From the chans via X. Dont know if it is true..but SOMETHING happened.
(media.greatawakening.win)
✈️ Planefags ✈️
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (194)
sorted by:
As much as I loathe speaking with narcississtic people bathing in Dunning-Kruger syndrome, I'm going to throw your own question back at you for shits and giggles:
Sauce?
At least I don't insult people. I have no idea what Dunning-Kruger has to do with me, nor do I think you know.
Here is a link to the Pentagon security camera 2 footage, which goes really fast. The airplane forward fuselage is visible at 0:24 seconds. The fireball is visible at 0.25 seconds. I recall viewing a version posted on this site that had slightly better time division (maybe every half second) and allowed a brief glimpse of the entire fuselage, enough to see the American Airlines livery. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_77#Security_camera_videos
Here is also an article that debunks the claim that no wreckage was reported. The reporter who supposedly made the report is the debunker. https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-911-pentagon-attack-footage-415983695442
I notice you have no refutation of my statements about cruise missiles.
That vid shows worse blur as the one I gave, only mine had better Frame rate that you could actually gauge size. They're both shit, but one gives more clues.
I didn't refute ( missle) due to its asinine assumptions, hence the dunning-kruger. I don't bother with bullshit, as I have witnessed first-hand a cruise missile both hitting target, and aftermath. Spent most of my 24 years military in the sandbox and know, from experience, what they do. I also wore the hat of Aircraft Mishap Investigator during my time in and nothing about the Pentagon hit adds up.
I noticed you had nothing to say about the Pennsylvania "crash site", either...which also doesn't add up.
Your video showed a vehicle much too long to be a cruise missile, and too big in diameter, where a cruise missile would be imperceptible at distance.
Air to surface cruise missiles always dive on their target, in order to reduce the miss distance due to altitude error. They do not fly nap of the Earth, because they cannot respond to obstacles, such as lamp standards. And if they clipped a lamp standard, to the point of breaking it off (which happened), the wing would also have broken off, causing a missile to fly out of control.
There is ample evidence for the airplane hit and continuous air traffic radar tracking from take-off to crash. I don't know why you say the event doesn't "add up." All the claims for a cruise missile are unsubstantiated.
As for Pennsylvania, I don't make a profession of all this. Why don't you take it up with the families of those who died? I recall reading of tests conducted with rocket sleds throwing fuselages at high speed into reinforced concrete walls (e.g., solid ground) and the fuselages were practically atomized by the energy of the crash. It seems like everyone has a cartoon conception of how airplanes crash. Reality is often different. I have seen photos of crash scenes where the fuselage is practically gone from melting.
Like I said: Dunning Kruger syndrome.
I get so tired of you arm-chair fuckin morons who spout horseshit they saw on Wikipedia.
You're wrong on all counts. Example: if you just take 5 minutes to YouTube cruise missile hits, arm-chair experts like you can easily see they attack from ALL angles depending on target proximity to other obstacles. This means from fully flat trajectories to straight down. I saw this first hand several times while serving, not to mention being AT ACTUAL AIRCRAFT CRASH SITES investigating for the Air Force.
Let's not even bring in the equation sites have been intentionally doctored by gov agencies to mask true incidents and that they've been doing it for decades.
Fuck you and your narcissism, troll.