Liberal Forum

Z09 » 01 Oct 2023, 8:01 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Oct 2023, 8:01 pm

The taxi drivers testimony has been discredited?

Got a link?

Already provided it - so did Jantje. 

You can click the little eyeball under my (or his) avatar to see only my (or his) posts.
 
Won't be hard to find.

Where's that video?
 

Z09 » 01 Oct 2023, 8:06 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Oct 2023, 8:06 pm

There's no video of a missile.

There's no video, PERIOD.

There should be.

If a plane hit the pentagon, where is the photographic evidence?

Keep ducking, duckie.

Z09 » 01 Oct 2023, 8:06 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Oct 2023, 8:06 pm

Aren't you a bit curious what happened to the plane that day and his dozens and dozens of people all lied about seeing a plane?

No.

I'm curious where the photos are. I don't fret about how the sausage is made. Just where the missing ingredients are. I'm not an idiot who thinks he has to figure out every element of the trick to know it's a trick.

The car that disappeared at the Copperfield show didn't REALLY disappear. Neither did the plane, fruitcake.

I don't know what happened to the plane OR the car. And I don't care - I don't get distracted by shiny stuff.

Z09 » 01 Oct 2023, 8:06 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Oct 2023, 8:06 pm

Phony FBI agents...

Are there any other kinds, fruitcake?

Z09 » 01 Oct 2023, 8:06 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Oct 2023, 8:06 pm

Area 51...

That is your narrative.

Z09 » 01 Oct 2023, 8:06 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Oct 2023, 8:06 pm

Flight controllers lying...

Your narrative.

Z09 » 01 Oct 2023, 8:06 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Oct 2023, 8:06 pm

And a plane that left Dulles that morning that no one can explain where it is....

I can tell you where it ISN'T, based on the lack of photographic and physical evidence. It ISN'T at the pentagon.

I do not care where it is, whether it existed, how the magic trick was made to happen. Not in the least.
 

Z09 » 01 Oct 2023, 8:14 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Oct 2023, 8:14 pm

Could you maybe just repost the link?

Why won't YOU post this video you keep lying about that shows a plane?

Here's my link:

http://truthandshadows.com/2019/03/20/l ... le-part-1/

Here's Jantje's:

https://youtu.be/AVEhuQXGjus?si=I7dN9Ci7mwwnsVEU

Z09 » 01 Oct 2023, 8:20 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Oct 2023, 8:20 pm

..

Can you maybe show us evidence it was a missile if that's what you believe?

No, I do not owe you any evidence, you hysterical fruitcake. 

I told you already, the one making an affirmative claim owes the evidence - not the one questioning it. 

I have no idea if the pentagon was hit by a missile - how the **** would I know that? Do you think I was there, you credulous ****?

I doubt it was hit by a plane, because there is not photographic evidence - and there would be. Also, YOU have assured me that what little photographic evidence was gotten from the same dishonest intelligence services that sent us to war in iraq shows what is described as a missile rather than as a plane. 

YOU told me that, stupid. Do you need me to quote you?
 
 

Cannonpointer » 01 Oct 2023, 8:29 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Oct 2023, 8:29 pm

No, I do not owe you any evidence, you hysterical fruitcake. 

I told you already, the one making an affirmative claim owes the evidence - not the one questioning it. 

I have no idea if the pentagon was hit by a missile - how the **** would I know that? Do you think I was there, you credulous ****?

I doubt it was hit by a plane, because there is not photographic evidence - and there would be. Also, YOU have assured me that what little photographic evidence was gotten from the same dishonest intelligence services that sent us to war in iraq shows what is described a missile rather than as a plane. 

YOU told me that, stupid. Do you need me to quote you?

Z09 is a big govt LIB......clothed in a Cheney skin coat.

Its hideous.


 
 

Sumela » 01 Oct 2023, 9:04 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Oct 2023, 9:04 pm

Z09 is a big govt LIB......clothed in a Cheney skin coat.

Its hideous.

I am a bit of a big government lib myself. 

I'm just not in favor of one that is openly hostile to my life and liberty.

 
 

Z09 » 01 Oct 2023, 8:13 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Oct 2023, 8:13 pm

Posted it...
Shows a silver streak barely and the explosion

WOW! I have actual video which does NOT show american airlines on the apparent missile, but you insist a HUNDRED PEOPLE were able to look at that and see an a.a. insignia?

Final answer?

I can see why you kept ignoring my requests for that footage. It rather **** on your narrative. 

Just so I understand, it is you affirmative position that this footage shows an AIRPLANE?
 

Cannonpointer » 01 Oct 2023, 9:11 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Oct 2023, 9:11 pm

I am a bit of a big government lib myself. 

I'm just not in favor of one that is openly hostile to my life and liberty.

Im not in favor of a big govt that

threatens other countries self-determination and liberty. (empire mafia)

Im ok with a big govt that serves the US populace

with basic needs: healthcare, infrastructure, affordable college education.
 

Sumela » 01 Oct 2023, 9:20 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Oct 2023, 9:20 pm

Im not in favor of a big govt that

threatens other countries self-determination and liberty. (empire mafia)

Im ok with a big govt that serves the US populace

with basic needs: healthcare, infrastructure, affordable college education.

Hence my affinity for FDR's internal policies. 

His foreign policy was a different matter - of course. 
 

Cannonpointer » 01 Oct 2023, 9:29 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Oct 2023, 9:29 pm

Hence my affinity for FDR's internal policies. 

His foreign policy was a different matter - of course.

word nigga
 

Z09 » 02 Oct 2023, 6:29 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 6:29 am

The one making the claim that a plane did NOT hit the Pentagon is you...

Then...
Show everyone the evidence...

Can you maybe show us the link debunking the taxi cab driver?

Oh 
That's right..
You won't show us

 https://www.wctv.tv/2021/09/07/i-was-as ... tagon-911/

I have posted this video of the cab driver outing himself at least twice

during an interview 

IN HIS OWN WORDS 

I have asked you if you watched it at least three times

watch it … then quit asking for proof 

https://youtu.be/AVEhuQXGjus?si=OlsRgb2CM4DaR6j5
 
 
 

Neo » 28 Sep 2023, 10:41 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Sep 2023, 10:41 pm

Building would have had to have been rigged on the exact same floors the planes crashed into. The explosives would have had to been undamaged and intact after the impact. That removes the use of most conventional explosives, which would have been melted and neutralized by the fires. Also would have required piloting skills not held by any of the hijackers.  So fantastic (see non existent) explosives were used and the planes weren't flown by inexperienced terrorists.  

Simple answer is better. Angry Muslims attacked some buildings.

You really don't know much about physics, do you? All of this is false. If they knew planes were going to hit it on top, then they just needed explosives in the bottom half to help weaken the structure. 

Vegas » 02 Oct 2023, 8:29 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 8:29 am

You really don't know much about physics, do you? All of this is false. If they knew planes were going to hit it on top, then they just needed explosives in the bottom half to help weaken the structure.

The buildings collapsed from the point of impacts down. I may not have a firm grasp on quantum physics but your statement shows a high degree of denial of clearly observed evidence. 
 

Neo » 02 Oct 2023, 8:38 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 8:38 am

The buildings collapsed from the point of impacts down. I may not have a firm grasp on quantum physics but your statement shows a high degree of denial of clearly observed evidence.

You don't need a firm grasp on quantum physics. Basic knowledge about gravity would suffice. 

Vegas » 02 Oct 2023, 8:45 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 8:45 am

You don't need a firm grasp on quantum physics. Basic knowledge about gravity would suffice.

Explosives as the base wouldn't cause a structural failure at the tops of the building. Gravity. Unless met with a lateral resistance, Gravity dictates these suspended objects have one vector. Straight **** down. 
 

Neo » 02 Oct 2023, 8:49 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 8:49 am

Explosives as the base wouldn't cause a structural failure at the tops of the building. Gravity. Unless met with a lateral resistance, Gravity dictates these suspended objects have one vector. Straight **** down.

Yes, and it fell straight **** down. 

Vegas » 02 Oct 2023, 8:53 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 8:53 am

Yes, and it fell straight **** down.

Gravity. What force or forces would have caused lateral movement? I suppose if it hit a titanium reinforced grounded structure it could have tipped or partially collapsed. It didn't. Straight **** down, as Gravity demands. 
 
collapses clearly started at the top. Explosives at lower levels would have presented differently and would have been apparent. 
 

Neo » 02 Oct 2023, 8:56 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 8:56 am

Gravity. What force or forces would have caused lateral movement? I suppose if it hit a titanium reinforced grounded structure it could have tipped or partially collapsed. It didn't. Straight **** down, as Gravity demands. 
 
collapses clearly started at the top. Explosives at lower levels would have presented differently and would have been apparent.

There was no lateral movement. It went straight down. Implosions cause that. It's not an uncommon thing for a building to fall straight down after a demolition. 

Vegas » 02 Oct 2023, 8:59 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 8:59 am

There was no lateral movement. It went straight down. Implosions cause that. It's not an uncommon thing for a building to fall straight down after a demolition.

Correct. Lateral movement would have required an opposing force greater than thousands of tons of matter converting potential energy to actualized energy. Nothing from that collapse footage indicated the collapse started at lower levels. 
 

Neo » 02 Oct 2023, 9:17 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 9:17 am

Correct. Lateral movement would have required an opposing force greater than thousands of tons of matter converting potential energy to actualized energy. Nothing from that collapse footage indicated the collapse started at lower levels.

You mean kinetic energy. There is no such thing "actualized energy." Stop trying to act like you know what you are talking about. Explosives don't need to be seen from the anterior of the building. They can easily be exploded from the middle. In fact, many demolitions are exploded from weakening the inside middle columns.