Aluminum Foil Deflector Beanie
An Effective, Low-Cost Solution To Combating Mind-Control
2006-09-26 10:02:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
1- The 9 caught did not get on their planes - not survivors.
2- Not everyone who had a cell phone called someone - you think some did not work - they had suncom I am sure!
3- A janitor would know what bombs look like - I would not probably. If they had wanted to shut him up , it would not have been with money.
4- It was crazy, bombs blowing up & fuel leaking down floors & igniting would look alike.
5- Did you not see the planes sticking out of sides of building. They maybe 100' long but they did not go 100' into building because we could see them.
6- Did we pay the thousands of spectators who watched the attack?
This whole conspiracy thing is getting old, the premise is illogical.
If the goverment would do this, why not just make up intel
to attack Afghanistan & why do the terrorist hate us so much.
They have for generations & they always will. Did we attack London, Canada, & try numerous other attacks?
2006-09-26 10:12:45
·
answer #2
·
answered by Wolfpacker 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Questions 1, 4, 6, 8, 9: Don't know your sources
Questions 2, 3, 9: A plane has never hit a building like that before, so it is hard to say how the crash should look/happen. usually a pilot decreases speed before impact, not increase, so the crash will result differently then other crashes. It is safe to say, the damage would end up far worse then any other in history, which would explain parts being completely destroyed.
Questions 5, 6, 8:circumstantial, not really good evidence.
Question 7: cell phones work great on top of buildings and hills, and actually work even better in a plane.
2006-09-26 10:15:49
·
answer #3
·
answered by Take it from Toby 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
I am disinclined to acquiesce to your request posed in your final line. You're another conspiracy nut!
Which 9 terrorists turned up alive, and why didn't they go all over worldwide television, and where the hell did the four planes go?
Get an engineer to answer your first two questions.
Prove that "thermite dripping from the towers" actually occurred and has significance.
Tell us what a "put" contract is and why the increase is significant.
Prove that "all of the evidence" was sold to "China" (big entity there).
Prove that the cell phones could not have worked at the specified locations.
Prove that Willem Rodriguez existed, and even if he did, that he was offered money, and by whom.
Identify the firefighters who saw bombs going off and lived to tell about it.
If you can't do that, you're a crazy crackpot.
2006-09-26 10:05:42
·
answer #4
·
answered by rustyshackleford001 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
I'd hate to think our government had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks but there are just way to many unaswered questions. Another one would be why did Building 7 fall? I also would like to know the answer to the question about the cell phones working so well on Flight 93. Until the airlines put in thousands of dollars of improvements for getting signals in planes in 2004, it was almost impossible to talk on a cell phone flying above the US.
2006-09-26 10:20:17
·
answer #5
·
answered by Pop D 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Nobody. There were no large passenger jets.
No plane hit the Pentagon
There were no plane engines, so none are missing
Thermite was placed there in preparation for controlled demolition
Increase puts because of inside knowledge
Evidence sold to hide the truth
There were no cell phone calls, passengers, hijackers or planes
Rodriguez offered money to hide the truth
Firefighters saw bombs because they are not blind.
Detailed 9/11 research work
http://members.iinet.net.au/~holmgren/research.html
2006-09-27 01:58:56
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I've tried hard not to give into those conspiracies.but there is too many things that don't add up to the story the administration is feeding us.like people have reported that they heard a noise around the pentagon before the plane was even in sight.and yes cell phones don't work on planes because of the height.and the fact that planes are vacuum sealed.so there would be no signals on the plane.i smell a cover up!
2006-09-26 10:11:36
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
one hundred' long would not translate to one hundred' huge. the hollow could be one hundred' deep, no longer huge. additionally, the place did you get sixteen'? there replace into no thermite dripping from the tires. heavily, verify greater desirable components. The data wasn't bought to China. There are telephones on the airplane, and despite if there have been no longer, they have been at a extremely low altitude. The airplane did lose some top interior the takeover, and did no longer regain it. additionally, cellular telephones beam to towers. they are in a position to beam right down to boot as up. And the "bombs" sound fictitious at suitable. greater non-MySpace components could be great. MySpace is extremely fabricated.
2016-12-12 15:40:04
·
answer #8
·
answered by zabel 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Did you see all the ''Squibs'' running up the side of building right before it went down?? It was most certianly an implosion that caused those towers to fall. I dont understand why people fail to admit the truth . It is something that we may never understand the true reason behind. it is clearly evident that it was secondary explosions that brought down the towers ......
2006-09-26 10:06:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
3⤋
These questions are an insult to the 3000 people who died on 9/11/01!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2006-09-26 10:03:38
·
answer #10
·
answered by Vagabond5879 7
·
3⤊
1⤋