wbt5845 said:

---

Closer to 100 years ago on the Tuskegee experiments.

And there was no election rigging in 2020.

Once again - the idea that the US government allowed many thousands of Americans to be slaughtered is borderline insanity.

---

Dude, the FBI colluded with big tech companies to impact the election. Maybe "rigging" isn't the right word...but "shocking, unspeakable levels of interference" is accurate.

Are you denying that FBI ordered Twitter, FB etc. to suppress stories that would be very damaging to Joe Biden's election chances? And that they also pressured them to censor conservative outlets and influencers? Even the Babylon Bee? Twitter censored the NY Post, one of the oldest papers in America, for crying out loud.

People who deny this are "borderline insane".

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

Are you denying that FBI ordered Twitter, FB etc. to suppress stories that would be very damaging to Joe Biden's election chances? And that they also pressured them to censor conservative outlets and influencers? Even the Babylon Bee?

---

Yes

titan said:

---

CanyonAg77 said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

Never mind the fact that highly experienced commercial pilots couldn't fly a simulated trajectory that was taken to hit the pentagon like that

---

Bulls**t.

It's 80 feet tall, well over a quarter mile wide, and covers 34 acres.

A 10-hour student pilot could easily hit it

---

Your testimony on this point is one of the important instances. Its a good example of it seems to be assumed its hard, but that building is epically massive. The WTC Towers were a harder target despite their prominence.

By contrast to prove your point another way, do you agree a hijacker that day with little skills probably will miss the WH -- its not easy to see, line up, etc. So the Pentagon choice kind of proves logical by proxy.

---

Boeing 757 has the following dimensions:
Wingspan: 124'-10"
Length (unstretched and most common configuration): 155'-3"
Height (landing gear extended) - 44'-6"

The Pentagon has the following dimensions:
Length per side: 923'
Height: 77'

As big as the 757 is, it's going to look small compared to a building as massive as the Pentagon

wbt5845 said:

---

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

Are you denying that FBI ordered Twitter, FB etc. to suppress stories that would be very damaging to Joe Biden's election chances? And that they also pressured them to censor conservative outlets and influencers? Even the Babylon Bee?

---

Yes

---

So you are denying REALITY. Even Mark Zuckerberg literally admitted to this, before the latest drops revealing it happened with Twitter too.

CanyonAg77 said:

---

The WH is a much smaller target, surrounded by other buildings and trees. It's also sort of tucked off to the side, though one might be able to spot and aim a slower aircraft.

Screaming in at 500mph, not so much

---

It's a smaller target, but you have a pretty nice approach with the Mall. Only thing you have to dodge is the Washington Monument. It also wouldn't take a direct hit from a 757 to do some catastrophic damage to it.

Quote:

---

Then again i have not seen or heard of any particular 'conspiracy theory' that was fully persuasive

---

Gee, I wonder why.

On this thread, we have some knuckle dragger claiming that a 757 did not crash into the Pentagon, despite all of the evidence which includes eye witness accounts from both the AIR and GROUND, because in their personal view, this event seems improbable.

They replace this "improbable" event with a completely impossible suggestion that the evidence supporting the fact that a 757 did actually crash into the Pentagon was "planted".

I agree that elements of 9/11 should be questioned and agree that our government may not be telling the entire truth.

However, claiming that AA 77 did not crash into the Pentagon is akin to denying gravity exists.

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

redcrayon said:

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

agracer said:

---

CanyonAg77 said:

---

I don't know what idiot thought I was joking about how easy it is to fly the plane, and got my post deleted.

I'm 100% serious. All you people acting like this is some amazing feat of airmanship are talking out of your butt.

Trained pilots (they did have training) flying a modern aircraft into a building that covers 34 acres, isn't exactly Chuck Yeager breaking the sound barrier

---

One of the things the conspiracy nuts like to point out is the crazy, erratic flight path that Flight 77 took before it hit the pentagon. The flight path that not even the best pilot could follow but this low IQ terrorist who failed flight school was able to fly that 757 like Maverick. What they ignore is the flight path was so erratic and crazy because the terrorist was barely in control of the plane and just reacting to what was going on. It was not skill, it was dumb luck he even hit the pentagon to begin with (let alone find it).

If you've ever flown and instrument approach and suddenly start chasing the needles your path will look the same. My uncle got me into a Navy t-34 simulator in Corpus a long time ago and had me do an instrument approach. I got about 1/2 mile from the runway and was off a little bit and suddenly I was chasing the needles all over the place and the flight path was a zig zag mess and I crashed the plane...

---

I respect what Canyon and the rest are saying with how it's achievable.

But this is the other side of the coin on this deal.

How do you calculate the probability that the pilot was able to pull this off and get a direct hit on the side of the building just above ground level.

We ain't talking about an experienced pilot here with a ton of hours.

Dude flying like a bat out of hell then all of a sudden regains composure and gets a direct hit like he's flying in Top Gun 2.

Nevertheless, it doesn't sit right. That's all I'm saying.

---

So, what do you think happened? Multiple witnesses saw the plane hit the Pentagon.

---

I don't know. I don't have a viable theory. At the end of the day it seems like there was more to it though.

Gas station video footage hurts more than it helps though, IMO.

Is that the best we can do under the circumstances?

It's a certainty that some other footage exist. Why can't we see it?

And if we can't see it for some specific reason ... what is that reason?

---

Why would there be security cameras facing the side of the Pentagon that was under construction? Why would other businesses waste money watching the Pentagon from their property? Why would the Pentagon need to have security cameras observing outward with 1 side is coverd by a freeway, another by Arlington National Cemetary, another by the Patomic river, and another with like zero vehicle access?

Warning =/= Order

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62688532.amp

A common tactic of conspiracy theorists is spinning an action into something much more sinister than it really was.

AgBandsman said:

---

2%er/New Army said:

---

AgBandsman said:

---

Wow, the amount of people on here blindly trusting our government is insane. There's nothing wrong with questioning and it isn't a sign of low IQ.

---

Yes, it is. Lol. Very low IQ

---

Which takes more IQ:

1) blindly trusting everything a proven tyrannical government tells you, or...

2) thinking for yourself and questioning the BS they tell you.

P.S. keep in mind, this same government has been shown to have killed JFK this week.

P.P.S. if you read the reply directly above the one you quoted, you'd see where I'm not denying the pentagon plane crash, but low IQ gonna Low IQ. 9/11 Pentagon Attack Question - Page 2 | TexAgs

---

Funny thing about the world - it's not a 1 or 2 and no other options. But you don't understand that.

And I have serious doubts as to the accuracy of your statement on JFK. Maybe the feds offed him, maybe they didn't. But I can guarantee you with 100% accuracy that there is absolutely zero chance that they would release any proof of them doing it if they in fact did. Because while the feds aren't trustworthy, they aren't dumb. And they sure as hell aren't dumb enough to implicate themselves.

cbr said:

---

I dont really get the conclusive opinions either way.

I've never studied any of this but there are a whole lot of seemingly odd things around 9/11

Then again i have not seen or heard of any particular 'conspiracy theory' that was fully persuasive


But one thing is for sure - there remain a lot of secrets or mysteries about this event.

---

There are not a lot of odd things. There are a lot of willful ignorance and intentional misleading by people with books to sell, hatred of government, or the desire to be "the smartest person in the room"

AggiEE said:

---

New World Ag said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

We still don't have footage of the alleged hijackers entering all the required airport terminals

Why?

---

---

1:16:43 Timestamp




Timestamped for you

Not a single image was released of any hijacker entering one of the planes

That picture is of the alleged hijackers entering a security checkpoint for a previous connecting flight (Maine to Boston), not the specific flight they allegedly hijacked from Boston.

There should be plenty of camera evidence of every single one of the hijackers, yet we were given so little.

---

Notice how the goal post was moved? Went from entering the airport to now getting on the plane...this is how the truther operates. He did these same kind of things in the previous thread.

Would airlines or airports have cameras facing the ramps in 2001? What would be the point? What value does it add with additional equipment and media storage?

wbt5845 said:

---

Warning =/= Order

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62688532.amp

A common tactic of conspiracy theorists is spinning an action into something much more sinister than it really was.

---

Haha geez. The FBI was pressuring the sh** out of them...but it wasn't an "official order on government letterhead" so it doesn't count.

What a weird and nerdy response.

Satellite of Love said:

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

redcrayon said:

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

agracer said:

---

CanyonAg77 said:

---

I don't know what idiot thought I was joking about how easy it is to fly the plane, and got my post deleted.

I'm 100% serious. All you people acting like this is some amazing feat of airmanship are talking out of your butt.

Trained pilots (they did have training) flying a modern aircraft into a building that covers 34 acres, isn't exactly Chuck Yeager breaking the sound barrier

---

One of the things the conspiracy nuts like to point out is the crazy, erratic flight path that Flight 77 took before it hit the pentagon. The flight path that not even the best pilot could follow but this low IQ terrorist who failed flight school was able to fly that 757 like Maverick. What they ignore is the flight path was so erratic and crazy because the terrorist was barely in control of the plane and just reacting to what was going on. It was not skill, it was dumb luck he even hit the pentagon to begin with (let alone find it).

If you've ever flown and instrument approach and suddenly start chasing the needles your path will look the same. My uncle got me into a Navy t-34 simulator in Corpus a long time ago and had me do an instrument approach. I got about 1/2 mile from the runway and was off a little bit and suddenly I was chasing the needles all over the place and the flight path was a zig zag mess and I crashed the plane...

---

I respect what Canyon and the rest are saying with how it's achievable.

But this is the other side of the coin on this deal.

How do you calculate the probability that the pilot was able to pull this off and get a direct hit on the side of the building just above ground level.

We ain't talking about an experienced pilot here with a ton of hours.

Dude flying like a bat out of hell then all of a sudden regains composure and gets a direct hit like he's flying in Top Gun 2.

Nevertheless, it doesn't sit right. That's all I'm saying.

---

So, what do you think happened? Multiple witnesses saw the plane hit the Pentagon.

---

I don't know. I don't have a viable theory. At the end of the day it seems like there was more to it though.

Gas station video footage hurts more than it helps though, IMO.

Is that the best we can do under the circumstances?

It's a certainty that some other footage exist. Why can't we see it?

And if we can't see it for some specific reason ... what is that reason?

---

Why would there be security cameras facing the side of the Pentagon that was under construction?

---

15 years ago my apartment complex was under construction and had security cameras monitoring 24/7. Cameras being used to monitor the most critical government buildings, especially while under construction and potentially more vulnerable than usual makes sense to me. Hell, in this instance you'd also want to monitor construction employees who could potentially be up to something bigger. My question is why wouldn't there be security cams? OF COURSE there were.

They just won't release better quality footage because, as others have stated, it's information you don't want potentially falling into the wrong hands.

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

wbt5845 said:

---

Warning =/= Order

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62688532.amp

A common tactic of conspiracy theorists is spinning an action into something much more sinister than it really was.

---

Haha geez. The FBI was pressuring the sh** out of them...but it wasn't an "official order on government letterhead" so it doesn't count.

What a weird and nerdy response.

---

lol, right?

Pressuring the sh** out of them . . . WHILE KNOWING IT WAS REAL!

I guess he knows nothing of the Twitter files 7 drop.

Or because the surveillance was oriented around the perimeter and gates where threats were most likely to come from, not filming the sides of the building 24/7 in case a 757 crashes into it

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Noblemen06 said:

---

Anyone who thinks the US government is capable of such a widespread, thousand layers-deep coverup has more faith in the government than I ever will.

---

And then covid happened.

---

Covid wasn't a thousand layer deep coverup. Completely different circumstance and situation and attempting to draw parallels between the two is dumb.

Covid was orchestrated by a relatively small handful of .gov actors, the fallout was that the populace in general was shown to be a bunch of lemmings that willingly ate the crap they were fed without any actual documentation or proof of anything (or asking questions for that matter at first), and then jumped all on board with the booster bandwagon even though the companies that created and made the boosters were given 100% immunity and all data associated with their product was hidden from the public.

A far cry from thousands of people and multiple videos of planes hitting WTC and the Pentagon and the subsequent collapses and damage caused by those million pound missiles that we literally know were the causes of everything.

VegasAg86 said:

---

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

wbt5845 said:

---

Warning =/= Order

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62688532.amp

A common tactic of conspiracy theorists is spinning an action into something much more sinister than it really was.

---

Haha geez. The FBI was pressuring the sh** out of them...but it wasn't an "official order on government letterhead" so it doesn't count.

What a weird and nerdy response.

---

lol, right?

Pressuring the sh** out of them . . . WHILE KNOWING IT WAS REAL!

I guess he knows nothing of the Twitter files 7 drop.

---

And paying them.

Quote:

---

The FBI, with the help of insiders at Twitter, led a domestic intelligence coup against Americans during the 2020 election by priming the lead censors at Twitter to discredit reports of the legitimate Hunter Biden laptop under the guise of hacked materials.

The use of an intelligence reimbursement program means the taxpayer-funded FBI was paying Twitter nearly $3.5 million while the Big Tech company was aiding its election-rigging operation, writer Michael Shellenberger confirmed on Monday in the seventh installment of the "Twitter Files."

---

LINK

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

wbt5845 said:

---

Closer to 100 years ago on the Tuskegee experiments.

And there was no election rigging in 2020.

Once again - the idea that the US government allowed many thousands of Americans to be slaughtered is borderline insanity.

---

Dude, the FBI colluded with big tech companies to impact the election. Maybe "rigging" isn't the right word...but "shocking, unspeakable levels of interference" is accurate.

Are you denying that FBI ordered Twitter, FB etc. to suppress stories that would be very damaging to Joe Biden's election chances? And that they also pressured them to censor conservative outlets and influencers? Even the Babylon Bee? Twitter censored the NY Post, one of the oldest papers in America, for crying out loud.

People who deny this are "borderline insane".

---

so because Big Tech wanted the left to win...

ergo that means literally THOUSANDS of Americans are in on this 9/11 Truther conspiracy?

would you have any actual... facts.. or any actual evidence that this is the case?!

"you know Big Tech censored the election, so that fact of course means the Earth is really flat and not round like so many in the media tell us!!"

GAC06 said:

---

Or because the surveillance was oriented around the perimeter and gates where threats were most likely to come from, not filming the sides of the building 24/7 in case a 757 crashes into it

---

This is what the truthers do too. There are many reasons to monitor the exterior of the US Capitol, The White House, or the Pentagon...or the Chinese Embassy in Houston for that matter. Tons of buildings monitor their exterior for reasons other than just "what if a plane crashes into it".

I would be shocked if the White House wasn't under 24/7 exterior surveillance of the structure itself even back in the 1980's.

15 years ago is a lot different than 21 years ago. In 2001 after Tropical Storm Allison flooded their house, my parents renovated with state of the art for the future by having cat 5 ports in every room like electrical outlets. Like Wi-Fi where you could just beam data around wasn't even on the radar. I highly doubt construction sites had 24 hour surveillance in 2001. The cameras would have to all be wired, they would have to be expensive as **** to see anything, and they would have to have a place to store that video that didn't cost a fortune.

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

Satellite of Love said:

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

redcrayon said:

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

agracer said:

---

CanyonAg77 said:

---

I don't know what idiot thought I was joking about how easy it is to fly the plane, and got my post deleted.

I'm 100% serious. All you people acting like this is some amazing feat of airmanship are talking out of your butt.

Trained pilots (they did have training) flying a modern aircraft into a building that covers 34 acres, isn't exactly Chuck Yeager breaking the sound barrier

---

One of the things the conspiracy nuts like to point out is the crazy, erratic flight path that Flight 77 took before it hit the pentagon. The flight path that not even the best pilot could follow but this low IQ terrorist who failed flight school was able to fly that 757 like Maverick. What they ignore is the flight path was so erratic and crazy because the terrorist was barely in control of the plane and just reacting to what was going on. It was not skill, it was dumb luck he even hit the pentagon to begin with (let alone find it).

If you've ever flown and instrument approach and suddenly start chasing the needles your path will look the same. My uncle got me into a Navy t-34 simulator in Corpus a long time ago and had me do an instrument approach. I got about 1/2 mile from the runway and was off a little bit and suddenly I was chasing the needles all over the place and the flight path was a zig zag mess and I crashed the plane...

---

I respect what Canyon and the rest are saying with how it's achievable.

But this is the other side of the coin on this deal.

How do you calculate the probability that the pilot was able to pull this off and get a direct hit on the side of the building just above ground level.

We ain't talking about an experienced pilot here with a ton of hours.

Dude flying like a bat out of hell then all of a sudden regains composure and gets a direct hit like he's flying in Top Gun 2.

Nevertheless, it doesn't sit right. That's all I'm saying.

---

So, what do you think happened? Multiple witnesses saw the plane hit the Pentagon.

---

I don't know. I don't have a viable theory. At the end of the day it seems like there was more to it though.

Gas station video footage hurts more than it helps though, IMO.

Is that the best we can do under the circumstances?

It's a certainty that some other footage exist. Why can't we see it?

And if we can't see it for some specific reason ... what is that reason?

---

Why would there be security cameras facing the side of the Pentagon that was under construction?

---

15 years ago my apartment complex was under construction and had security cameras monitoring 24/7. Cameras being used to monitor the most critical government buildings, especially while under construction and potentially more vulnerable than usual makes sense to me. Hell, in this instance you'd also want to monitor construction employees who could potentially be up to something bigger. My question is why wouldn't there be security cams? OF COURSE there were.

They just won't release better quality footage because, as others have stated, it's information you don't want potentially falling into the wrong hands.

---

At that point there was not outside construction going on. I believe they were wrapping up construction in that part of the building when the impact happened.

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

Again, it didn't come down clean by any stretch. You have one video that doesn't show much and you are trying to make something out of nothing.

It came down after 7+ hours of burning because the girders and columns that supported the building could not take that much heat for that long of a time period with that much load on them. Steel is extremely strong, but it has limitations - and heat does a number on limiting the structural integrity of steel. Doesn't even take all that much, but a fire burning at 1200+ degrees uncontrolled for 7 hours is more than enough to get the A-36 steel to a plastic state where they deform under load.

Mix that in with the rather unique design of the building and you get a surprisingly small number of columns that support the load of the entire building. One of those columns finally gave way and the result is a daisy chain reaction of failures that lead to the building collapse.

WTC7 didn't collapse as a single unit in one fail swoop either - there was a series of failures on lower floors internally that eventually led to what your video of half a building shows as a singular event, starting on the east side of the building. But like anything else, a little research and understanding that one view that supports your theories doesn't even come close to telling the entire story and with even a little scrutiny the idea that it was some "clean" collapse proves to be garbage.

Like the theories that it wasn't a plane that hit the Pentagon (despite the fact that there is video footage showing it was exactly that) or the even dumber theories that all of the WTC towers were pre-wired by the CIA and George Bush himself to be imploded and the planes hitting were a decoy or whatever other nonsense gets brought up.

And when it collapsed uncontrolled like it did, it damaged every building around it, some pretty significantly. Fiterman Hall had significant damage done to it as a result of WTC7 collapsing. Because it wasn't controlled, it wasn't clean and it wasn't a prepared demolition.

---

I starred your other post for the solid info. Part of what raised suspicion, in addition to my lack of any knowledge on the subject, was that I remember seeing a NYC fire marshall (I believe) who was saying that he didn't think there was any way building 7 came down on it's own like that. And that it resembled a demolition. This was back closer to when it happened and I was younger and more naive, but I guess that part always stuck with me.

---

There was a bunch of drama around a radio transmission made by one of the fire chiefs when the phrase "Pull it" was heard. Conspiracy theorists latched onto that like it was a smoking gun.

But what they refuse to believe is that statement was made in reference to pulling S&R crews out of WTC7 when it was deemed too unstable to continue having fire crews inside the building due to the uncontrolled fires, lack of water for the fire suppression systems (the water systems on that block were damaged and pressure was almost zero when WTC1 collapsed earlier in the day) and when WTC7 started making noises that indicated structural failure was imminent.

JJxvi said:

---

15 years ago is a lot different than 21 years ago. In 2001 after Tropical Storm Allison flooded their house, my parents renovated with state of the art for the future by having cat 5 ports in every room like electrical outlets. Like Wi-Fi where you could just beam data around wasn't even on the radar. I highly doubt construction sites had 24 hour surveillance in 2001. The cameras would have to all be wired, they would have to be expensive as **** to see anything, and they would have to have a place to store that video that didn't cost a fortune.

---

And it would have looked like it was filmed with a potato.

Probably some special restrictions on video surveillance by contractors working on the pentagon

LMCane said:

---

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

wbt5845 said:

---

Closer to 100 years ago on the Tuskegee experiments.

And there was no election rigging in 2020.

Once again - the idea that the US government allowed many thousands of Americans to be slaughtered is borderline insanity.

---

Dude, the FBI colluded with big tech companies to impact the election. Maybe "rigging" isn't the right word...but "shocking, unspeakable levels of interference" is accurate.

Are you denying that FBI ordered Twitter, FB etc. to suppress stories that would be very damaging to Joe Biden's election chances? And that they also pressured them to censor conservative outlets and influencers? Even the Babylon Bee? Twitter censored the NY Post, one of the oldest papers in America, for crying out loud.

People who deny this are "borderline insane".

---

so because Big Tech wanted the left to win...

ergo that means literally THOUSANDS of Americans are in on this 9/11 Truther conspiracy?

would you have any actual... facts.. or any actual evidence that this is the case?!

"you know Big Tech censored the election, so that fact of course means the Earth is really flat and not round like so many in the media tell us!!"

---

No, I don't think you read what I was responding to specifically. I was saying that I do not believe that the government conspired to perpetrate 9/11, but that I wouldn't be surprised if the CIA or other agency had prior knowledge...just as numerous mass shooters have been on their radar before killing many innocent children and teachers. To further paint a picture to the poster who denies that they worked with big tech companies to interfere in the last election (which has been PROVEN), I was just trying to illustrate how evil and corrupt the govt is.

At the very least, I think that we used this as a convenient chance to go to war...at worst, I would not be shocked to find that some govt members had prior knowledge. I have lost all trust and view several groups of our govt as corrupt and agenda driven. Don't care if that makes me crazy...I was called crazy for calling Fauci out in mid March, for thinking it was an intentional lab leak, for thinking the vax would basically be forced on us through mandates, for thinking the vaccines sucked...I've been called crazy many times.

aggiehawg said:

---

And paying them.

Quote:

---

The FBI, with the help of insiders at Twitter, led a domestic intelligence coup against Americans during the 2020 election by priming the lead censors at Twitter to discredit reports of the legitimate Hunter Biden laptop under the guise of hacked materials.

---

---

The payments are interesting, but the egregious part is they engaged in the bolded part, WHEN THEY KNEW THE LAPTOP WAS REAL!!!

It's hilarious to me that this FBI interference in the election dropped on the day the Jan 6 Committee recommended charges against Trump.

In 2001 the typical government worker probably had a computer with 16 meg (yes MB) of RAM

wbt5845 said:

---

Closer to 100 years ago on the Tuskegee experiments.

And there was no election rigging in 2020.

Once again - the idea that the US government allowed many thousands of Americans to be slaughtered is borderline insanity.

---

You are absolutely wrong on both the election and the idea that the government wouldn't sacrifice American lives for nefarious or ulterior motives.

Do I think the feds had intimate knowledge of 9/11 and sat back and watched it happen? No. But not for one second do I think that the feds wouldn't let Americans die if it was in what they thought their best interest was. Pearl Harbor is a really good example of this.

BigRobSA said:

---

JJxvi said:

---

15 years ago is a lot different than 21 years ago. In 2001 after Tropical Storm Allison flooded their house, my parents renovated with state of the art for the future by having cat 5 ports in every room like electrical outlets. Like Wi-Fi where you could just beam data around wasn't even on the radar. I highly doubt construction sites had 24 hour surveillance in 2001. The cameras would have to all be wired, they would have to be expensive as **** to see anything, and they would have to have a place to store that video that didn't cost a fortune.

---

And it would have looked like it was filmed with a potato.

---

It's crazy how some people act like 2001 was 1950 or something. OF COURSE we had good quality cameras monitoring places like the white house. What world are yall living in?

Hell, Scarface had this dope setup in 1982...



IB4, "That's a movie, decent security cameras didn't exist in the 1980's!"

The truthers and the logical often times use the same sort of red herrings and argument tactics imo.

GAC06 said:

---

Probably some special restrictions on video surveillance by contractors working on the pentagon

---

My point is that his apartment construction site in 2007 or 2008 was probably extremely high tech compared to exterior security cameras at the Pentagon in 2001, even if you consider that in 2001 the Pentagon was the best in the world (debateable, who really knows?) and this apartment complex construction site was run of the mill for its time.

schmellba99 said:

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Quote:

---

That's a 757? Probably the best flying ever. You know how difficult that would be?

---

This is also where I get hung up on all this.

I don't know **** about flying, but that seems like extremely difficult maneuver in a 757.

I don't see where you get anywhere that low with out crashing first.

It was a 100% direct hit.

With no formal training, no practice runs,

This is like some HS player throwing a no hitter in the World Series.

---

So you are saying that essentially landing a plane is near impossible?

Because that is what the Saudi hijacker did - and he did have training on flying. Comparing pointing the nose of a plane at the base of a building with no obstructions around it to a HS player throwing a no hitter in the world series is just dumb.

I'm as anti-government as anybody, but the bending and twisting and turning verifiable facts into pretzels in an attempt to make it into something it isn't with regards to 9/11 is just not something I am capable of understanding.

Sometimes the truth is exactly what every single bit of data, video, eye witness reports, etc. tells you it is. In this case, it was a bunch of crazy muslim hijackers that flew 3 planes into buildings and killed a whole lot of people in the process. Would have been 4 had it not been for the fact that a handful of heroes on the plane that went down in Pennsylvania fought back and at least kept the hijackers from completing their goal on that plane.

---

No only does the Elementary Education major (turn in your degree) continue to bend facts, he completely ignores anything that goes against his narrative. It's been posted twice, by a someone who WORKED ON THE 757 AT BOEING how the tags on the plane components match up to the 757 parts which are ALL OVER THE PLACE in, around on top of and scattered everywhere around the Pentagon but somehow those were planted and no one noticed.

schmellba99 said:

---

wbt5845 said:

---

Closer to 100 years ago on the Tuskegee experiments.

And there was no election rigging in 2020.

Once again - the idea that the US government allowed many thousands of Americans to be slaughtered is borderline insanity.

---

You are absolutely wrong on both the election and the idea that the government wouldn't sacrifice American lives for nefarious or ulterior motives.

Do I think the feds had intimate knowledge of 9/11 and sat back and watched it happen? No. But not for one second do I think that the feds wouldn't let Americans die if it was in what they thought their best interest was. Pearl Harbor is a really good example of this.

---

Exactly. My theory with the election collusion is that they possibly knew of smoke that Trump was going to push hard to gut/defund them (understandably so). Pretty much every major institution hated and feared Trump. China's virus was also very conveniently timed, but that's for a different thread.

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

BigRobSA said:

---

JJxvi said:

---

15 years ago is a lot different than 21 years ago. In 2001 after Tropical Storm Allison flooded their house, my parents renovated with state of the art for the future by having cat 5 ports in every room like electrical outlets. Like Wi-Fi where you could just beam data around wasn't even on the radar. I highly doubt construction sites had 24 hour surveillance in 2001. The cameras would have to all be wired, they would have to be expensive as **** to see anything, and they would have to have a place to store that video that didn't cost a fortune.

---

And it would have looked like it was filmed with a potato.

---

It's crazy how some people act like 2021 was 1950 or something. OF COURSE we had good quality cameras monitoring places like the white house. What world are yall living in?

Hell, Scarface had this dope setup in 1982...



IB4, that's a movie, decent security cameras didn't exist in the 1980's!

The truthers and the logical often times use the same sort of red herrings and argument tactics imo.

---

The Pentagon probably had ****loads of expensive cameras….all pointed at doorways entrances, hallways, just like this in that shot…which also would not show you an airplane hitting the building it was in.

Give us examples of top of the line tech from 2001.

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Noblemen06 said:

---

Anyone who thinks the US government is capable of such a widespread, thousand layers-deep coverup has more faith in the government than I ever will.

---

And then covid happened.

---

For a conspiracy person, Covid would be a lot easier to swallow. Fauci and 6-8 other high level GOF fans could have pulled it off in an inner circle. Let's face it, he was the lead voice. Now compare that to the 1000s that would have been needed to pull off 911.