9/11 No Planers who claim no planes struck the WTC, and think all the video is fake

[7forever]

Well, something is in this thread.

Her statement is not consistent (as eyewitness testimony often is), and she specifically contradicts your drone assertion.

You are lying. She completely refutes her fake footage by saying it came from the west. Her fake footage shows a fake plane coming south to north. She continued to report what she saw, not what her altered video showed.

 

[BStrong]

Sure! Hands B a 6pack of Thomas Hardy's ale.
Drink this... 7s post will start to make sense.

I'll need beer goggles and the memory eraser.

 

[7forever]

Why is she irrefutable and the hundreds of others who saw actual reality of planes hitting the towers, as confirmed by real time live television footage, you somehow think are refutable. Are you sure you mom has enough ventilation in her basement?


What drone footage would that be? You've posted footage of airplanes hitting the towers. Did you misplace some other footage?

I already explained it. You can nothing but go in circles repeating nonsense about people who didn't see planes but said they did.

 

[7forever]

I thought you said the footage was faked and we couldn't believe it? Which is it little fella?

Every image showing a plane is fake. The drone footage is consistent with itself, making it the truth according to what's available for video comparison.

 

[BStrong]

You are lying. She completely refutes her fake footage by saying it came from the west. Her fake footage shows a fake plane coming south to north. She continued to report what she saw, not what her altered video showed.

Two fakes plus one mark equals what exactly?

How does CGI work in the open air, in realtime?

 

[RoboTimbo]

I already explained it. You can nothing but go in circles repeating nonsense about people who didn't see planes but said they did.

Even your witnesses video footage shows planes. Can you post that dumbed-down-for-CTwits video again? The one where it's been compressed so that you can't even make out the time stamp?

What happened to the planes and people from flight 11 and flight 175 that day? Why do you cowardly dodge the question?

 

[BStrong]

Every image showing a plane is fake. The drone footage is consistent with itself, making it the truth according to what's available for video comparison.

All the drone footage is faked.

End of discussion.

See how flat assertion simplifies everything?

 

[332nd]

There are many witnesses who reported seeing something circle around but none are needed because low Res video footage shows what I like to call the drone.

Ftfy.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Every image showing a plane is fake. The drone footage is consistent with itself, making it the truth according to what's available for video comparison.

And the drone footage is the highly pixelated, compressed multiple times, dumbed-down-for-CTwits one, right?

 

[7forever]

So what about the hundreds of other eyewitness testimonies? You don't think those count because they don't work to your advantage? You quote mine, and cherry pick. You're a joke, just like the troll movement.

You are a defeated joke who cannot prove a lie. The witnesses are only as good as what can be corroborated by other evidence. The drone footage is consistent and witnesses reported seeing something circle. A plane cannot circle any building but a drone can and did.

 

[7forever]

And the drone footage is the highly pixelated, compressed multiple times, dumbed-down-for-CTwits one, right?

Not really. Wnbc is great footage. It shows a slow floating ball that isn't a plane or chopper.

 

[RoboTimbo]

You are a defeated joke who cannot prove a lie. The witnesses are only as good as what can be corroborated by other evidence. The drone footage is consistent and witnesses reported seeing something circle. A plane cannot circle any building but a drone can and did.

And the drone footage is the repeatedly compressed, pixelated, dumbed-down-for-CTwit video you've been posting, right?

 

[George 152]

Two fakes plus one mark equals what exactly?

How does CGI work in the open air, in realtime?

You are trying to make sense from the rambling assertions of one of natures errors

 

[7forever]

What "might" have been proves what exactly?

Exactly. She didn't identify it as a chopper because it wasn't, further proving that it was something as weird as it appears on video.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Not really. Wnbc is great footage. It shows a slow floating ball that isn't a plane or chopper.

So that's the footage that is repeatedly compressed, highly pixelated, dumbed-down-for-CTwit idiotic foolage that you've been posting, right?

 

[7forever]

You are trying to make sense from the rambling assertions of one of natures errors

You are not trying to make sense from the rambling fakes of the government and media's failures.

 

[TJM]

I wonder what happened to the drone footage of flights 11, 77 and 93.

The NWO only budgeted enough for one fake?

 

[7forever]

And the drone footage is the repeatedly compressed, pixelated, dumbed-down-for-CTwit video you've been posting, right?

If you can find a better copy of WB11's drone, link me up.

 

[000063]

There are many witnesses who reported seeing something circle around but none are needed because video footage shows the drone.

Who are these witnesses? You have one or two people with vague statements.

If there is stronger evidence, such as thousands of people who say they saw planes, and you think the video shows a drone, there are only a few possibilities.

1. The video shows planes.
2. The witnesses are wrong.
3. Both are wrong.

 

[332nd]

Exactly. She didn't identify it as a chopper because it wasn't, further proving that it was something as weird as it appears on video.

& there you have it folks. "What might have been" proves "what."