SalarHaqq
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2019
- Messages
- 4,569
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
And because of the fact that white phosphorous since its inception has been a multi-use item, not restricted to producing smoke but also meant as a means to burn people to death, as extensively witnessed during WW1.
Zelensky's rants against Russian forces and their alleged deployment of white phosphorous munitions were baseless, but the reason he attempted to push this narrative is because under certain circumstances, white phosphorous attacks constitute war crimes.
White phosphorous is not exclusively a generator of smoke, just like knives were not only created to slice bread.
Better yet, I can produce numerous cases of white phosphorous being fired upon military personnel with the express intention of killing or incapacitating them, consistent with the definition of an incendiary weapon according to Article 1.1 of the treaty.
_____
I do not want to deviate from the main topic here, but I do not care who is your 'informed analyst'. Given the differences of flight training of when I was learning how to fly versus the technology of Sept 11, 2001, I have no problems declaring that the maneuvers to make ANY airliner fly into a WTC tower is well within the skills of any student pilot that passed ground school.
In fact...
Watch: Passenger who landed plane speaks about harrowing experience - CNN Video
In an interview with NBC's "Today," Darren Harrison describes how he managed to land a plane with zero flight experience after the aircraft's pilot became incapacitated.www.cnn.com
In an interview with NBC's "Today," Darren Harrison describes how he managed to land a plane with zero flight experience after the aircraft's pilot became incapacitated.
That does not mean anyone can fly in an emergency situation like above. But flying airliners into the WTC were not emergency situations. The issue is settled like gravity.
You're preaching to the converted though. Because the source I cited is referencing a whole spate of aviation experts as well as experienced pilots (quoted from both mainstream and dissident media) who were actually flying the same machines allegedly slammed into highrise buildings by some total novices who had never been trained to man these types of aircraft (one of whom is said to have been a highly mediocre student), nor to execute the complex maneuvers that were performed by at least one of the planes.
Some of these testimonies can be found here:
http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/pilots.html
It is noteworthy that none of the pilots under the above link are harboring any hostility against the USA, in fact they're considered as patriotic Americans so their views aren't informed by political bias.
And with regards to the World Trade Center attacks, users who value critical analysis over state-sanctioned narratives may reinform themselves as to the massive inconsistencies of the official version here:
How the FBI and 9/11 Commission Suppressed Key Evidence about Hani Hanjour, alleged hijack pilot of AAL 77 - Global Research
The evidence was crucial because it undermined the official explanation that Hani Hanjour crashed American Airlines Flight 77 into the Pentagon at high speed after executing an extremely difficult top gun maneuver. But to understand how all of this played out, let us review the case in bite-size...
www.globalresearch.ca
Last edited:
