What People Will Get Up To - 2

from presstv: ‘William Kristol is terrified that Trump could try 9/11 perpetrators’ -  December 27 (carried on Co-creating Our Future on Planet Earth)

(“US neoconservative commentator William (Bill) Kristol is terrified that if Donald Trump becomes president, he might try the perpetrators of the 9/11 coup d'etat for mass murder and high treason, an American scholar and researcher says.

“Dr. Kevin Barrett, a founding member of the Scientific Panel for the Investigation of 9/11, made the remarks in an interview with Press TV on Sunday while commenting on a recent interview by Kristol, the founder of the Emergency Committee for Israel, an American neoconservative group associated with the Israel lobby…")

..

Scerry 12 hours ago (December 27)

It's physically impossible for an aluminum projectile to penetrate a larger piece of structural steel at subsonic speed.

THERE WERE NO PLANES!

Reply

+3

Laika Lammerink> Scerry 9 hours ago

I reckon half New York saw the second (remotely controlled non-commercial) plane, and you say there was no plane? You must be a CIA-disinformation troll. The internet is full of (CIA-) disinformation . . . Of course planes (and kerosene) could never bring down these strong as iron buildings, anyway. And what about the even stronger WTC building 7?

Reply

+0

John Vanderford> Laika Lammerink 5 hours ago (December 27)

Screrry is part of a Fetzer/Judy Wood disinfo op launched around 2005 to discredit anyone attempting to do serious scientific research on how the buildings fell. At this point it's wise to ignore these people but unfortunately this op was so successful you'll see people trying to insert 'no planes' in almost every discussion on 9/11.

Reply

+0

Stan Stanfield right now (December 28)

Fetzer has uncovered evidence that a plane was parallellng a short distance away the image of the plane going into the second tower. It could well have been just that: an image. Remember that the people behind 9/11 were experts at imagery, leading us to believe what we saw 'with our own eyes'.

Scerry is right: an aluminum projectile could never penetrate that steel-rise building. It sliced into it like a Roadrunner cartoon. That was imagery, friend.
Reply

sorgfelt> Stan Stanfield 20 hours ago (December 28)

There is a big difference between penetrating and breaking. Those planes broke the steel and were themselves shredded by the central columns. It could have been done by a big, fat dough boy.

Reply

+0

Stan Stanfield 3 minutes ago (December 29)

Doesn't answer the fact that another angle of the 'hit,' on a major TV news feed, showed the nose of the plane's image coming out of the other side of the building before the guy at the TV station controls could Cut To Black and try to cover up the mistake. 

I repeat: That was imagery. The perps have gotten away with their scam long enough. It's time for major independent hearings on the matter, for the whole story of 9/11 - the TRUE story - to come out.

The comment will be published after moderation

John Vanderford> Stan Stanfield12 hours ago (December 28)

No Scerry is not right, and thanks for outing yourself as a disinfo peddler as part of the same very suspicious campaign to distract serious truthers and researchers. I will make note of your username/handle for future avoidance.