Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="911" data-source="post: 1130931" data-attributes="member: 11221">The article was complete BS, it has several layers of disinfo. Unfortunately, the only layer you have identified here is the woman pilot glorification angle. The problem here is at the cognitive level. There are many people who cannot deal with the kind of cognitive dissonance that comes with seeing things as they really are. It doesn't matter if whistleblowers step up (and for 9/11, many have) because the majority of people are unable to view the facts from an unbiased, rational matter. In this case, the patriotic angle and strong emotions take over.Not to get into a 9/11 debate, and just limiting the scope to this article alone, can you at the very least acknowledge that the picture of the alleged crash site used in that article has been staged to reinforce their narrative, given that the original footage and pictures taken right after the plane went down showed no tail part or plane debris at that spot?<img src="http://tribunist.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/09112016-b12-768x1016.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" />picture used by the article[img=690x460]<a href="http://tumetuestumefaisdubien1.sweb.cz/Flight%2093%20Crater.png[/img]" target="_blank">http://tumetuestumefaisdubien1.sweb.cz/Flight 93 Crater.png[/img]</a>Picture from footage taken shortly after the plane went down, proving that the site as represented in the first picture above has been tampered with to push a fake narrative.Once again:<a href="http://IxDjOobmC8M?t=13s" target="_blank">IxDjOobmC8M?t=13s</a></blockquote>

[QUOTE="911, post: 1130931, member: 11221"] The article was complete BS, it has several layers of disinfo. Unfortunately, the only layer you have identified here is the woman pilot glorification angle. The problem here is at the cognitive level. There are many people who cannot deal with the kind of cognitive dissonance that comes with seeing things as they really are. It doesn't matter if whistleblowers step up (and for 9/11, many have) because the majority of people are unable to view the facts from an unbiased, rational matter. In this case, the patriotic angle and strong emotions take over. Not to get into a 9/11 debate, and just limiting the scope to this article alone, can you[i] at the very least[/i] acknowledge that the picture of the alleged crash site used in that article has been staged to reinforce their narrative, given that the original footage and pictures taken right after the plane went down showed no tail part or plane debris at that spot? [img]http://tribunist.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/09112016-b12-768x1016.jpg[/img] picture used by the article [img=690x460][URL]http://tumetuestumefaisdubien1.sweb.cz/Flight%2093%20Crater.png[/img][/URL] Picture from footage taken shortly after the plane went down, proving that the site as represented in the first picture above has been tampered with to push a fake narrative. Once again: [URL]IxDjOobmC8M?t=13s[/URL] [/QUOTE]

Verification