Magazine article from 1994 depicts Beavis & Butthead dressed as Al Qaeda flying planes into the WTC

originally posted by: Rocker2013

originally posted by: real_one
a reply to: Rocker2013

This is crazy, literally crazy.

Not crazier than 2 airplanes causing 3 towers to demolish themselves.

And here we go rewriting history yet again, something the "truther" movement seems to love doing.
Two towers fell that day, not three. The third building was 47 stories and fell after considerable damage weakened the structure combined with fire damage.

They didn't "demolish themselves" either. We know what happened.
I'm not going to get into this again, because you will just go over every debunked point again and refuse to accept REALITY.

Maybe I'm having a little math trouble here. 2 towers fell, not 3, the 3rd tower "fell."

Is this like a mind bender thing? Let me try an analogy, see if it helps me figure out out:

3 cars are reaching towards the edge of a cliff. 2 cars fall of the edge of the cliff. The 3rd car falls of the edge of the cliff. How many cars fell of the edge of a cliff?
Answer: 2.

Reason - the first 2 fell, the 3rd, however, fell.

I still can't figure it out. Or is it semantics and 47 stories isn't considered a "tower?" You've got me stumped!

a reply to: dogstar23

The reason that the WTC has been depicted in all different forms of media before as a target, or some other form of destruction is due to the fact that it was seen as a symbol of western capitalism, power and imperialism.

If you follow the official story on what happened on the 11th September (yes I'm English), then peoples of the middle east that see Western forces as invading their lands and occupying them, what better way to retaliate then attacking a symbol of western power and civilization.

Note - I don't agree with the official story, as their are too many inconsistencies, but the other imagery I put as coincidental or as I previously stated.

a reply to: visitedbythem

a reply to: tigertatzenGood work! I believe you are correct

Thanks Got a lot of truckers in my family, but even better, my bestie from kindergarten is married to a movie exec, so she found the original location for me...of course the 9'11" could have just been a randomly chosen height, but there are lots of "sublimnal" little extras in movies that people don't notice and that particular measurement is really odd...it stands out. Disney does this all the time, famously, in fact. Coincidence does not exist. That's the one thing I am certain of.

a reply to: Subaeruginosa

Good research on that.
It's one of my favourite movies. Not watched it in years though.

Seems right they painted that on there. I still think they might have used that height to be less than whatever the standard height of that type of vehicle was though, to elevate the suspense of its not gonna fit, then Armold looks cool knocking what's left of the windshield out.

a reply to: misguided

As I stated in an earlier post, the CIA did not begin calling them Al-Qeada till 1996

The CIA publicly disclosed the existence of the Kryptos sculpture in the old CIA courtyard during that time period. Solutions to part 3 were floating around in the astral.

What you need to ask yourself is how would a group of 7 year olds with the intellectual capacity of Beavis & Butthead perceive the WTC project? The original story to cover the planned obsolescence probably didn't have much investment of thought. They would have had enough of a problem conceiving a metal exostructure design with a deep pit, never mind how to take such a structure down safely.

These 911 threads remind me a little of the Lincoln Douglass debates when the US politicians were openly discussing kinder and gentler ways of keeping slaves. Might have been the recent speech about "diplomatic solutions to the Iranian problem" that got me thinking along these lines, I'm just a robot slave like everybody else.

originally posted by: Slichter
a reply to: misguided

As I stated in an earlier post, the CIA did not begin calling them Al-Qeada till 1996

The CIA publicly disclosed the existence of the Kryptos sculpture in the old CIA courtyard during that time period. Solutions to part 3 were floating around in the astral.

What you need to ask yourself is how would a group of 7 year olds with the intellectual capacity of Beavis & Butthead perceive the WTC project? The original story to cover the planned obsolescence probably didn't have much investment of thought. They would have had enough of a problem conceiving a metal exostructure design with a deep pit, never mind how to take such a structure down safely.

These 911 threads remind me a little of the Lincoln Douglass debates when the US politicians were openly discussing kinder and gentler ways of keeping slaves. Might have been the recent speech about "diplomatic solutions to the Iranian problem" that got me thinking along these lines, I'm just a robot slave like everybody else.

I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to say here. None at all.