Discussion in '9/11' started by Shinebox, Sep 10, 2016.
all that video and you're going off a couple "witnesses"... have another bowl of Cocoa Puffs ...
Truthers accept the lunatic fringe ... that says a lot ...
"And then heard this noise that seemed to come from everywhere but didn't...had no idea what it was and then the south tower just exploded, it just it just, it just blew up. And somebody said that was a plane and I was like, "I was underneath it, I was looking at the tower, I had my camera in my hand, I heard the noise, I never saw the airplane."
David, did not hear or see an approaching plane and did not photograph one. He would have heard and felt the roaring engines coming in way before the tower exploded. NO AIRLINER HIT THE SOUTH TOWER.
911stealth David Handschuh Propelled in Air a Block by Explosion & Saw No Plane - YouTube
Yet thousands of people in New York saw a plane hit the South Tower and millions more on live tv.. over the years billions have seen videos of it.. You surely are pushing a big steamy pile of nonsense..
Of course he's pushing a big steamy pile of nonsense. He's not a real truther. I talked about that here.
He's trying to make real truthers look silly.
Why don't your fake planes have markings or windows? There was no attempt to make the fake images look real.
But it did have windows..
You can see them in the picture you link as well..
And it had markings.. which you can also see in the picture you link..
There is no better source than the videos from 911. They either depict something real or they do not. The images and video footage from 911 do not contain an authentic plane of any kind.
Fake plane images with no right wing and other missing parts. No markings. No windows. No evidence of any real plane exists from 911.
just wow ... how did I not see this before? ...
You probably have. No one has explained the garbage quality because it can't be.
Agent - "Sir, we've got a plan, now we just to recruit the numbers and it's go"
Bush - "Excellent, what are the details?"
Agent - "Well sir, we're going to get a team of men to sneak explosives into the twin towers. Then we're going to hijack all the live feeds and impose a fake aircraft hitting the towers in the exact spot and at the exact time we blow the explosives."
Bush - "Won't fake planes be easy to spot on video?"
Agent - "We've covered that by making them appear imperfect; no logos, no windows, even some have entire wings missing and stuff."
Bush - "Okay............. and you're going to do this with every single live feed... how?"
Agent - "Don't worry yourself with details"
Bush - "And what about the thousands of people who are going to be there to see this actually happen? Surely if a building explodes with no planes anywhere near it people will talk and tell the media, what about people with home video cameras? They're going to be filming a building exploding with no plane and showing the world.. How do we stop them?"
Agent - "Don't worry sir, we've going to hire a couple of dozen people to film the event, then doctor in fake planes and share it to the media as home videos.. we're also going to hire dozens of people to remove any videos from anywhere on the internet showing otherwise, and also have agents established in all international governments to ensure they don't ask questions and refuse to give any witness or whistleblower asylum.."
Bush - "Wait, how many people are we going to have to get in on this? What if some of them talk or doesn't dispose of records properly or leak information to foreign governments?"
Agent - "Don't worry sir, everyone we get on board will have to sign non-disclosure agreements."
Bush - "........... Can't we just crash a plane into a building by remote control?"
Agent - "No, I'm sorry sir we just don't have that kind of capability.............."
Regardless of the worthless quality this Robert Clark image depicts, it is totally fake based solely on every single part being misaligned with a real plane at the same angle, including the left engine. The fake images and videos are sourced at the link posted below. Someone did this comp several years ago and really nailed it.
This single piece of evidence refuting a plane is more reasonable doubt than almost any defense attorney has ever raised that led to a not guilty verdict. It takes a drastically different angle to produce a similar alignment but even then, the right wing is angled upward instead of straight out as it clearly must be.
some people are really out of touch with reality ...
Stop with your craziness already...
Gamlon tried and failed at altering evidence to match existing altered evidence. He was exposed then and will be right now.
Only if he'd used a model that wasn't readily available on goog-images. He warped, distorted, and degraded the model to tilt Clark's fake. I found the model and pointed out that its angle was similar to the one I was using to show how different the angle needed to be to create a match. Gammy failed at failing, making the case for forgery that much stronger. Don't even try this BS because I will catch and expose your garbage.
The following is from your sig: "The objective of disinformation is not to convince you of one point of view or another, it is to create enough uncertainty so that everything is believable and nothing is knowable. " -- James Fetzer"
Fetzer not only founded the fraudulent "Scholars for 911 Truth" which pioneered fake peer reviewed, a precursor to the Bentham paper. But Fetzer also blamed the Sandy Hook Shootings on Israel, before claiming it was all "fakery" (something else pioneered by Fetzer assiciates called September Clues, but that's another story...):
"An article by Fetzer published by Press TV and Veterans Today (a site, according to Oliver Kamm, which "promotes conspiracy theories") titled (by the latter) "Did Mossad death squads slaughter American children at Sandy Hook?" was described in January 2013 by Oliver Kamm in The Jewish Chronicle as "monstrous, calumnious, demented bilge" that "violates all bounds of decency". Jovian Byford criticized Fetzer's speculations that Jews or Israel were involved in a conspiracy to commit the 9/11 attacks as "a contemporary variant of the old, antisemitic conspiracist canard about the disloyalty of Jews and their usurpation of power in the name of communal interests and the accumulation of wealth." Fetzer has written "My research on the Holocaust narrative suggests that it is not only untrue but probably false and not remotely scientifically sustainable." In 2015, Fetzer published the book Nobody Died at Sandy Hook: It Was a FEMA Drill to Promote Gun Control"
It's not a coincidence all these conspiracies originate from allies in alt-right politics:
You really have no leg to stand on to criticise people with much better sources for "altering evidence".
You exposed nothing! Here's another exercise for you. Download Sketchup and install it. Then get any plane model and rotate it around. You can get the same view you show. Your incoherent ramblings mean absolutely nothing.
Your problem is you have a hard time understanding scale and viewpoints when discussing photos. That translates into misinterpreting what they show as has been pointed out here. Anyone can get a 3D model and produce the same image view you claim is fake.
Go peddle your idiocy somewhere else.
Gammy is just a sad sack of failure. Here's my invitation to anyone to find a match for Robert Clark's stupid fake. Its alignment of fake parts will not match under any circumstances because the right wing is angled upward, but ignoring that, it cannot be matched without a much different angle.
No you are the failure in this thread and every other.
You fail to provide any evidence at all to support idiotic claims about Kennedy.
You also failed to provide any evidence of any kind about planes and the towers.
You have been shredded crushed and defeated time after time/
Much like Scott Bob and the rest who repeat the same claims over and over without any evidence.
I don't think Gammy produced this fake comparison but whomever did acknowledged that the fake image was at a much straighter angle in relation to the camera. That is evident by Clark's image being greatly reduced in size. Air Canada's wing alignment is closer to the fake because it doesn't reveal the left wing.
How come I can take a model of the plan in the Sketchup modeling program. view it from the same angle as the Clark picture you claim is fake, and get exactly what is seen in the Clark photo?
You need to get educated on viewing angles, perspective, and scale.
How can you make the claim in red above yet the evidence/photo you supply below doesn't show what you claim? The bottom "real plane" is not being viewed at the same angle. Your evidence is a joke and further supports the fact that you have no clue regarding viewing angles, perspective, and scaling. This is the very reason your "real plane's" fuselage is not as wide.
Naw he wont check it out,they only see what they want to see,your post there is the REAL hard evidence Obviously,your post there with REAL hard evidence takes the defenders of the 9/11 commission report to school so they wont look at it since they dont want to be taken to school by you.
Separate names with a comma.