Well, umm, yes they lied to you.
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (29)
sorted by:
Explain?
I believe its illustrating the fact that planes don't simply evaporate when they hit a solid wall. Think Pentagon.
This is not comparable. At all. Not saying the Pentagon thing wasn't fishy, but this is just silly.
This photo was from the 2005 Teterboro incident.
This was a smaller plane, a Canadair 600, which was poorly loaded and hit V1 but failed to rotate, causing it to - at land speed - crash into a building across from the runway.
It's not remotely comparable to the Pentagon, if indeed that is what the OP is getting at.
You can hit a telephone pole with a car at 25mph and still make sense of what happened. Hit it at 125mph and you’ll have a lot of splinters and unanswered questions.
Well yeah, I mean this plane was much, much, much smaller, had a smaller fuel load, was going at a much, much slower (land) speed and... it's just not comparable.
You can't compare an apple to an orange and say it proves that lemon's can't exist. There's zero metrics here.
^this
Got it. Thank you.
There were parts of the plane's landing gear and wheels sitting outside the pentagon right after it happened, unless someone drove the parts over there and unloaded them right in the middle of the whole world watching live.
There were engine parts as well. However, someone suggested that the parts on show were not from the exact engine that should have been in the plane.
I thought it was all the 'snow' right next to the plane, kek
Pentagon was a drone. All the signs. We were told a plane. As of today, they still keep all surveillance video classified. And I mean all. Every store in a 10 block radius they collected.