Flat_Eric wrote:
>
> How much devastation do you want?! The whole place looked a
> mess to me.
I dont want devastation at all, but whatever anyone says, some of it does not add up.
>
> And so far none of the conspiracy theories I know of tackles
> the basic question:
>
> If you're going to crash 2 planes into the WTC in front of tens
> of thousands of witnesses on the ground and a global TV
> audience of millions, why only PRETEND to crash one into the
> Pentagon??
I never suggested that the whole thing was pretend. I certainly agree that something hit the pentagon, no denying it, but the damage pictures are not always consistent. Again - why has the US Govt locked up all the footage?!
>
> And - for the third time of asking - WHAT ABOUT THE
> EYEWITNESSES NEAR THE PENTAGON WHO DID SEE AN AIRLINER
> CRASH???? The conspiracy theorists (including those on this
> board) have so far ignored that one as well.
Not at all - i think you will agree that this whole debate, as insane as it sounds, could be put to bed with the US Govt simply releasing the CCTV footage that showed the collision!
I am not saying that i 100% believe the whole thing was a hoax, all i am saying is that there are inconsistencies and other anomalies that raise suspicion!
9/11 documentary
-
perihelion
- Posts: 120
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: 9/11 documentary
shame......such a shame.... i think i kind of lost myself again.....
Re: 9/11 documentary
perihelion wrote:
>>
As insane as it sounds, it may be that there IS NO MEANINGFUL CCTV FOOTAGE of the crash itself, given that most if not all the CCTV cameras would most likely have been trained on entrances, pathways etc. around the building itself, rather than pointing outwards and / or upwards at the sky.
I agree that if there is some clear CCTV footage, there shouldn't be any reason not to release it. I would also agree that the CCTV footage that was released recently (I believe it was a from a filling station opposite) was next to useless as it showed just a very quick blur and then a flash-bang. But maybe that's as good as it actually gets.
But why all this obsession with CCTV footage anyway? Once again - WHAT ABOUT THE MANY MANY WITNESSES ON THE GROUND WHO SAY THEY DID SEE A PLANE HIT??? AND WHAT ABOUT THE PASSENGERS ON THE PLANE???!!! WHAT ABOUT THE PHOTOS OF PLANE WRECKAGE IN THE PENTAGON ITSELF??
All people keep saying is "something doesn't add up ... something doesn't add up ...something doesn't add up ... something doesn't add up ... something doesn't add up" - like a broken record, yet they don't answer these three fundamental questions! How many witnesses do you need??
There was no footage of the tube bombings in London last year (unless you cound a few grainy, heavily- pixellated snippets taken on people's mobile phones in the immediate aftermath).
But just because there's no CCTV footage, does that mean the whole thing was all one big, sinister conspiracy??
You cite the unbroken windows thing at the Pentagon. Okay so there were some unbroken windows where you may not normally expect to find any. But remember the tsunami? Entire villages washed away, yet still there'd be the occasional building left standing, almost unscathed. Ditto after the hurricanes on the Gulf Coast last year. No-one really knows why. Weird shit like that happens in disasters. Just because there were some unbroken windows, it doesn't point to a conspiracy.
>>
As insane as it sounds, it may be that there IS NO MEANINGFUL CCTV FOOTAGE of the crash itself, given that most if not all the CCTV cameras would most likely have been trained on entrances, pathways etc. around the building itself, rather than pointing outwards and / or upwards at the sky.
I agree that if there is some clear CCTV footage, there shouldn't be any reason not to release it. I would also agree that the CCTV footage that was released recently (I believe it was a from a filling station opposite) was next to useless as it showed just a very quick blur and then a flash-bang. But maybe that's as good as it actually gets.
But why all this obsession with CCTV footage anyway? Once again - WHAT ABOUT THE MANY MANY WITNESSES ON THE GROUND WHO SAY THEY DID SEE A PLANE HIT??? AND WHAT ABOUT THE PASSENGERS ON THE PLANE???!!! WHAT ABOUT THE PHOTOS OF PLANE WRECKAGE IN THE PENTAGON ITSELF??
All people keep saying is "something doesn't add up ... something doesn't add up ...something doesn't add up ... something doesn't add up ... something doesn't add up" - like a broken record, yet they don't answer these three fundamental questions! How many witnesses do you need??
There was no footage of the tube bombings in London last year (unless you cound a few grainy, heavily- pixellated snippets taken on people's mobile phones in the immediate aftermath).
But just because there's no CCTV footage, does that mean the whole thing was all one big, sinister conspiracy??
You cite the unbroken windows thing at the Pentagon. Okay so there were some unbroken windows where you may not normally expect to find any. But remember the tsunami? Entire villages washed away, yet still there'd be the occasional building left standing, almost unscathed. Ditto after the hurricanes on the Gulf Coast last year. No-one really knows why. Weird shit like that happens in disasters. Just because there were some unbroken windows, it doesn't point to a conspiracy.