Sunday, April 14, 2013

9/11: A Meteor Hit the Pentagon!


Not really, but a video clip from RT about the meteor that hit Mother Russia in February 2013 is priceless for a comment made by a savvy Russian around the 20:25 mark. He says that many Americans ask why so many Russians had a video tape of the meteor when you Americans don't even have a video that shows what hit the Pentagon on 9/11.


What Really Happened at the Pentagon on 9/11? Just don't put forth the theory that it wasn't a jet plane, but a missile, because 'Mikey' will get his knickers in a twist and start screaming names at your punk ass.

'Mikey' agrees with the government that a jet plane hit the Pentagon, although the one video released is so grainy and out of focus, there's no telling what it was, but it wasn't a plane.

Bottom line about the 'official' 9/11 coverup report: You can't say it's a bunch of lies, like 'Mikey' does, but then turn around and say they didn't lie in this portion. Not unless you're protecting something or someone.

Guess one could ask "Pilots for 9/11 Truth" who say the official report is bunk, that no human could of flown that Boeing jetliner in that tight descending spiral without either blacking out or the G forces tearing the plane to pieces, but what the fuck do they know, they're just pilots who've flown tens of thousands of hours in combat and civilian life in jetliners and fighter jets.

Did a Russian 'Granit' cruise missile, salvaged from the sunken 'Kursk' sub in 2000, hit the Pentagon on 9/11?



3 comments:

  1. Mikey is not telling us "what really happened"

    I guess whoever did it, we should not "thank them for their service"

    ReplyDelete
  2. Greg,

    Of course I don't have a saved copy of the page (or if I did it disappeared along with all of our other first desktop computer's unbacked up hard drive,when it shit itself!) but I had read a very interesting story about that rapid spiral descent. The article atributed the descent to an F18 or F16 that had been "shadowing" the Boeing (which the article went on to say would not have been able to physically perform at those "G's")
    I never came across that article again, I don't recall who penned it or on what site I'd seen it or linked from to find it. Which suprised the crap outa me as a fighter, shadowing the hijacked Boeing was the only thing that sorta explained that radar tracking data, and I thought there would've been more than a single article about it.

    The Pentagon thing is the one part of the fairy tale that really spins my tires. Initially I was a "no way a plane coulda done that - where did the wings go? etc., etc. but I've gone the other way too after seeing a Jewtube video of an old 7x7 hitting a concrete wall at speed and virtually disappearing. Plus there are too many people who saw it flying in low and taking out all those lighting polls and lamposts. The witnesses I know were all "explained" as being media or military so all "controlable" but there were others who outwardly have no reason to lie. The FIB grabbing all the videos is granted, not a good look. and theres been a lot of conjecture about the turbine remains. So I still am not sure - there's for and againsts for both scenarios. I haven't heard about the cruise missile from the Kursk either - I'm off to have a look at that now.

    Cheers, Chris in ChCh

    ReplyDelete
  3. There's probably 2.3 TRILLION reasons why it wasn't a Boeing jetliner, the bastards needed a full proof way to pentetrate NINE FEET of heavily re-inforced concrete to destroy the evidence and take out those auditors on the trail of that missing money.

    ReplyDelete

Fair Use Notice

This web site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance the understanding of humanity's problems and hopefully to help find solutions for those problems. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. A click on a hyperlink is a request for information. Consistent with this notice you are welcome to make 'fair use' of anything you find on this web site. However, if you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. You can read more about 'fair use' and US Copyright Law at the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School. This notice was modified from a similar notice at Information Clearing House.

Blog Archive