15 May, 07:03
It was dissecting 9/11 that got me into this "conspiracy" stuff (around 2010). Too many anomalies for the official story to be credible:
- Missing planes
- Missing rubble and dustification of towers
- Molten rock
- Eyewitness reports of bombs plus visual evidence of explosions
- Ignoring WTC6 and 7
- Ignoring all expert objections
- Ignoring the money
- Cameras turned off
- Immediate patsy on offer
- Timeline messed up
- "Convenient" excuses for absence on day by powerful
- Insurance fraud
- Symbolism used
- Foreshadowing in media
- Biased and weak investigation committee
- Convenient excuse for 2 (illegal, profitable) wars
That's just off the top of my head. As with other scams, what's amazing in retrospect is how easily the public are played when they are presented with the same thing in synchrony and want to believe it in order to look respectable.
- Missing planes
- Missing rubble and dustification of towers
- Molten rock
- Eyewitness reports of bombs plus visual evidence of explosions
- Ignoring WTC6 and 7
- Ignoring all expert objections
- Ignoring the money
- Cameras turned off
- Immediate patsy on offer
- Timeline messed up
- "Convenient" excuses for absence on day by powerful
- Insurance fraud
- Symbolism used
- Foreshadowing in media
- Biased and weak investigation committee
- Convenient excuse for 2 (illegal, profitable) wars
That's just off the top of my head. As with other scams, what's amazing in retrospect is how easily the public are played when they are presented with the same thing in synchrony and want to believe it in order to look respectable.
Notice: Undefined index: tg1tga_access in /home/admin/www/anonup.com/themes/default/apps/timeline/post.phtml on line 396
we won't believe it unless we see it with our own eyes in many cases and the media was showing the "factual" imagery which allowed us to be fooled because of our naivety
12:24 AM - May 16, 2022
In response Martin Geddes to his Publication
Only people mentioned by Whimma in this post can reply
