This is the lady who says they diverted flights to a military base, had passengers call from the ground claiming hijack and then liquidated them I think
Considering how many people were there and looking up, there are very few eyewitness testimonies of the second plane, and no amateur video. Impossible. I believe those who claim they saw the second plane are CIA, and that there were no planes. We know for a fact that there was no plane in shanksville, no plane at the pentagon, so why would there be planes at the towers. If there’s one lie, it’s all lies. Same as NASA.
Could it really not be both? Could they not use project blue beam for local viewers and then digital imagery for broadcasts? I read some people suggested it may have been a guided weapon disguised of sorts in the shell of a mock 767.
I think they play both sides. We can’t get too distracted by these people with CIA ties. They have a tendency to muddy the waters for people awake and asleep.
One thing that she missed in her description of the phone calls, is that one woman whispered at the end of the call (which was recorded on an answering machine), "It's a fake."
Loose Change guy had some of it right didn't he. He suggested the planes were landed and the people led off. Would be interesting to watch that again actually and see if there is any supporting evidence within it that may be over looked.
As I understand it, the planes landed in a joint NASA airfield in Cleveland...not outside of Boston. One of the "phone callers" (who I think was a Navy pilot) commented that it looked like they were "...flying over Ohio."
In the video, it was the first time I had heard about the fraudulent air traffic software. I had heard through a different source that the ID's of the planes were switched to military aircraft over Stewart AFB. I vaguely recall a witness testimony who watched passengers from one of the aircraft loaded onto another in Boston, but my memory is fuzzy...
My personal opinion is that we shouldn't get hung up on this particular aspect of 9/11 because it's not verifiable as of yet, very speculative and could lead us on a wild goose chase. We should just focus on the points that can be proven by science, like the ability of a steel frame building to collapse at free fall speed into it's own footprint without the use of explosives. Once we get the public to understand that 9/11 was an inside job AND we force our gov't to address this issue, then we can focus on other issues to figure out what exactly happened.
I am hoping that 9/11 is an issue that Trump will eventually address when he is able. IMO, it's even more important that we understand what & why this happened than the JFK assassination. Hopefully we won't have to wait much longer to find out.
This is the lady who says they diverted flights to a military base, had passengers call from the ground claiming hijack and then liquidated them I think
yep. then added the "crash" everyone witnessed as a very cheap digital effect: https://www.bitchute.com/video/2ynY9D0sfusP/
Considering how many people were there and looking up, there are very few eyewitness testimonies of the second plane, and no amateur video. Impossible. I believe those who claim they saw the second plane are CIA, and that there were no planes. We know for a fact that there was no plane in shanksville, no plane at the pentagon, so why would there be planes at the towers. If there’s one lie, it’s all lies. Same as NASA.
...not quite the same... ...space is still real...
Could it really not be both? Could they not use project blue beam for local viewers and then digital imagery for broadcasts? I read some people suggested it may have been a guided weapon disguised of sorts in the shell of a mock 767.
#NOPLANES FOREVER BROTHER
I remember she sounded credible altho I later read she had some CIA ties or some issue I forget what
I think they play both sides. We can’t get too distracted by these people with CIA ties. They have a tendency to muddy the waters for people awake and asleep.
around the 25 minute mark.
One thing that she missed in her description of the phone calls, is that one woman whispered at the end of the call (which was recorded on an answering machine), "It's a fake."
Loose Change guy had some of it right didn't he. He suggested the planes were landed and the people led off. Would be interesting to watch that again actually and see if there is any supporting evidence within it that may be over looked.
As I understand it, the planes landed in a joint NASA airfield in Cleveland...not outside of Boston. One of the "phone callers" (who I think was a Navy pilot) commented that it looked like they were "...flying over Ohio."
In the video, it was the first time I had heard about the fraudulent air traffic software. I had heard through a different source that the ID's of the planes were switched to military aircraft over Stewart AFB. I vaguely recall a witness testimony who watched passengers from one of the aircraft loaded onto another in Boston, but my memory is fuzzy...
My personal opinion is that we shouldn't get hung up on this particular aspect of 9/11 because it's not verifiable as of yet, very speculative and could lead us on a wild goose chase. We should just focus on the points that can be proven by science, like the ability of a steel frame building to collapse at free fall speed into it's own footprint without the use of explosives. Once we get the public to understand that 9/11 was an inside job AND we force our gov't to address this issue, then we can focus on other issues to figure out what exactly happened. I am hoping that 9/11 is an issue that Trump will eventually address when he is able. IMO, it's even more important that we understand what & why this happened than the JFK assassination. Hopefully we won't have to wait much longer to find out.