E Team and Nose Out were the two situations that gave me the "well okay maybe I'll consider it" to the notion that there were no planes.
Add a little mass formation psychosis and then you have to ask yourself, did YOU see a plane? Do you know anyone who saw a plane? At the individual level, everyone just assumes that everyone else saw the plane. But if everyone assumes that everyone else saw it, what then if nobody saw it? Then surely everyone saw it, and thus it would be absolutely insane to question something that everyone saw? You can hide something in plain sight if the very idea of questioning it would be preposterous. If you're going to cook up a nefarious scheme, why not build that preposterousness (and thus plausible deniability) directly into the scheme? Helps you cover it up later.
Aye. All the adults have been conditioned over many years to think in terms that are away from that base state of understanding, thus missing the truth that's right in front of them. Also, I'll add that the child just comes right out and says it, because the child doesn't know why it is not to be pointed out! Seeing truth and pointing it out without fear, because why should one be afraid to ask a question in a free society? <--- FACT CHECK: This claim is made by someone who spreads false claims without evidence. Verdict: Mostly False
Forgive me, but, seriously, how does e team (which branded themselves as an art collective that constructed a balcony outside the WTC) convince you that there were no planes on 9/11, that's absolutely ridiculous.
The reactions of people on the ground appear to support the official narratives that planes hit. I've viewed the videos with Gray planes instead of commercial aircraft. The first responders reported series of explosions which supports the claims of planted charges to pull the buildings when the planes hit. Huge psyop. Some might say it is bigger than the moon landing. Both events changed history.
You know, one thing that definitely changes the narrative is that both of the planes that hit the World Trade Centers entered the FAA register after 2 years off the day before 9/11. Yes, they were marked in official Airlines liveries, but there is no proof whatsoever you have the planes actually carried the passengers. But they were definitely 767's, I saw them with my own eyes
Charges placed doesn't invalidate the existence of plane collisions, and indeed there is value in going all in on a psyop instead of leaving it to one avenue of attack.
It's not that E Team convinced me that there were no planes on 9/11, it's that it was the missing piece of the puzzle that would explain the explosion and corresponding damage to the "impact zone" that was visible to everybody after the "plane" struck.
It's that E Team had unprecedented access to the buildings in the months leading up to 9/11.
It's that their "diary" was filled with all sorts of weird imagery, including people falling from the sky with a down arrow and saying something to the effect of "hundreds of feet of pure pleasure."
Then Nose Out gave the explanation for how the second plane appeared in live footage on the broadcast, because it was composited over live footage.
Pieces of the puzzle that go from "schizo-town" to "there just may be something here."
I was a couple miles from the Pentagon when “the plane” hit it. I drove by it within an hour after the strike to retrieve my daughter from pre-k. That video is what the crash site looked like, but w smoke billowing out. No one saw or heard any plane. Within a year or so, people started saying they saw or heard the plane…the same people. Mass formation psychosis.
You guys are lost in space. My boss's brother nearly got killed from falling debris from the Twin Towers. There sure as hell were two airplanes, and corresponding missing and dead passengers and crew...not to mention the dead from the building collision and collapse. Very weird. You want to deny the truth of an evil act in order to support a paranoid belief that you are being lied to.
But if you are being lied to, then---for you---this whole site is a Deep State leg-pulling exercise, where 3-letter agency trolls jump on board during lunchtime in order to pull you around the block. If everyone lies to you, where does it stop?
The 1 camera they released footage from (the pentagon had over 80) was too close for anything as large as an airliner to fill the frame. It looked like a plane because a cruise missile resembles a plane at that distance.
More research will show that footage from the news stations was doctored and the media was 100% complicit in the day’s events even making mistakes as large as reporting the destruction of wtc7 before it had happened
Sure planes hit. No fuel melts steel buildings in freefall. Remember DJT explaining that he thought they were nuts to build it with small windows which was forced by building it so strong with the steel on the outside. Planes may have hit for show but they didn't collapse the buildings
People don't understand how the WTC was constructed. For instance, at the point of impact of the first airplane, the steel I beams outside the WTC were only one quarter inch thick steel. That's because architects have an old adage that the building only has to support the weight of above it. Every time you build a building taller, you are actually sliding a floor underneath the existing weight of the floors above. The outside mesh of the WTC was designed to hold 40% of the total weight of the building.
"No fuel melts steel..." Always uttered by people who never check the details. The adiabatic flame temperature of kerosene (jet fuel) is 2093 deg C. The only metals that can tolerate that temperature (in jet engines) are special nickel alloys or columbium. Steel (iron) has a melting temperature of 1538 deg C, approximately 550 deg C below the flame temperature of burning kerosene. And steel gives up its strength rapidly with temperature, losing most of it well before it reaches the melting point. So your statement is pure puffery.
The collapse appears to have been the result of the fires and the consequent weakening of the columns, leading to pancake collapse as each floor suffered increasing weight and impact loads. Without the airplane crashes, this would never have happened. You have a strange conception of causality.
A whole lot of people were killed "for show," so your characterization is a grotesque trivialization of their deaths.
Yep, I'm blanking on the exact phrase, but it's exactly like what happened to Kitty Genovese;
Multiple, multiple people heard her screaming for help while being raped, but everyone assumed that someone else must be calling 911, so nobody ended up doing it.
No planes hit any buildings on 911.
Come at me bro.
Tell me how your uncle saw the planes hit the buildings with his own eyes.
The reason they will expend infinite money on trying to stop speech like this is because:
The media was complicit on 911
They put the doctored video feeds on the air.
They are desperately trying to keep that fact from spreading.
Too bad....
You chased us off all the platforms you control, so now we have platforms you do not control.
E Team and Nose Out were the two situations that gave me the "well okay maybe I'll consider it" to the notion that there were no planes.
Add a little mass formation psychosis and then you have to ask yourself, did YOU see a plane? Do you know anyone who saw a plane? At the individual level, everyone just assumes that everyone else saw the plane. But if everyone assumes that everyone else saw it, what then if nobody saw it? Then surely everyone saw it, and thus it would be absolutely insane to question something that everyone saw? You can hide something in plain sight if the very idea of questioning it would be preposterous. If you're going to cook up a nefarious scheme, why not build that preposterousness (and thus plausible deniability) directly into the scheme? Helps you cover it up later.
Now I understand why only a child spoke out when he saw the emperor had no clothes. A child only sees truth.
Aye. All the adults have been conditioned over many years to think in terms that are away from that base state of understanding, thus missing the truth that's right in front of them. Also, I'll add that the child just comes right out and says it, because the child doesn't know why it is not to be pointed out! Seeing truth and pointing it out without fear, because why should one be afraid to ask a question in a free society? <--- FACT CHECK: This claim is made by someone who spreads false claims without evidence. Verdict: Mostly False
Good take. Children don't have bias built in.
Forgive me, but, seriously, how does e team (which branded themselves as an art collective that constructed a balcony outside the WTC) convince you that there were no planes on 9/11, that's absolutely ridiculous.
The reactions of people on the ground appear to support the official narratives that planes hit. I've viewed the videos with Gray planes instead of commercial aircraft. The first responders reported series of explosions which supports the claims of planted charges to pull the buildings when the planes hit. Huge psyop. Some might say it is bigger than the moon landing. Both events changed history.
You know, one thing that definitely changes the narrative is that both of the planes that hit the World Trade Centers entered the FAA register after 2 years off the day before 9/11. Yes, they were marked in official Airlines liveries, but there is no proof whatsoever you have the planes actually carried the passengers. But they were definitely 767's, I saw them with my own eyes
Charges placed doesn't invalidate the existence of plane collisions, and indeed there is value in going all in on a psyop instead of leaving it to one avenue of attack.
It's not that E Team convinced me that there were no planes on 9/11, it's that it was the missing piece of the puzzle that would explain the explosion and corresponding damage to the "impact zone" that was visible to everybody after the "plane" struck.
It's that E Team had unprecedented access to the buildings in the months leading up to 9/11.
It's that their "diary" was filled with all sorts of weird imagery, including people falling from the sky with a down arrow and saying something to the effect of "hundreds of feet of pure pleasure."
Then Nose Out gave the explanation for how the second plane appeared in live footage on the broadcast, because it was composited over live footage.
Pieces of the puzzle that go from "schizo-town" to "there just may be something here."
Excellent work frog. Solid. 🐸🐸🐸🐸
I was a couple miles from the Pentagon when “the plane” hit it. I drove by it within an hour after the strike to retrieve my daughter from pre-k. That video is what the crash site looked like, but w smoke billowing out. No one saw or heard any plane. Within a year or so, people started saying they saw or heard the plane…the same people. Mass formation psychosis.
You guys are lost in space. My boss's brother nearly got killed from falling debris from the Twin Towers. There sure as hell were two airplanes, and corresponding missing and dead passengers and crew...not to mention the dead from the building collision and collapse. Very weird. You want to deny the truth of an evil act in order to support a paranoid belief that you are being lied to.
But if you are being lied to, then---for you---this whole site is a Deep State leg-pulling exercise, where 3-letter agency trolls jump on board during lunchtime in order to pull you around the block. If everyone lies to you, where does it stop?
The 1 camera they released footage from (the pentagon had over 80) was too close for anything as large as an airliner to fill the frame. It looked like a plane because a cruise missile resembles a plane at that distance.
This ^^^
More research will show that footage from the news stations was doctored and the media was 100% complicit in the day’s events even making mistakes as large as reporting the destruction of wtc7 before it had happened
This....canceled a downvote from the logic impaired.
Sure planes hit. No fuel melts steel buildings in freefall. Remember DJT explaining that he thought they were nuts to build it with small windows which was forced by building it so strong with the steel on the outside. Planes may have hit for show but they didn't collapse the buildings
People don't understand how the WTC was constructed. For instance, at the point of impact of the first airplane, the steel I beams outside the WTC were only one quarter inch thick steel. That's because architects have an old adage that the building only has to support the weight of above it. Every time you build a building taller, you are actually sliding a floor underneath the existing weight of the floors above. The outside mesh of the WTC was designed to hold 40% of the total weight of the building.
"No fuel melts steel..." Always uttered by people who never check the details. The adiabatic flame temperature of kerosene (jet fuel) is 2093 deg C. The only metals that can tolerate that temperature (in jet engines) are special nickel alloys or columbium. Steel (iron) has a melting temperature of 1538 deg C, approximately 550 deg C below the flame temperature of burning kerosene. And steel gives up its strength rapidly with temperature, losing most of it well before it reaches the melting point. So your statement is pure puffery.
The collapse appears to have been the result of the fires and the consequent weakening of the columns, leading to pancake collapse as each floor suffered increasing weight and impact loads. Without the airplane crashes, this would never have happened. You have a strange conception of causality.
A whole lot of people were killed "for show," so your characterization is a grotesque trivialization of their deaths.
Talking about the Pentagon....try to pay attention.
I have. Have you? Plenty of assertions that certain things are true that were not true at all...on the part of the conspiracy theorists.
Yep, I'm blanking on the exact phrase, but it's exactly like what happened to Kitty Genovese;
Multiple, multiple people heard her screaming for help while being raped, but everyone assumed that someone else must be calling 911, so nobody ended up doing it.