world political, religious, and financial system).

4 minutes ago, aljay said:

Could they not have done that without such a spectacular loss of life and property damage in NY?

No.

The nearly 3,000 lives lost on that day meant as much to them as you or I accidentally stepping on an ant on the pavement.

Their M.O. of ritual blood sacrifice mocks the importance God has put on His Son's cleansing blood for salvation (so... perpetual war it is!)

[Scotty CTA]

Phart - You up on the Gelatin Art Group and The B Thing?

[phart]

22 minutes ago, aljay said:

Could they not have done that without such a spectacular loss of life and property damage in NY?

Dunno. Their policy papers described a "Pearl Harbour" type incident as what was needed.

From the links above.

"...a section of Rebuilding America's Defenses entitled "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force" became the subject of considerable controversy. The passage suggested that the transformation of American armed forces through "new technologies and operational concepts" was likely to be a long one, "absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor." Journalist John Pilger pointed to this passage when he argued that Bush administration had used the events of September 11 as an opportunity to capitalize on long-desired plans..."

[thplinth]

So basically you seem to be picking it up where you left off which was basically that Rebekah Roth novel mixed in with a bit of Judy Wood. 

I am just curious Scotty but how do you explain all those people witnessing the plane at the pentagon, some so close they thought they saw people at the windows? Did you even read the witness accounts. I don't think you could have.

[thplinth]

And by the way you cannot disguise a missile to be plane that size. How would the wings work with giant fake balsa wood wings framed around its tiny wee wings. 

The missile is tiny in comparison to one of these massive passenger jets. The idea they built some massive fake frame around a wee missile to disguise it is a passenger jet is preposterous. Think about it - it is a cruise missile - it needs those little wings on the side for lift, to cruise... If you put a massive set of fake wings on it and a huge fake fuselage it will be totally buried inside the 'fake plane'. The missile engine would set the fake plane on fire as soon as it started and it's little wings would not be able to generate any lift as they'd be inside the fake plane! 

And for what advantage did they need this ludicrous fake plane? WTF man.

Please don't say holograms. 

Edited December 13, 2016 by thplinth

[Scotty CTA]

15 minutes ago, thplinth said:

So basically you seem to be picking it up where you left off which was basically that Rebekah Roth novel mixed in with a bit of Judy Wood. 

I am just curious Scotty but how do you explain all those people witnessing the plane at the pentagon, some so close they thought they saw people at the windows? Did you even read the witness accounts. I don't think you could have.

'Eye-witnesses' can be plants, and eyewitnesses can be mistaken.

We know there were plants to help sell the story... 

 

[thplinth]

So what you never listen to the eye witnesses to any event then? 

Have you read those 87 accounts from all the numerous different sources? I don't think you have. I can't believe you would simply dismiss the accounts of all the people who saw it and then run with something so ludicrous in its place. That just does not make any sense to me. But it seems that it is exactly what you are doing here. 

Kirk if you have doubts go read the link I posted - see how far you get before you accept it was a plane that hit the pentagon. I defy anyone to read those accounts and then post on here they think it was a missile or whatever. You would not do it is my guess.

edit: and I think there are other reasons they have not released the footage. Probably the flying is far too good.

Edited December 13, 2016 by thplinth

[Ally Bongo]

As the boy more or less says in one of the earlier videos - these nutjob conspiracy theories deflect from the real truth and the authorities are delighted with them.

I wonder how much money has been spent by the same authorities on publicly disproving the no planes/ no hijackers/ controlled demolition theories ?

Debunking these theories one by one ensures that anything else will be treated with scepticism because of what has gone before.

IMO there is only one possible conspiracy outwith the terrorists that planned & carried out the attacks and it is either complicity & collusion or a cover up of massive failures within the US security networks

Prior knowledge has already been proved

The CIA were tracking the hijackers and the Mossad agents that were shadowing them

There were numerous warnings that an attack was planned. The US security services defence is that they believed that potential hijackings would be undertook in the traditional sense and that they wouldnt be using the planes to crash into buildings - even though this was clearly stated in the intelligence.

However whilst they didnt believe planes would be crashed into buildings they still had numerous drills on that eventuality happening.

So they either made a massive fvck up or they allowed it to happen

The Mossad agents clearly knew it was going to happen and most importantly when. It's more than likely that they wanted them to succeed and played a part in that

Therefore it is impossible to believe that nobody in the CIA didnt know that too

And thats where the trail should start

 

 

 

[Scotty CTA]

On 12/10/2016 at 4:40 AM, hunchy said:

Ye these guys have been going since shortly after the events and have raised lots of key questions that have been ignored or brushed over by the officials. They do make a very good case and have the knowlage to ask the right questions

The emergence of a truth movement was a given.

Controlling the cover-up also included controlling the truth movement.

Every large 'truth' group was either started by the perps, or has been infiltrated by the perps.

They'll tell you 90% truth to gain trust just so they can mislead, deflect, omit, and lie to keep us away from the most crucial 10% of what really happened.

[Scotty CTA]

On 12/12/2016 at 4:21 AM, phart said:

 How can you deduce it was no plane based on that, especially considering all the plane parts scattered around, the DNA of the passengers of American Airlines being present. Dozens of people who witnessed a plane fly into the pentagon.

1. There was a few plane parts small enough to be carried by hand for a photo-op.

2. The massive steel and titanium engines "vaporised" but they had the DNA of the passengers?

(Not quite the same size.)

3. Did they witness a drone, or a 'fly-over' with an explosion, or something similar? (cause it wasn't Flight 77).

 

On 12/12/2016 at 4:21 AM, phart said:

What's more likely in my opinion was a secondary explosion inside the pentagon (it had just been refitted and contained all the folk looking for the mission trillions the MIC couldn't account for)

Very believable.

On 12/12/2016 at 4:21 AM, phart said:

...the DNA team were in on it, dozens of people misidentified a plane, agents scattered American airline debris after impact. They must have taken the passengers somewhere and killed them etc etc..

All easily accomplished.

On 12/12/2016 at 4:21 AM, phart said:

If you just fly a plane into the pentagon then you dont need anyone to cover for you, as it happened as said.

They wouldn't take the chance on pilot/human error, or someone not going through with it.

All of those problems weren't even in play.

[Scotty CTA]

On 12/12/2016 at 8:55 AM, phart said:

 So what does hollow have to do with it?

A fragile fibreglass and aluminum plane isn't made to cut through steel, while a water jet cutter is.

Cartoon physics!

[Scotty CTA]

On 12/12/2016 at 9:01 AM, phart said:

Is ghosted a scientific word for a particular phenomenon? Cause it was loud as feck and debris spattered everywhere so not sure what you mean by "ghosting", it was a high energy collision.

Over to you 'physics man'...

[Scotty CTA]

On 12/12/2016 at 9:37 AM, phart said:

Yeah no evidence apart from...

dozens of eye witness reports...

 

And how many of those accounts were written before the event?

On 12/12/2016 at 9:37 AM, phart said:

...tonnes of debris (no idea why you say none, it's clearly visible)... 

None from Flight 77. (No idea why you say tonnes.)

On 12/12/2016 at 9:37 AM, phart said:

 ...all the passengers DNA was recovered from the site(bodies)...

So they say.

On 12/12/2016 at 9:37 AM, phart said:

...the landing gear and engines punching holes into further rings, engines inside the pentagon as well...

You got photos or video (or just more 'reports'?)

On 12/12/2016 at 9:37 AM, phart said:

If you have seen no evidence of a plane then you haven't looked at the majority of the evidence on the Pentagon.

There's evidence of something, but it's not Flight 77.

[Scotty CTA]

On 12/12/2016 at 6:46 PM, Eisegerwind said:

You know fine well that the passengers were forcibly held to be used as playthings by the recently born antichrist.

All of the passengers died that day.

There were no Muslim hijackers on board, but there were collaborators and Mossad handlers.

[Scotty CTA]

13 hours ago, thplinth said:

So basically you seem to be picking it up where you left off which was basically that Rebekah Roth novel mixed in with a bit of Judy Wood. 

Yes, plus one of 3 working theories I have on the antichrist.

(I've since met Judy Wood btw.)

[Scotty CTA]

13 hours ago, thplinth said:

And by the way you cannot disguise a missile to be plane that size. How would the wings work with giant fake balsa wood wings framed around its tiny wee wings. 

No, I don't believe it was the same size.

Definitely smaller.

Just paint this thing appropriately and we've taken care of the witnesses, the debris, human flying error, etc.

[Scotty CTA]

13 hours ago, thplinth said:

So what you never listen to the eye witnesses to any event then? 

Sometimes.

 

[Scotty CTA]

14 hours ago, thplinth said:

edit: and I think there are other reasons they have not released the footage. Probably the flying is far too good.

No Boeing 757 would have to be the number one reason.