>>9610704 PB
Who said two planes destroyed two hundred-floor skyscrapers?
You read what you want to hear. So let me be clearer.
IF a guy wanted to push people away from the concept that 911 was planned and executed by deep state operators and financiers both in America and abroad to create pretext for wars in the Middle East - he might say something outlandish like no planes hit the building, that it was all CGI.
Curious normies would raise their eyebrows and think: "Nutter! Them conspiracy idiots are absolute brain dead crazy freaks. Now they're even saying no planes hit the buildings. Assholes."
The desired effect? Keeping new generation's eyes away from the 911 topic completely?
Explosives of one kind or another took the towers and building 7 down. But real planes hitting those buildings created the real terror and the movie imagery. The two can exist in the same reality. Explosives don't need the absence of planes to detonate.
Clear now on the idea of 'no planers' discrediting the entire pursuit of truth by people who say planes were real but only window dressing?
If you genuinely believe no planes. Fine. Believe it, write about it. I'll believe some of you aren't being genuine and are out to ridicule the entire 911 conspiracy foundation.