Topic: | Re:Re:Full forensic examination | |
Posted by: | Michael Brown | |
Date/Time: | 17/04/15 13:17:00 |
Ah, so you now acknowledge the existence of such research but claim it can’t be described as ‘serious’, presumably because it’s not published by the ‘right’ people in the ‘right’ places and approved by you. It’s a bit like saying that the official 9/11 story is true because we’re reminded of it on an almost daily basis by the MSM, when the tale has been completely disproven. Plus, remember, I make no claims about chemtrails. All I’ve said is that there are enough people out there who’ve carried out enough research for their claims to be considered before being rubbished. As for people like Wood, Jones, Harriet etc. arguing about what type of weaponry was used to blow the towers to smithereens on 9/11, I think the most important thing is that people simply realise that they were blown up. I’m actually more interested to know how they faked the planes – whether it was CGI, projected imagery, combination etc. Here’s a short video on the ‘no plane’ theory, which I thought I’d share as it’s relatively new: |