Is not in our interest or for our benefit.
An interesting video from Paul Weston.
youtube.com/watch?v=1-QfgQQkGJU
Worrying times ahead,leftists want this China style lifestyle!
It’s more than interesting.
The evidence of my eyes and ears is that 9/11 was most likely a ( Chinese ) hypersonic cruise missile attack not planes flying through structural steel and concrete like a knife through butter.
The elites decided that the resulting cover up operation and all the surrender terms, that we’ve seen being met since, were the best option ( for them ).
Conspiracy indeed.
Having said that where and why did Weston decide as being immune from the resulting global coup for sanctuary ■■.
I think Juddian and Carryfast have been watching one too many conspiracy programmes.
Carryfast:
The evidence of my eyes and ears is that 9/11 was most likely a ( Chinese ) hypersonic cruise missile attack not planes flying through structural steel and concrete like a knife through butter.
The elites decided that the resulting cover up operation and all the surrender terms, that we’ve seen being met since, were the best option ( for them ).
Conspiracy indeed.
Having said that where and why did Weston decide as being immune from the resulting global coup for sanctuary ■■.
Really?? You are a little paranoid aren’t you.
tmcassett:
Carryfast:
The evidence of my eyes and ears is that 9/11 was most likely a ( Chinese ) hypersonic cruise missile attack not planes flying through structural steel and concrete like a knife through butter.
The elites decided that the resulting cover up operation and all the surrender terms, that we’ve seen being met since, were the best option ( for them ).
Conspiracy indeed.
Having said that where and why did Weston decide as being immune from the resulting global coup for sanctuary ■■.Really?? You are a little paranoid aren’t you.
Refusal to believe that the light aluminium structures that make up an aircraft wing and tail and fuselage can cut and smash their way through structural steel holding up a 1,000 foot skyscraper and the fortified walls of the Pentagon ain’t paranoid.Bearing in mind the principle of how barrage balloons work.
Obviously nor is the fact that all the CGI technology in the world couldn’t create the supposed Pentagon scenario when the only video they dared to release clearly doesn’t show an aircraft flying into it straight and level at impossible height flown by an amateur unqualified pilot.
Everything that the free world’s governments have done since as documented by Weston would make Mao proud.
Paranoid indeed.
Carryfast:
It’s more than interesting.
The evidence of my eyes and ears is that 9/11 was MOST LIKELY a ( Chinese ) hypersonic cruise missile attack not planes flying through structural steel and concrete like a knife through butter.
The elites decided that the resulting cover up operation and all the surrender terms, that we’ve seen being met since, were the best option ( for them ).
Conspiracy indeed.
.
As you said ONLY ‘‘In YOUR eyes’’ , nobody else’s. 
Got to admit I did not (could not) watch the vid to the end, so if that is also matey’s theory in the vid,.I stand corrected…
So only in your eyes and his.
I don’t know what drugs you use, Carryfast, but it appears you took them all at once.
I expect CF to post utter nonsense, but he’s really excelled himself with this, bravo! 
I suppose the actual footage of the planes hitting the towers and the plethora of evidence about the well-identified perpetrators was all a smoke screen?
Zac_A:
I expect CF to post utter nonsense, but he’s really excelled himself with this, bravo!I suppose the actual footage of the planes hitting the towers and the plethora of evidence about the well-identified perpetrators was all a smoke screen?
Try and keep up man.
The planes were 'hypersonic missiles ’ in disguise. 
robroy:
Zac_A:
I expect CF to post utter nonsense, but he’s really excelled himself with this, bravo!I suppose the actual footage of the planes hitting the towers and the plethora of evidence about the well-identified perpetrators was all a smoke screen?
Try and keep up man.
The planes were 'hypersonic missiles ’ in disguise.
Ah, it’s all making sense now, more twists than an Inspector Morse movie. Carryfast is the only one who saw the truth.
Don’t let it go to your head Geoff, I’m taking the urine.
The so called aircraft that supposedly hit the Pentagon did not look right to me, an airliner practically at ground level on impact.
No witnesses to that before it happened.
Odd tank shapes captured underneath the aircraft that hit the towers and a fireman stating he witnessed controlled demolition at the time of the attack on a large building nearby.
George Bush didn’t look entirely surprised when his agent tapped him on the shoulder to inform him what had happened when he visited the school.
I narrowly escaped being in the towers on that fateful day!
I only escaped by virtue of the fact that I was crap at maths or I too could very well have been a high flying banker in New York.
Close thing.
robroy:
Zac_A:
I expect CF to post utter nonsense, but he’s really excelled himself with this, bravo!I suppose the actual footage of the planes hitting the towers and the plethora of evidence about the well-identified perpetrators was all a smoke screen?
Try and keep up man.
The planes were 'hypersonic missiles ’ in disguise.
As opposed to CGI planes with all that video evidence conveniently at hand and witnesses not describing involvement of any planes.But obviously all the CGI tech in the world couldn’t actually show an amateur pilot flying a plane at ground level into the Pentagon leaving a small missile shaped and sized hole in it.
While the only video evidence they dared to release from all that security video around the place clearly showed a bunker busting missile flying at massive speed and its effects.Not an airliner being flown way outside of its design envelope in terms of height and speed and drilling a hole through the massive walls structure.Just as plane wings etc don’t cut their way through structural steel holding up a skyscraper like a knife through butter.Bearing in mind the WTC load bearing perimeter box type construction.
When even a barrage balloons cable is enough to tear them apart.
Was the Pentagon building material the same as the WTC with axis bend metamorphosis Vierendeel trusses?
Carryfast:
Refusal to believe that the light aluminium structures that make up an aircraft wing and tail and fuselage can cut and smash their way through structural steel holding up a 1,000 foot skyscraper and the fortified walls of the Pentagon ain’t paranoid.Bearing in mind the principle of how barrage balloons work.
Obviously nor is the fact that all the CGI technology in the world couldn’t create the supposed Pentagon scenario when the only video they dared to release clearly doesn’t show an aircraft flying into it straight and level at impossible height flown by an amateur unqualified pilot.
Everything that the free world’s governments have done since as documented by Weston would make Mao proud.
Paranoid indeed.
No, I like everyone else saw numerous video’s of planes flying into the Twin Towers at high speed.
Not one vehicle dash camera footage, cctv from a business or private property, nothing from a door bell camera or video footage but this lorry driver or the passenger was able to film Concorde crashing in Paris.
Nobody filmed an airliner at 550 mph travelling metres AGL hitting the Pentagon.
Carryfast:
Paranoid indeed.
To you it seems everything is some sort of scam or conspiracy theory. Life cannot be much fun for you.
Carryfast is correct to say about how aluminium could not slice through concrete beams and steel girders at WTC,this is the body of the aircraft made of aluminium.
Could an experienced ATPL CPL pilot with years of experience carry out the same manoeuvres carried out by the hijackers flying in to WTC via a flight simulator?
Star down under.:
I don’t know what drugs you use, Carryfast, but it appears you took them all at once.
And can I have some of them please?