• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

ALTERNATIVE THEORIES V: The Build-a-bear Workshop

Listened to Douglas Dietrich on Coast to Coast AM tonight on the way home from the bar.

Mr Dietrich even has a website.

Just one example:

If the United States hadn't sued for peace on August 15th 1945, a majority of Americans could have died in the same way as many American prisoners of war in Japan: via weapons of mass destruction created by Emperor Hirohito's covert "Empire of the Black Sun."

Douglas Dietrich has exposed the documents which prove that the United States perpetrated the war with an interdicted Flying Tiger air raid on Japan, which led directly to the preemptive Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

Douglas discusses how the Pacific Conflict was a Race-War in which the United States objective was nothing less than total extermination of what the U.S. Government had fore-concluded was an inhuman species of enemy "Alien."

Now, in this heavily-illustrated live presentation/or radio interview, Dietrich reveals how Japan ended World War II with an astonishing super-weapon that could deliver mass death to the American homeland, and proves that the government is still lying to us - about how it lost the war it started!
Click to expand...

Oh my...

Poe's law is cranked up to 11 on this one. Among other hidden history he discusses is Nazi supermen conquering Antarctica, how zombies and vampires were used in the cold war (US had zombies, the Commies had vampires), and Satanic crusaders in the US military.

Dang.
 
alasdairm said:
it looks fake to you because you've made your mind up that it's fake and you want to believe it's fake. nothing anybody here says will convince you otherwise and any attempt to do so is a waste of time.

when all you have is a hammer? definitely.

alasdair
Click to expand...

What? I don't understand your disconnected attempts at retorts.

I was a late bloomer into the 911Truth thing. I didn't even know about it until summer 2008, and didn't accept it until fall 2008, when I had thought long and hard about it for over a few months. I wasn't a "no planer" until I saw that slow motion video and I found a link to Ace Baker's series in fall of 2012. It looked like a shitty video composite (i.e. that's not the same as a hologram, so quit talking about it as if it was) because it melts into the building with a little smoke puff cover before any explosion occurs. That led me to question how such a thing could be quickly done live or under a short time delay.

It looks fake because...it looks fake! In normal speed, not so much, but in slow motion...yes, it does!

I don't believe that there were holograms, and desperate shitheads will try to use that as a straw man to beat up on. Nobody saw any planes in real life that day - only on television were they shown. Witnesses do not claim to see "holograms." They claim to have seen no plane, and only an explosion, which it's obvious by the damage that it was from charges and incindiaries pre-planted inside the building.
 
Last edited:
Have you ever seen a plane fly into a steel and glass structure? How do you know what it would look like.

Thousands of people, head of their fields in physics, engineering, etc, have studied what happened that day, and pretty much every one of them have come up with the same conclusion.. 2 planes hit the world trade centre building.

Nobody saw real planes that day
Click to expand...

Bullshit.
 
This guy says he was in the wtc during the alleged plane "crash" and he only heard an explosion. Over the intercom it was first described as a bomb (which it really was) and only later as a plane. He was in the building and didn't instantly know a large jet was heading into it/crashed into it? Guy thought it might have even been an "earthquake" at first.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxq0TwXLm1k

This woman doesn't talk about seeing a plane either. She saw the explosion, but she sure doesn't mention anything about a plane.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CI2lWZY869I
 
Last edited:
^ So people on the lower floors should have instantly known a plane crashed into the building? I didn't realize clairvoyance was a requirement to work in the WTCs.

Well, I guess that proves it was a nuke, then.
 
MyFinalRest said:
Nobody saw any planes in real life that day - only on television were they shown. Witnesses do not claim to see "holograms." They claim to have seen no plane, and only an explosion, which it's obvious by the damage that it was from charges and incindiaries pre-planted inside the building.
Click to expand...

That's is an outright LIE.


I have personally seen several videos where people are running around screaming "A fucking plane just hit that building!! THAT WAS A FUCKING PLANE."

Now, they DO say it did not look like a commercial air liner and instead was all black and had no windows.. but saying there was NO plane there is fucking stupid and is an insult to all of our intelligence.
 
links please. How come I have a link of a woman saying she saw an explosion coming from within the top of the tower clearly and mentioned no plane early after it happened? She denied anything "hitting" it. Why would an explosion come from within? Certainly the thing would blow as it collided with the building's exterior. Until I get video that looks realistic, I'm not buying it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CI2lWZY869I

I don't want to believe anything, I'm just looking at what I see and making a sound conclusion.
 
severely etarded said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ys41jnL2Elk

looks like a plane to me...

but yea I don't think both those towers fell so perfectly on their own... I could be wrong, but that's some shit for the interior core columns to be completely disintegrated the entire way down so perfectly.
Click to expand...

Of course it looks like a plane, but that infamous Naudet bros. film was never shown live and was easily doctored. The building damage is not consistent with what I believe would occur if a plane struck it.

I also think that the plane sound was edited in and had the fireman who looks up actually seen one flying like that he would have bothered to turn around and see it fly into the tower. Nobody says anything like "holy shit a plane just crashed into the wtc" either, they just say holy shit.

I know the no planes is highly taboo, but watch this botched edit where the nose of the "plane" sticks out through the other side of the building! There is no way a plane crashed through both the exterior AND core columns and had a perfectly undamged nose and fusilage stick out the other side!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQ6TMZOfAfE
botched from the opposite side as well!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBpTWYUgvcM
This second link explains it quite well!
 
Last edited:
MyFinalRest said:
Of course it looks like a plane, but that infamous Naudet bros. film was never shown live and was easily doctored. The building damage is not consistent with what I believe would occur if a plane struck it.

I also think that the plane sound was edited in and had the fireman who looks up actually seen one flying like that he would have bothered to turn around and see it fly into the tower. Nobody says anything like "holy shit a plane just crashed into the wtc" either, they just say holy shit.

I know the no planes is highly taboo, but watch this botched edit where the nose of the "plane" sticks out through the other side of the building! There is no way a plane crashed through both the exterior AND core columns and had a perfectly undamged nose and fusilage stick out the other side!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQ6TMZOfAfE
botched from the opposite side as well!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBpTWYUgvcM
This second link explains it quite well!
Click to expand...

It was never shown live because it was an amateur video. For the first video, p = mv which means momentum = mass x velocity. At 500+ mph , there's probably going to be some debris shooting through the other side.

the second youtube link gives some very interesting points, however it would be nice to have more than two eye witnesses that didn't see a plane. At that speed it's likely they just heard an explosion and looked up.

Manhattan NYC seems to be a fairly populated area; there should have been thousands of people outside at the given time the second WTC was hit. Had there not been so many people outside watching the first catastrophe burn at the time of the second strike, I might actually buy it. But I'm assuming there were hundreds of thousands, maybe even a million eye witnesses there in manhattan at the time of the second impact. I'd like to hear more from them. And also what happened to the hijacked planes...
 
MyFinalRest said:
links please. How come I have a link of a woman saying she saw an explosion coming from within the top of the tower clearly and mentioned no plane early after it happened? She denied anything "hitting" it. Why would an explosion come from within? Certainly the thing would blow as it collided with the building's exterior. Until I get video that looks realistic, I'm not buying it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CI2lWZY869I

I don't want to believe anything, I'm just looking at what I see and making a sound conclusion.
Click to expand...

You hear a bang, you turn around, you see the explosion.
 
severely etarded said:
It was never shown live because it was an amateur video. For the first video, p = mv which means momentum = mass x velocity. At 500+ mph , there's probably going to be some debris shooting through the other side.
Click to expand...

some "debris" shooting out the other side? It showed a perfectly intact nose and fusilage. That nose would have been smashed up good when it slammed into the exterior steel. It also may have had to likely pass through various office debris and framed walls, the CORE columns, more office stuff and walls, and then through another set of exterior coloumns and remain perfectly intact...I don't think so. Sure, there's lots of mass (albeit spread out over a wide area) and plenty of velocity, but there's also lots of combined and individual strength in those exterior and especially the core columns.

Other witnesses report a vast inconsistency of hearing and seeing different things...

And also what happened to the hijacked planes...
Click to expand...
It could have easily been a made up manifesto about flights that never even existed or flights that ended up somewhere else. All planed were grounded that day at the nearest airports and logistics became a mess. Who could account for everything in a mess like that?

Here's some pootube links about that particular question...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYhiz4VXevY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jO4WKAf6go
 
September Clues - No Plane Theory

I find it interesting to watch, but not 100% convincing. I'd like to hear more reports from eye witnesses in Manhattan... There's got to be thousands, maybe even a million+...

@ MFR - What's your theory then..? if not a plane, perhaps a missile strike? It seems likely at the pentagon...

What I don't get is if they were going to shoot some missiles to start a war in the middle east, why not just dress up a fighter jet as an Iraqi military jet and blame them? Why go through all the trouble of video editing etc..? Then again, who knows.

That video raises some good points, I do admit...

NorthwoodsMemorandum.jpg
 
Last edited:
Severely etarded.. Why do you think it seems likely there was no plane at the pentagon?

And don't buy into the no plane theory it's completely insane.
 
alasdairm said:
total nonsense.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/people.html
http://sarahjanenelson.com/my-911-s...morning-that-changed-our-nation-and-our-world
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-09-09/eyewitness-accounts-of-september-11/2866958
and many, many more.

alasdair
Click to expand...


I got to say from that last link..


Baby in stroller and he walks to two blocks north of the other tower. The second plane hits and explodes. He and the baby are pushed back by the sheer force.
Click to expand...

Does a plane exploding hundreds of feet in the air really have enough force to push people back that are blocks away from the base?
 
Folley said:
Now, they DO say it did not look like a commercial air liner and instead was all black and had no windows.. but saying there was NO plane there is fucking stupid and is an insult to all of our intelligence.
Click to expand...

320px-Tomahawk_Block_IV_cruise_missile.jpg

^ looks kind of like a plane maybe if it was going 500 mph. Most people just saw the explosion I'd imagine. It's pretty strange, as big as the planes were, you'd figure more people would have a more detailed description.
rickolasnice said:
Severely etarded.. Why do you think it seems likely there was no plane at the pentagon?

And don't buy into the no plane theory it's completely insane.
Click to expand...
Because no plane parts were found, the hole does not look anything like a plane hit it, all the camera footage was seized by the .gov, so on and so forth.

Try watching September Clues on the no planes theory. It's not compelling, but it does raise several valid questions. I really wanted to poke holes in the whole no planes theory, but after watching that it only left more questions...

The pentagon seems far more likely a missile hit it though. Just look at the damage, it's far more consistent with a cruise missile strike than a Boeing 757 crash. Not many witnesses there either.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top