View Full Version : Victims on Vesey Street
MaGZ
17th October 2009, 03:53 AM
Those who were injured on Vesey Street and taken to local hospitals that morning were not burned from falling debris but suffered trauma from the missile explosion that hit WTC 7 at 9:03.
BigAl
17th October 2009, 03:54 AM
Troll Much? I've put you on ignore. Bye.
JAStewart
17th October 2009, 04:09 AM
God damn, I love truthers. They're so thorough.
TruthersLie
17th October 2009, 04:14 AM
Those who were injured on Vesey Street and taken to local hospitals that morning were not burned from falling debris but suffered trauma from the missile explosion that hit WTC 7 at 9:03.
Oh twoof.
Please try to provide any citations to support you wild accusations.
JUST ONE
TokenMac
17th October 2009, 04:29 AM
So did you get that from this
http://www.anthraxattacks.net/2009/07/the-missiles-at-ground-zero/
or did you skim this for the words missile, WTC7, and Vesey.
http://911digitalarchive.org/parser.php?object_id=12311
Your mom and I decided that I should go down to the scene to see if I could help. There were not very many people coming up the street as I was going down. The people were being evacuated to the east, south, and west. When I got to Vesey (the street bordering the complex on the north), I saw emergency vehicles off to my right, to the west, on West St., toward the Hudson River, and fire trucks to my left on Vesey itself. I went under the overpass that connected the main complex with 7 WTC. There was a lot of activity in the truck bays there, with people coming and going. I had worked for more than ten years for the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. The captain of the regional office's police detail came by heading into the building. He told me that the Pentagon had been hit.
I was considering where to go and what to do when I heard a third screaming that sounded to me like another plane or some kind of missile coming in. I dove to the curb and pressed up against a concrete barrier waiting for some kind of impact - and, it crossed my mind, my death. No shock came. I got up and moved toward the river, to West St., where scores of emergency vehicles and personnel were deployed, and where people from the Trade Center and other offices were escaping to the north. The screaming I'd heard wasn't another jet or a missile. It was the sonic wave from the south tower collapsing, something I had no idea had happened. Suddenly a huge black-gray cloud with the debris and dust from the collapse of the south tower came roaring up the street, people running for their lives before it. I managed to outrun it and got home a few minutes later.
ETA:
Looks like he has had this theory since 2007
http://forums.randi.org/archive/index.php/t-91365.html
Josarhus
17th October 2009, 04:41 AM
Victims in the truth movement were hit by sudden stupidity. The damage seems to be permanent.
TruthersLie
17th October 2009, 04:53 AM
well considering his name
MAGZ is
missle
at
ground
zero
Not very original or honest.. but he is a twoof what do you expect?
Alt+F4
17th October 2009, 05:13 AM
Those who were injured on Vesey Street and taken to local hospitals that morning were not burned from falling debris but suffered trauma from the missile explosion that hit WTC 7 at 9:03.
No, they did not.
funk de fino
17th October 2009, 05:16 AM
He still cannot even say what type of missile it was or what aircraft fired it.
His support came from a video of a bird flying across a screen. Totally clueless.
Björn Toulouse
17th October 2009, 05:35 AM
Those who were injured on Vesey Street and taken to local hospitals that morning were not burned from falling debris but suffered trauma from the missile explosion that hit WTC 7 at 9:03.
How were you able to tell the difference?
RedIbis
17th October 2009, 07:45 AM
Those who were injured on Vesey Street and taken to local hospitals that morning were not burned from falling debris but suffered trauma from the missile explosion that hit WTC 7 at 9:03.
Do you include a source or are we just supposed to take your word for it?
Thunder
17th October 2009, 08:43 AM
funny how WTC 7 is clearly undamaged right up until the collapse of the second tower.
and for that matter, photos and videos of WTC 7 after the collapse of the 2nd tower also show ZERO damage to the north side of the building.
how can this be? oh why oh why?
i would love to see photos of the missile damage to wtc 7. i would just love it.
i'll pay MaGZ $50 if he can provide us with a photograph of wtc 7 showing missile explosion damage to the north side of WTC 7.
triforcharity
17th October 2009, 09:02 AM
Those who were injured on Vesey Street and taken to local hospitals that morning were not burned from falling debris but suffered trauma from the missile explosion that hit WTC 7 at 9:03.
Typically, FALLING DEBRIS do not BURN people. Falling debris INJURE people.
Falling FLAMING DEBRIS might though. But, not very likely.
Thunder
17th October 2009, 09:09 AM
Do you include a source or are we just supposed to take your word for it?
100% of his sources on this matter are from white supremacist web sites.
Brainster
17th October 2009, 02:14 PM
Those who were injured on Vesey Street and taken to local hospitals that morning were not burned from falling debris but suffered trauma from the missile explosion that hit WTC 7 at 9:03.
You can't even get your own cockamamie theory right; it was WTC 2 that was hit at 9:03, not WTC-7.
Brainster
17th October 2009, 02:21 PM
funny how WTC 7 is clearly undamaged right up until the collapse of the second tower.
Not true. The BBC special on WTC-7 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9072062020229593250#) last year showed footage of the building after the collapse of the first tower (i.e., the South Tower or WTC-2), and there was substantial damage to the south side of the building, with many windows broken, etc.
ETA: See starting at 11:20 in.
9/11 Chewy Defense
17th October 2009, 02:34 PM
I'll just sum it up in 2 words:
CHEWBACCA DEFENSE!
Thunder
17th October 2009, 06:19 PM
My question is: why has this "missile hitting WTC 7" theory become soo popular with white supremacists and neo-nazis?
or is it just with our local nazi boy.
Trojan
17th October 2009, 07:58 PM
Those who were injured on Vesey Street and taken to local hospitals that morning were not burned from falling debris but suffered trauma from the missile explosion that hit WTC 7 at 9:03.
Did the missile come with a cloaking devise?
beachnut
17th October 2009, 08:02 PM
Those who were injured on Vesey Street and taken to local hospitals that morning were not burned from falling debris but suffered trauma from the missile explosion that hit WTC 7 at 9:03.
How did you come up with that moronic statement? You need a sonic boom to go with your delusional missiles. Too simple to debunk your white power neoNAZI idiotic news lies.
firecoins
17th October 2009, 08:34 PM
Those who were injured on Vesey Street and taken to local hospitals that morning were not burned from falling debris but suffered trauma from the missile explosion that hit WTC 7 at 9:03.
I am a NYC paramedic. How does falling debris burn patients? It doesn't! It is a projectile traveling at high speed.
MaGZ
18th October 2009, 04:45 AM
He still cannot even say what type of missile it was or what aircraft fired it.
It was an air-to-air missile fired from one of the fighters sent from Otis airbase.
MaGZ
18th October 2009, 05:10 AM
"One person actually said that it was like a military style plane that actually shot missiles into the building." - Anthony Bartolomey
http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/Oral_histories_-_EMS_1
MaGZ
18th October 2009, 05:28 AM
"Oh, My God. It was a military plane." -Bob and Bri video
stateofgrace
18th October 2009, 05:35 AM
"One person actually said that it was like a military style plane that actually shot missiles into the building." - Anthony Bartolomey
http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/Oral_histories_-_EMS_1
Cherry pick much? Here is the full quote.
American Airlines Flight 11 (first plane)
Numerous civilians were telling him that a plane had hit the building. There were discrepancies as to the type of plane. Some were saying it was a Cessna or Leer jet type, a small jet plane. Some said it was a large passenger plane. One person actually said that it was like a military style plane that actually shot missiles into the building.
He is talking about WTC 1 not WTC 7.
MaGZ
18th October 2009, 06:01 AM
Cherry pick much? Here is the full quote.
He is talking about WTC 1 not WTC 7.
The editors of the web page put the tag "American Airlines Flight 11 (first plane)" into his statement. No one could confuse Flight 11 for a military plane.
stateofgrace
18th October 2009, 06:10 AM
The editors of the web page put the tag "American Airlines Flight 11 (first plane)" into his statement. No one could confuse Flight 11 for a military plane.
He is talking about a PLANE that hit a building. Two planes hit two buildings. So in your expert, cherry picking opinion, which building is he talking about then? Answer a or b.
a. WTC 1.
b. WTC 2.
Numerous civilians were telling him that a plane had hit the building. There were discrepancies as to the type of plane. Some were saying it was a Cessna or Leer jet type, a small jet plane. Some said it was a large passenger plane. One person actually said that it was like a military style plane that actually shot missiles into the building.
Sam.I.Am
18th October 2009, 06:15 AM
It was an air-to-air missile fired from one of the fighters sent from Otis airbase.Just so I get you right. Are you saying that not only was there not a stand down but that fighter planes got there earlier than when they say that they did?
"One person actually said that it was like a military style plane that actually shot missiles into the building." - Anthony BartolomeySimile and hearsay. Two flavors that taste better than one!!!
"Oh, My God. It was a military plane." -Bob and Bri videoThe Mother In Law said it first and Bri repeated it. Married rule number one, "Never disagree with your Mother In Law". Add in that they edited out the approach and hit of 175 and it proves absolutely nothing.
MaGZ
18th October 2009, 06:35 AM
He is talking about a PLANE that hit a building. Two planes hit two buildings. So in your expert, cherry picking opinion, which building is he talking about then? Answer a or b.
a. WTC 1.
b. WTC 2.
Reports of military planes and missiles came in shortly after the second plane hit WTC 2. Check the CNN transcript and the erroneous 911 calls to police concerning reports claming missiles were being fired from the Woolworth Building.
The flurry of reports of people seeing missiles and military planes came in after the airliner hit WTC 2 not WTC 1.
Björn Toulouse
18th October 2009, 06:38 AM
"One person actually said that it was like a military style plane that actually shot missiles into the building." - Anthony Bartolomey
http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/Oral_histories_-_EMS_1
Here is the paragraph from which you quoted in full:
Numerous civilians were telling him that a plane had hit the building. There were discrepancies as to the type of plane. Some were saying it was a Cessna or Leer jet type, a small jet plane. Some said it was a large passenger plane. One person actually said that it was like a military style plane that actually shot missiles into the building.
"Some" trumps "one" in my world. Why did you just focus on the "one"?
MaGZ
18th October 2009, 06:47 AM
Just so I get you right. Are you saying that not only was there not a stand down but that fighter planes got there earlier than when they say that they did?
The Mother In Law said it first and Bri repeated it. Married rule number one, "Never disagree with your Mother In Law". Add in that they edited out the approach and hit of 175 and it proves absolutely nothing.
US fighters were on the scene when the second plane hit WTC 2. They attempted to shoot it down. One missile missed and hit WTC 7 (south face) near the 12th floor. Photos from across the Hudson River show WTC 7 on fire (12th floor) before the towers collapsed.
The Bob and Bri video would have shown the fighters if it was not edited.
MaGZ
18th October 2009, 06:56 AM
Here is the paragraph from which you quoted in full:
"Some" trumps "one" in my world. Why did you just focus on the "one"?
That report of a military plane firing missiles had to be referenced to the 9:03 second WTC plane attack not the first.
BigAl
18th October 2009, 07:25 AM
US fighters were on the scene when the second plane hit WTC 2. They attempted to shoot it down. One missile missed and hit WTC 7 (south face) near the 12th floor. Photos from across the Hudson River show WTC 7 on fire (12th floor) before the towers collapsed.
The Bob and Bri video would have shown the fighters if it was not edited.
The word, gullible comes to mind.
sylvan8798
18th October 2009, 10:51 AM
US fighters were on the scene when the second plane hit WTC 2. They attempted to shoot it down. One missile missed and hit WTC 7 (south face) near the 12th floor. Photos from across the Hudson River show WTC 7 on fire (12th floor) before the towers collapsed.
The Bob and Bri video would have shown the fighters if it was not edited.
When military planes do flyovers at our stadium they are pretty noticeable. Were these super secret invisible military jets using secret invisible missiles?
Thunder
18th October 2009, 10:59 AM
US fighters were on the scene when the second plane hit WTC 2. They attempted to shoot it down. One missile missed and hit WTC 7 (south face) near the 12th floor.
.
boldface lie
beachnut
18th October 2009, 11:09 AM
That report of a military plane firing missiles had to be referenced to the 9:03 second WTC plane attack not the first.
Where do you find these moronic lies?
dtugg
18th October 2009, 11:15 AM
Was a jooo piloting the plane that fired the missile?
Arus808
18th October 2009, 11:29 AM
why are rehashing the same arguments from this troll, who only pops his head to stir #%#@ up? Just link back to the many other threads that he has participated in and ignored and let it be
Hokulele
18th October 2009, 11:44 AM
When military planes do flyovers at our stadium they are pretty noticeable. Were these super secret invisible military jets using secret invisible missiles?
Invisible and silent.
Thunder
18th October 2009, 11:45 AM
when an F-16 flies over Manhattan at high speed, low altitude, the plane is loud............very very loud.
Funny how no one heard nor saw that plane.
Must have had its Klingon cloaking device on.
AJM8125
18th October 2009, 12:53 PM
when an F-16 flies over Manhattan at high speed, low altitude, the plane is loud............very very loud.
Funny how no one heard nor saw that plane.
Must have had its Klingon cloaking device on.
They wouldn't need a cloaking device, believe me. The Blue Angels were here last week buzzing the buildings in the Financial District. Oh no, nobody noticed.:rolleyes:
dudalb
18th October 2009, 12:55 PM
He still cannot even say what type of missile it was or what aircraft fired it.
His support came from a video of a bird flying across a screen. Totally clueless.
But MAGZ knows the Jews did it...........
PB2007
18th October 2009, 01:11 PM
Didn't half of New York get mad in April 2009 when 2 fighter jets and an airliner buzzed around for a photo op?
Loads of footage and photos... yet curiously no fighter jet or missile pics or video from 2001...
AJM8125
18th October 2009, 01:20 PM
Didn't half of New York get mad in April 2009 when 2 fighter jets and an airliner buzzed around for a photo op?
Loads of footage and photos... yet curiously no fighter jet or missile pics or video from 2001...
It was Air Force One plus fighter escort. It was the sight of the low flying jumbo jet that scared the hell out of everyone.
ETA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWARNUP07kQ&feature=youtube_gdata
16.5
18th October 2009, 01:22 PM
I got to say it, if i were a truther, and I had to pick one person who I thought was a disinfo plant, i would pick MaGZ.
A holocaust denying bigot who pushes one of the top ten stupid inside jobby job theories of all time.
16.5
18th October 2009, 01:25 PM
They wouldn't need a cloaking device, believe me. The Blue Angels were here last week buzzing the buildings in the Financial District. Oh no, nobody noticed.:rolleyes:
They were here in August. No one noticed here either.
/Except the completely nude chick that ran to her window in the hotel down the street, and gave an outstanding show to at least 1000 people standing at their windows watching the practice.
triforcharity
18th October 2009, 01:38 PM
They were here in August. No one noticed here either.
/Except the completely nude chick that ran to her window in the hotel down the street, and gave an outstanding show to at least 1000 people standing at their windows watching the practice.
Sorry sir, without proof, and PICTURES, I don't believe it.
So, I'll be needing those pictures at your eaarliest convienence.
16.5
18th October 2009, 01:49 PM
Sorry sir, without proof, and PICTURES, I don't believe it.
So, I'll be needing those pictures at your eaarliest convienence.
I can ask any of the other ten people in the conference room if they got pictures.
Her attractiveness outweighed the three naked guys we saw too. The three of them had a total of about 700 punds on her.
AJM8125
18th October 2009, 01:57 PM
The three of them had a total of about 700 punds on her.
Are you sure that wasn't just one Aldo?
Thunder
18th October 2009, 05:34 PM
Didn't half of New York get mad in April 2009 when 2 fighter jets and an airliner buzzed around for a photo op?
Loads of footage and photos... yet curiously no fighter jet or missile pics or video from 2001...
lets see..one 757 just crashed into the WTC. another crashes into the WTC 25 minutes later.
and yet noboby...no one...zilcho...notices the supersonic F-16 flying over Manhattan
wow.
stateofgrace
18th October 2009, 05:36 PM
For anybody that may (or may not) be interested in MAGZ's BStheory, it was discussed to death here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=83514&highlight=missile)
and here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=118125)
and here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=103141)
and here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=79013)
and here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=73933)
In every thread he runs away when questions get asked and he is unable to answer, only to return later with the same BS. It was laughable in 2007, it is still laughable in 2009.
Please guys, give this one a swerve, do you really want to discuss the events of Sept 11th with somebody that calls himself Missiles At Ground Zero?
9/11 Chewy Defense
18th October 2009, 05:49 PM
What "missiles" at Ground Zero?
<scratches head>
This little one's not worth the effort ------> MAGZ
Brainache
18th October 2009, 08:32 PM
Missiles at GZ?
I prefer A-Train and his Jewish Paratroopers leaping from the cargo bay doors (or was it under-carriage wheel bays) of the 767s as they fly over NYC.
Far more plausible...
Thunder
18th October 2009, 08:35 PM
yeah, I'm out of this one guys. this truly is dumb.
A W Smith
18th October 2009, 09:33 PM
MAGZ already had his ass handed to him two years ago by me as well as others. State of grace already linked to those earlier threads, Thanks for saving us all the trouble. That's all that needs to be said.
triforcharity
18th October 2009, 10:38 PM
For anybody that may (or may not) be interested in MAGZ's BStheory, it was discussed to death here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=83514&highlight=missile)
and here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=118125)
and here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=103141)
and here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=79013)
and here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=73933)
In every thread he runs away when questions get asked and he is unable to answer, only to return later with the same BS. It was laughable in 2007, it is still laughable in 2009.
Please guys, give this one a swerve, do you really want to discuss the events of Sept 11th with somebody that calls himself Missiles At Ground Zero?
The second thread there is hillarios. My favorite quote
Do any of those missles have flapping wings?
Lol!!
This one too.
You also once posted a video of a "missile" at GZ that was flapping its wings... :rolleyes:
Aabsolute hillarity!!
willhaven
22nd October 2009, 01:45 PM
Missiles? Where's the proof?
None? I didn't think so.
twinstead
22nd October 2009, 01:55 PM
Well. It appears somebody has stopped taking his meds again...
Macgyver1968
22nd October 2009, 02:15 PM
Air to air missle? A sidewinder missle has a warhead that only weighs 20 pounds. That's supposed to bring down a skyscraper?
Brainster
22nd October 2009, 03:29 PM
I don't know what missile theory that MAGZ promotes, but at one point, the idea that a missile was fired from the Woolworth Building (http://www.orbwar.com/woolworth/) was quite popular with the kooks.
MaGZ
22nd October 2009, 07:46 PM
Air to air missle? A sidewinder missle has a warhead that only weighs 20 pounds. That's supposed to bring down a skyscraper?
No, the missile was suppose to bring down the second airliner. It missed and hit WTC 7 causing some oil filled transformers to explode. This is what Barry Jennings experienced when he was in the building.
Unsecured Coins
22nd October 2009, 07:48 PM
and what kind of jet fired this missle?
A W Smith
22nd October 2009, 07:51 PM
and what kind of jet fired this missle?
an invisijet with a cloaking device that not a single person saw over a city of 8.3 million people, which wasn't captured on hundreds of video cams.
MaGZ
22nd October 2009, 07:53 PM
and what kind of jet fired this missle?
One of the fighters base at Otis.
MaGZ
22nd October 2009, 07:55 PM
an invisijet with a cloaking device that not a single person saw over a city of 8.3 million people, which wasn't captured on hundreds of video cams.
Bob and Bri video captured it. They saw a military plane.
Unsecured Coins
22nd October 2009, 07:56 PM
an invisijet with a cloaking device that not a single person saw over a city of 8.3 million people, which wasn't captured on hundreds of video cams.
Of course you realize that only one person has access to an invisible jet. Unfortunately, she also has a lasso of truth and indestuctible bracelets. So, honestly, you better run, or something, because when Wonder Woman finds out you just blew the lid off her role in 9/11, she's gonna be pissed
A W Smith
22nd October 2009, 07:58 PM
Bob and Bri video captured it. They saw a military plane.
no. no they didn't, produce the video with the military jet now or concede.
Unsecured Coins
22nd October 2009, 07:58 PM
One of the fighters base at Otis.
and that model would be...
Hokulele
22nd October 2009, 08:20 PM
No, the missile was suppose to bring down the second airliner. It missed and hit WTC 7 causing some oil filled transformers to explode. This is what Barry Jennings experienced when he was in the building.
What type of oil do you think they use as a coolant in transformers? Do you realize that storing explosive materials inside large office buildings is generally considered a Bad Idea?
RedIbis
22nd October 2009, 09:09 PM
No, the missile was suppose to bring down the second airliner. It missed and hit WTC 7 causing some oil filled transformers to explode. This is what Barry Jennings experienced when he was in the building.
This is parody, right?
apathoid
22nd October 2009, 09:13 PM
This is parody, right?
Now you know how we feel.
Sam.I.Am
22nd October 2009, 09:22 PM
This is parody, right?
Oh the irony...
Audible Click
23rd October 2009, 12:26 AM
What goes around comes around Red Ibis.
BigAl
23rd October 2009, 01:07 AM
No, the missile was suppose to bring down the second airliner. It missed and hit WTC 7 causing some oil filled transformers to explode. This is what Barry Jennings experienced when he was in the building.
The largest missile on any fighter is too small to do any significant damage to any building and won't cause a big commercial jet to do anything but crash at the speed and heading that it was already on. 140 tons of aircraft at 500 MPH has the same impact even if it is about to crash due to a hit by a missile.
A 757/767 hit by a sidewinder will probably be able to land safely on the remaining engines.
Reactor drone
23rd October 2009, 01:22 AM
The largest missile on any fighter is too small to do any significant damage to any building and won't cause a big commercial jet to do anything but crash at the speed and heading that it was already on. 140 tons of aircraft at 500 MPH has the same impact even if it is about to crash due to a hit by a missile.
A 757/767 hit by a sidewinder will probably be able to land safely on the remaining engines.
That depends,a continuous rod warhead could potentially sever a wing or cause major structural damage to the fuselage.
bill smith
23rd October 2009, 01:44 PM
No, the missile was suppose to bring down the second airliner. It missed and hit WTC 7 causing some oil filled transformers to explode. This is what Barry Jennings experienced when he was in the building.
I'm new to the missiles theory. In this clip something seems to go hrough the building other than the plane.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5-xcvv_fRQ
jhunter1163
23rd October 2009, 01:54 PM
Bill, would you care to tell Stanley Praimnath what it was that went through his office and killed all his co-workers if it wasn't a plane?
funk de fino
23rd October 2009, 01:56 PM
One of the fighters base at Otis.
They did not get there in time. The missile would not have hit the building and would not have damaged it sufficiently as you claim.
Justin39640
23rd October 2009, 04:01 PM
Those who were injured on Vesey Street and taken to local hospitals that morning were not burned from falling debris but suffered trauma from the missile explosion that hit WTC 7 at 9:03.
too bad WTC 7 was largely undamaged until about 10:30 when WTC 1 fell on it...
twinstead
23rd October 2009, 04:22 PM
I'm new to the missiles theory. In this clip something seems to go hrough the building other than the plane.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5-xcvv_fRQ
How many people saw the plane hit with their own eyes, bill?
firecoins
23rd October 2009, 08:49 PM
Of course you realize that only one person has access to an invisible jet. Unfortunately, she also has a lasso of truth and indestuctible bracelets. So, honestly, you better run, or something, because when Wonder Woman finds out you just blew the lid off her role in 9/11, she's gonna be pissed
does this mean the Hall of Justice was behind 9/11? What motivation could they have? Superman, an alien being/nes journalist and Batman/Bruce Wayne is a defense contractor. Hmmm.
I notice that Magz has not responded to my first post in this thread about injures. Seems I pretty much debunked post 1.
leftysergeant
24th October 2009, 08:23 AM
I'm new to the missiles theory. In this clip something seems to go hrough the building other than the plane.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5-xcvv_fRQ
That has been done to death already. It is a flat sheet of fuel mist expelled under pressure from one floor. Seen from below, it looks much different. That it is not a solid object is 100% certain in that it all turns to flame, with no particulate residue.
Just jet fuel.
And the guy who did that computer over-lay of an aircraft nose and the "nose out" is a moron. He clearly manipulated some of the pixels in his "aircraft" nose.
Guess he thinks we are all as stupid as he is.
twinstead
24th October 2009, 08:41 AM
Guess he thinks we are all as stupid as he is.
I dare say it would be pretty much impossible for anybody to be as stupid as he is. Well, somebody who actually believed him would be....oh. Sorry bill. Carry on.
9/11 Chewy Defense
24th October 2009, 08:48 AM
No, the missile was suppose to bring down the second airliner. It missed and hit WTC 7 causing some oil filled transformers to explode.
Leaving Barry Jennings out of the picture, I'm just interested in that piece of garbage above.
Mag, only 1 problem:
NOONE SAW A MISSILE IN LOWER MANHATTAN!
willhaven
24th October 2009, 01:43 PM
I'm new to the missiles theory. In this clip something seems to go hrough the building other than the plane.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5-xcvv_fRQ
That's about the most insane thing I've seen in 9/11 conspiracy aside from the "space beam" theories.
twinstead
24th October 2009, 01:48 PM
NOONE SAW A MISSILE IN LOWER MANHATTAN!
Mass hallucination, possibly induced by reverse-engineered alien technology developed in area 51. Think outside the box dude ;)
© 2001-2009, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
vBulletin® v3.7.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.