Comments by "Dirk Diggler" (@dirkdiggler8260) on "JRE Clips" channel.

  1. Because it wasn't. The truther arguments all sound very compelling in the surface, but when you look into each of them on an individual basis, it soon becomes clear they hold no weight whatsoever.
    3
  2. Science is the sum of the accumulated work of others. People build on previous knowledge, it's a collective body of work.
    3
  3.  @christopherclink6931  Indeed it is, which is why your breathtaking display of wilful ignorance is so saddening. Keep running Chris.
    3
  4.  @kurtwollermann2210  But you do admit this is a baseless opinion without a shred of evidence to back up that claim, right?
    3
  5.  @bencavert7421  It was never lost, simply a case of it being difficult to track due to incompatible software systems between departments. The money was later tracked and accounted for.
    3
  6. Nonsense. Fire brought it down, just as the fire fighters predicted it would.
    3
  7.  @jebidiahnewkedkracker1025  The main problem here is the conspiracy theory holds no weight and has been thoroughly debunked over and over again. If you have any credible evidence to show otherwise then please present it.
    3
  8.  @BrianD1961  DEWs??? 🤣🤣🤣 I see we have a Judy Woods crackpot in our midst 🙈 She makes the average truther sound positively sane lol. Her insane, pseudoscientific claims were utterly refuted by other truthers 😂
    3
  9.  @WAVE_ZERO  I disagree. My points were pretty clear and straight forward. You made 2 false claims, the first being the towers collapsed through the path of MOST resistance when in reality, it fell through the path of LEAST resistance. The second false claim you made was that the towers collapsed into their own footprint when in reality, the collapse zone qas 6 times their circumference. I cannot simplify that any more for you sorry.
    3
  10.  @studas2011  Then you really need to familiarise yourself more with the available evidence & see just how absurd it is to believe it was a missile. You think people can't tell the difference between a 155ft airliner with a 125ft wingspan & a 22ft plane with 9ft wingspan??
    3
  11.  @HeathenFitness  It most definitely wasn't lol.
    3
  12.  @chriswood3370  Great analogy.......except that the twin towers were 95% hollow as opposed to a jenga tower being all but a solid block. It seems you're the one who needa to brush up on basic physics, or at least learn to be a little more honest. Those towers collapsed exactly as they should have given the circumstances and design of the structures. The top sections smashed through the path of least resistance which in this case, was indeed through the structure below. You seriously believe you've thought of something that would be so obvious, that the entire physics community have missed?? lol, oh please.
    3
  13.  @jpmonin7429  Yes, but they were NOT designed to withstand a hit from a 767 fully laden with fuel travelling around 600mph. They were designed to take hits from a smaller 707 lost in fog whilst coming in to land and therefore hardly any fuel and travelling at around 180mph. Incomparable. For the record, the towers DID withstand the plane strikes and remained standing, one for around and hour and the other around 90 minutes. It was the fire that brought them down, not the plane impacts.
    3
  14.  @harijotkhalsa5546  It helps if you actually understand some basic physical principles in the first place. The path of least resistance in the case of the collapses was straight down through the structure below. For those towers to have toppled over sideways would have required a sufficient lateral force.
    3
  15.  @xx7legion7xx99  The CCTV footage was running at a standard fps for a CCTV security camera. It did in fact capture a still which when zoomed in on, shows what is quite obviously a large plane with the American Airlines livery emblazoned across it. 136 people witnessed it's approach, some of whom were pilots who'd flown those very models of plane, and you're telling me none of them could tell the difference between say, a cruise missile which is 20ft long with a 9ft wingspan and a Boeing 757 which is 155ft long and has a wingspan of 125ft? The damage to surrounding structures on approach confirm thise of a Boeing 757 and would have been impossible to have hit if it were a missile. The explosion was also a clear kerosene explosion which is very different to that of a missile strike. The exit hole also isn't consistent with a missile strike. And then there's the fact there was plenty of plane wreckage found from a 757, including the blacm box which was decoded to show details of AA Flight 77's last 11 flights. The remains of everybody known to have been on board were retrieved from the crash site along with their belongings. There are even first responder accounts of the charred remains of passengers strill strapped into their seat, images of which were presented in court during the Moussaoui trial. The evidence is overwhelming and proves beyond all reasonable doubt that AA Flight 77 crashed there as the official stance states.
    3
  16.  @jackieclark9679  The money you're claiming was missing the day before was actually made public in 1999 and spoken of on a few occasions. The money was never actually missing as such as the conspiracy theorists would have you believe, it was simply a case of them having difficulty tracking it between departments due to outmoded, incompatible software.
    3
  17.  Michael Hoffman  Great, let's dig. Begin by explaining to me, if it was such a shock and mystery that building 7 collapsed, how was it that the fire fighters said it would definitely collapse, several hours before it came down? Hence the collapse zone they put in place.
    3
  18.  @gabemarshall7777  You don't need to ie. you can't because you as well as i do there aren't any. NOT ONE!! So what you're telling everybody is, you think you know more about controlled demolition than the ENTIRE demolitions community. In reality, it would have been IMPOSSIBLE to have brought the twin towers down in that manner via a controlled demolition. Believe whatever you like Gabe, just don't expect anybody of worth to take anything you say seriously and get used to being ridiculed. This is not a matter of opinions sorry.
    3
  19.  @corneaterman  Because there's no corroborating evidence and to believe they would come up with such an elaborate, insanely risky, completely over the top plan is insane.
    3
  20.  @mlb805  No response to my previous replies i take it? As predicted 🙄
    3
  21.  @prism8289  Yes, we've all heard truther tales of pilots they know personally 🥱 I don't believe a word any of you say given how dishonest every last one of you are. What you fail to acknowledge are all the pilots who say otherwise and that the fact he had to pull that manoeuvre was BECAUSE he was a pretty poor pilot. He came in way too fast and too high which was the very reason he had to make a STANDARD manoeuvre pilots use to do reduce altitude. Many pilots will naturally say it would be difficult to do what he did but others say he was simply reckless and suicidal and therefore hardly had safety in mind. Here's one for you to ignore. Google the words giulio bernacchia pilot oh no not another expert and show it to your Alaskan Airline buddy. Regardless of what you believe or what a handful of pilots may have said, we have ample proof a Boeing 757 (specifically AA Flight 77) DID pull off those manoeuvres before slamming into the side of the Pentagon. It isn't open to debate in academic circles, only pockets of the internet where opinions don't matter, echoed only by the lunatic fringe. The evidence supporting AA Flight 77 crashing into the Pentagon that day is overwhelming and conclusive.
    3
  22.  @prism8289  Again, you're categorically wrong. The transcript from the ATC literally says that they lost radar contact with Flight 77 and this happened because the hijackers turned off the transponder. There was then only primary radar that they had to rely on and they were in an area with limited radar coverage. Please stop pretending to understand things you clearly don't. Just ask yourself, why aren't there any ATC staff, radar technicians etc. exposing what would be such a glaringly obvious error and hole in their story if you were right? That should tell you something, just like why there aren't any demolitions experts claiming the twin towers were demoed..... but you know better 😉
    3
  23.  @prism8289  I've already made my opinion clear on your conjectural claims and their piloting skills. We KNOW that plane crashed there that day and we KNOW Hanjour was at the controls. He literally had to steer the plane which is the same principle regardless of the aircraft. Larger aircraft are often easier to control as they have more tech to help stabilise them in extreme conditions. Are you telling me he didn't have enough skill as a certified pilot, to just STEER A PLANE??? Even you could do it with no more than 30 minutes tuition! The difficult parts of flying are taking off and landing, neither of which none if the hijackers had to concern themselves with. They steered the aircrafts then crashed them. Steering a plane is easy; crashing one is even easier. Did you other looking up what i told you to, or was i right previously when i said you people don't give a damn about any conflicting evidence?
    3
  24.  @prism8289  Don't pretend you've read the Commission report because we both know you haven't. That would be far too much like proper research for a truther to do. You're just parroting the usual, out of context remarks truthers have to resort to doing to desperately try and bolster their kooky, cultish beliefs. Can you state any specific issues with the Commission report or just vague, blanket statements you choose to take in a context that supports your agenda?
    3
  25.  @jayh9529  Yes, gravity 🙈 ffs
    3
  26.  brettski  Exactly, 2 yrs prior as opposed to the day before in order to use the attack as a cover-up. Why mention it at all if it was the money used to fund an alleged inside job? Like i said, that's just illogical and makes no sense.
    3
  27.  @Chris-0113  The kind of intellect I've come to expect from the average 9/11 twoofer. Can't refute a single, easily verifed thing I've said, so reply with a response we'd expect from a small child. Is there any wonder why nobody of worth takes a blind bit of notice of beIIends like you?
    2
  28.  @rogerham  Name one false claim i've made and I'll gladly back it up. What exact office do you believe it hit and why is this such a shock to you? Explain what exactly your issue here is because i don't get it sorry. Missile?? Lol, impossible for reasons I've already detailed above. This has to be the most absurd theory of them all, right up there with space lasers taking the twin towers down and anybody who even considers this as a viable theory does so through blinding ignorance of the available evidence. AA Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon is an incontrovertible fact that cannot rationally be denied. The evidence is overwhelming and conclusive and not knowing of it after all these years is not a valid excuse. Ps. Of course it was planned, those guys didn't just do it on a whim during a flight that was originally meant to be a bloody holiday! 🙈
    2
  29.  @rogerham  What are you talking about? 900 billion dollars? That's a new one on me, can you elaborate and then explain what it is you're actually suggesting here? Are you saying 9/11 was just a government plot to hide 900 billion dollars that you seem to be insinuating they stole? Just googled it quick and no mention anywhere of any missing 900 billion dollars 🤷🏽‍♂️ Still waiting for any false claims you allege I've made. Any chance? 🤨
    2
  30.  @eddieb9930  CCTV cameras were set at around 1 frame per second. Theblma e was travelling about 500mph. It's quite an easy calculation to work out how far that plane would cover in a second that I'm sure even you can work it out. Do that simple calculation then get back to me and tell me again how funny you find it. Just another dumb truther argument made in ignorance. Why are you so hung up on footage when the evidence we have proving Flight 77 crashed there is so overwhelming? We don't need any footage to know what happened and the fact you think we do says it all. Are you saying EVERY SINGLE PERSON who saw it are lying? Are you saying all the wreckage was planted along with the physical remains and personal belongings of those on board? Do you believe the ATC staff were in on this too, as well as all the first responders and forensics teams etc.? If you don't believe a plane crashed there, what exactly do you believe happened there that day? You're just being ridiculous and refusing to acknowledge the facts.
    2
  31.  @here_to_watch2115  Your source was wrong because no such missile batterys exist at the Pentagon. And yes i have seen the footage and ypu simply cannot tell by that alone what it is, which is why we look at the other evidence, ALL of which confirm is most definitely was indeed a plane, specifically AA Flight 77. Anybody who disputes this does so in ignorance of the available evidence. 136 people directly witnessed it, most sat in traffic on their morning commute. There were even pilots who witnessed it and identified it specifically as being a 757. All witnesses reported a plane whilst not a single witness for anything other.
    2
  32.  @VonJay  Agreed, but will they listen? 🙄 lol. They're only interested in what fits with their agendas. If what they believed were true, would Rumsfeld even bother making it public?? Makes zero sense whatsoever. It was actually made public first back in 1999 and mentiones several times between then and the attacks and has since been tracked. Again, truthers don't wish to acknowledge this.
    2
  33.  @SidewaysBurnouts  What a load of boIIox 🤣
    2
  34.  @suzanneoshannessy7666  Because you're gullible and believe everything you read on the internet.....
    2
  35.  @grimmertwin2148  Just because a minority of delusional crackpots aren't aware of/don't accept the mountain of evidence that proves beyond all reasonable doubt that AA Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, does not mean this argument hasn't been settled. Hani Hanjour flew that plane into that building whether you accept it or not, and we have the evidence to back it up. There is ZERO evidence of anything else other than AA Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon and the flight path was witnessed and backed up by the ATC and the FDR evidence.
    2
  36.  @22ucespatriotwarrior88  Nope. Never said i did. I'm just going on the evidence.
    2
  37.  @22ucespatriotwarrior88  I've answered both questions you've asked me in two separate replies.
    2
  38.  @22ucespatriotwarrior88  Many buildings were hit, as would be expected. Are you suggesting it was purposely brought down in a manner so as to destory WTC7?? Lol, i do hope not. I don't know what your point here is, if you have any specific issues, let's hear it.
    2
  39.  @melbourne-heat.69-71  What a disgusting, despicable excuse for a human. Your BLATANT lies are easily refuted by a mountain of evidence so good luck trying to get any suckers to believe your treacherous buIIsh!t d!ckhead.
    2
  40.  @donroxitheoverthinker  I love how dumb, naive beIIends like you think just because somebody doesn't buy into you buIIsh!t conspiracy theories that means they automatically trust the government. We call that a strawman argument you clown. No the government can't be trusted but that doesn't mean they're behind every bad thing that happens.
    2
  41.  @ericsheep4895  Can you give me an example.of one hit by an airliner travelling around 500mph or having thousands of tons of debris falling on to them? If not then it's a moot point. That said..... the Plasco building was a high-rise that collapsed PURELY from fire without being hit by anything and there have been many steel-framed structures that have collapsed from fire, because guess what......fire weakens steel 🙄
    2
  42.  @loneranger9485  Why are you shouting? 🤨 When you say made from those materials, you mean a non-concrete reinforced, steel-framed structure right? Of which there are plenty, all from fire, none having the addition of being struck by a jet airliner with the force equivalent to 1.35 tons of TNT. Ah ok, so not a single demolitions expert has spoken out saying they believe the twin were demoed, but you just personally know a few? Convenient 🤔 Why don't you ask them how the demo charges managed to survive the plane impacts and fires because to say that's a bit of a mystery would be a bit of an understatement lol.
    2
  43.  @bennynagon9322  I disagree. I personally believe, based on the available evidence, that there was miscommunication between the FBI and the CIA and more could have been done, but i just think it was more negligence than nefarious planning. If I'm shown sufficient, credible evidence to the contrary then my opinion is open to chance. So far nobody has been able to provide such evidence.
    2
  44.  @johnv6806  Great. Except it didn't. Both towers collapsed at the impact zones as opposed to collapsing from the bottom up, as controlled demolitions do. This would be impossible to achieve in terms of a controlled demolition, hence why there aren't any demolitions experts making this claim.
    2
  45.  Ludwig Nickles  No, almost every single he lists is garbage and demonstrably false. You really shouldn't believe everything people say on the internet without qualification.
    2
  46.  Ludwig Nickles  Of course you do, that's why you have just blindly accepted the utter horsesh!te David Savian listed, almost all of which is EASILY refuted and has been quite some time back.
    2
  47. Missiles that zigzag to their targets and leave exit holes 🤣👍🏼
    2
  48.  @chrisgmusic4God  If you're a flat-earther then there isn't much chance of that sorry champ.
    2
  49. @DC Nope, it was later accounted for and simply a matter of them having great difficulty tracking money between departments due to to conflicting softwares systems. If they seriously just pocketed the cash, why would they bother announcing it was missing?
    2
  50. Oh shut up lol. Is there no end to yhe paranoia of you whackjobs? What's so hard to accept he has changed his mind after becoming better informed?? I hate to admit it but i once believed 911 was 'an inside job', but after some thorough research, it soon became evident there was no truth to any of the conspiracy claims.
    2