Originally posted by apex
Originally posted by Natasha_Thompson
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
Truth is, it the plane huggers who need extraordinary proof at this point, because all of the media and "amateur" footage is solid evidence, ....
against their ridiculous claims.
Media mind control has all of your brains turned inside out.
Tell me, do you realise how complicated it would be to get those planes to land somewhere else in order for there to be no planes hitting the
towers?
It has not yet been proved conclusively, that any of the flights purportedly involved even really existed, let alone having really taken off.
Now just presuming they did however, as some do presume, I imagine it would not be hard at all. One need only land them somewhere.
Such question do not really interest me however, because really
they merely serve as a diversion away from the topic being discussed, .... and
that topic is the video evidence of the computer graphic tech used to fake the media coverage.
Originally posted by apex
The idea that the footage is proof is like peeling just the skin off an apple to get to the core.
Would the video experts appearing in court, on your behalf, debunking the faked videos showing you having mad wild sex with an orangutan and then
murdering the zookeeper for interrupting your pleasure, be by you so thought of?
Originally posted by apex
So tell me, were all the air traffic controllers bribed in order to get those planes to land at an undisclosed location in order for the planes to
disappear?
Tell me, do you presume the following, to all be true?
The flights supposedly involved really existed?
The CIA or whomever, could not fool those flight controllers, IF THOSE FLIGHTS REALLY EXISTED, and therefor bribes were necessary?
Prove those flights existed.
Now prove that those flight controllers could not possibly have been fooled.
Originally posted by apex
Considering there is a separate controller for about every 15 minutes of the flight, particularly in busy airspace like that over the US. And after
that, what happened to the planes and the people on them?
On a good day, when a multi billion dollar agency and several other foreign INTEL agencies, all working together, aren't trying to fool them?
Originally posted by apex
The planes would need to be destroyed, since the airlines and everyone else would know which planes were destroyed, so for them to show up at some
strange location would be difficult to get away with.
You're right. If they existed they would need to be destroyed.
And so perhaps they were. The just weren't destroyed at the WTC, the Pentagon, or Shanksville.
Originally posted by apex
And what then happened to the passengers? Were they killed afterwards, as they could never be released since to do so would blow the story wide open.
You may have answered your own question.
Originally posted by apex
And if you say it would have been easy for the government to kill them, .....
Why, ..... would it not be?
Originally posted by apex
I think it would be easier to crash them into a building if the government were responsible.
Really? Why? Because bullets are too expensive, and they want to save them for the Iraqi civilians trying to repel the foreign invaders raping their
country?
Originally posted by apex
And then, how did the wreckage get there in NY and in Pennsylvania, and Washington. Extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof after all.
Have you seen, the tiny bit of stuff, that they claim to be the wreckage of those planes?
All of the combined "wreckage", from the WTC, Pentagon and Shanksville combined, is really a very tiny amount.
Where is all the plane wreckage? No one seems to know. Where are all the bodies?
New York was littered with literally tons of UNBURNED paper, wood and plastic, from the WTC. Yet all but a few of the bodies were burned to ashes,
and the concrete and steel was somehow reduced to FREAKING DUSt that covered that whole area several inches deep.
That makes no sense at all, ..... unless ........
