"they show Japanese aircraft flying out from ground bases. "
Yeah just point out the most irrelevant bits of the films. Aside from showing still pictures on Pearl Harbor from inside Jap planes DURING THE FUCKING ATTACK they also show a F/X sequences of Japanese planes attack battle ship row in Pearl Harbor. Its called hard evidence of which you do not have ONE FUCKING SHRED. Why the fuck would the Japanese make a propaganda film during the war showing their planes attacking Pearl Harbor if they actually didn't do it? It makes absolutely no fucking sense!
"How does the eyewitness know, for instance, that it is a Japanese plane he/she was looking at?"
Because the planes looked like Zeros and Kates (these were trained military personnel who are on the look out for Jap aircraft) and they were DROPPING FUCKING BOMBS on them and machine gunning them. They saw it with their own eyes. You can't produce ONE FUCKING WITNESS that contradicted them. NOT ONE!
You still can't explain why THOUSANDS of people, both military and civilian, would lie about seeing planes attacking with bomb and torpedoes. Not military or civilian.
You still can't produce one fucking person, just one, who was there that day that confirms your "no-planes, no bombs" bullshit fantasy story. I can produce people that tell the truth about 911, Oklahoma City, the USS Liberty, etc. You story is total, insane bullshit.
"fake accounts would be part of a false-flag attack."
One or two would be believable. THOUSANDS of people saw the Japanese dropping bombs and torpedoes with their own fucking eyes.
NOT ONE FUCKING PERSON has come forward with your bullshit "no planes, no bombs" fantasy.
"Photographs show damage done from the ground. "
Have you seen ALL the photographs taken that day. Was every fucking impact crater and bullet hole photographed? You can produce one or two grainy, distance pictures that is supposed to disprove the entire attack witnessed by THOUSANDS of people. And how the fuck do you know what Japanese bomb damage is supposed to look like as opposed to American bomb damage would look like? I mean what is the difference, can you explain it?
"Ships floating, even those that are listed as having been "sunk.""
How do you know the ship didn't sink after the picture was taken? How do you know the ship was severally damaged and then merely listed as sunk? How do you know how deep the water was at that very spot and the ship was not rest on a shallow bottom?
" Photographs that show people on the day of the attack relaxed"
The attack was spread out for hours in two waves over a huge area. There were not bombs going off every where every second for the entire two hours straight. You don't know what was happening the exact moment those photos were snapped. You don't know what going on in those people's heads. They could have been in shock for christs sakes.
"You mentioned yourself 30 planes shot down with nothing but a couple of nuts and bolts left of them? Doesn't that seem strange to you?"
No because the planes could been so burned up and damaged that they weren't fit to put into a museum. The salvageable planes were taken by the military for study. After all the Japs built THOUSANDS of planes and how many ended in US museums. Only a handful. Doesn't that mean the US only shot down a handful of Jap planes during the entire war? It nonsense.
Your story is nonsense. Its total FUCKING bullshit and you still can't provide ONE FUCKING WITNESS.
And how the fuck do you know what Japanese bomb damage is supposed to look like as opposed to American bomb damage would look like? I mean what is the difference, can you explain it?
Yes, of course I can explain it. Example, if you look at the photographs of Wheeler Field, you see neatly aligned rows of aircraft set on fire. Where are the bomb craters? The Japanese are alleged to have used general purpose bombs, nothing exotic. You can see the relevant photographs in the PDF file, as well as photos of other airfields that were bombed from the air for comparison.
How do you know the ship didn't sink after the picture was taken? How do you know the ship was severally damaged and then merely listed as sunk? How do you know how deep the water was at that very spot and the ship was not rest on a shallow bottom?
Most of the photographs of ships attacked at Pearl Harbor show only the USS Arizona. A ship that was listed as being "sunk." There are photographs of it floating on the water long after the smoke has cleared. If you read about it, you will find out that it was scuttled months afterwards.
A ship is not actually sunk unless, at the very least, part of its hull is under water.
You can find answers to these and more of the questions you might have on the pdf. I think you might not be eager to read it, because you have such an emotional reaction to it.
"Where are the bomb craters?"
How do you know the particular bombs dropped from those particular Japanese fighter bombers that attacked that facility at Pearl at that particular altitude and at that particular angle are supposed to produce huge bomb craters? Produce one picture. Just one fucking picture that shows a huge bomb crater produced by those very same Japanese bombs dropped from the same altitude and angle. You aren't going to find one because the bombs from those planes at that altitude don't produce bomb craters the way 500 to 1000 lbs bombs dropped 10,000 feet at 250 mph from strategic heavy bombers like B-17's and B-29s. It just doesn't happen.
You can't produce a single fucking picture just like you can't produce a single fucking eye witness to corroborate your "no-planes, no-bombs" bullshit story.
"Most of the photographs of ships attacked at Pearl Harbor show only the USS Arizona."
Most (you claim but your claims aren't worth a squirt of piss) but certainly not all.
https://4815162342execute.files.wordpress.com/2021/12/pearl-harbor-1.7-battleship-row.jpg
:focal(1649x1288:1650x1289)/https://tf-cmsv2-smithsonianmag-media.s3.amazonaws.com/filer_public/5d/66/5d660be7-b9f5-4681-b3d1-ac741d84dc68/gettyimages-615316446.jpg){kind=link}
/https://tf-cmsv2-smithsonianmag-media.s3.amazonaws.com/filer_public/dd/34/dd3476b1-5ed0-4365-828b-9baf2012352e/gettyimages-543495247.jpg){kind=link}
This picture taken from the Japanese attack planes during the attack showing the ships in battle ship row being attacked
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c7/Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor_Japanese_planes_view.jpg
http://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net/p/kunr/files/styles/x_large/public/201712/3c29812u_1.jpg
That's a Japanese Kate in the frame. Note the ribbed canopy, the very wide wings, the rounded fin and tail stabilizers almost flush with the bottom of the tail. Its a Kate. I am sure that picture is faked, right? Or did the US government build a plane to look like a Kate?
'A ship that was listed as being "sunk."'
It was most likely listed as sunk because one look at it would tell any sane person with a lick of common sense (that excludes you) that it was a complete loss, totaled, kaput, its was never going to sail again.
Now again I dare you, I triple dog dare you, to produce one, just one fucking eye witness who was at Pearl on that day and corroborates your bullshit no-planes, no-bombs story. You can't because no such person exists because the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor and it was eye witnessed by THOUSANDS upon THOUSANDS of people. I've given you link upon link and could give you more but you can't produce one, not a single fucking one, because your story is TOTAL FUCKING BULLSHIT.
Thanks for the picture containing the Nakajima B5N. I spent a lot of time searching for pictures like that and wasn't able to find any. However, I can see something looks off on that photograph right away. There is a square shadow on the right wing of the aircraft, that looks unlike the fuselage.
How do you know the particular bombs dropped from those particular Japanese fighter bombers that attacked that facility at Pearl at that particular altitude and at that particular angle are supposed to produce huge bomb craters?
The Japanese bombs should produce some damage that radiates out from a central location, since these are according to all the information that's available "land bombs" (general purpose bombs filled with explosives), but we only see planes burning still arranged in neat little rows. No bomb craters or any apparent damage to the nearby buildings.
To prove your point, you would have to show that Japanese "land bombs" were capable of setting airplanes alight while causing no additional damage.
I like the photograph . The Japanese somehow missed the big easy target (the USS Pennsylvania) and hit instead the little destroyer of little military value. The destroyer is among the ships listed as sunk even though it was in a DRY DOCK at the time of the attack. Afterwards, they flooded the dry dock with water, and then it wasn't dry anymore and then they took the photograph that you see.
It was most likely listed as sunk because one look at it would tell any sane person with a lick of common sense (that excludes you) that it was a complete loss, totaled, kaput, its was never going to sail again.
If it's totaled it should be listed as totaled or as a complete loss calling it sunk is not actually representative as what actually happened. Sunk means that the hull was at least partly underwater as a direct result of the attack. Not because they scuttled it afterwards. There were no ships actually sunk as a direct result of the "attack." They are only labeled as such to make the "attack" seem dramatic.
This is a major point. A false-flag attack would produce dramatic photographs, but no serious or crippling damage. Therefore the damage done is exaggerated for propaganda.
If someone were to show that the combat readiness of the US fleet was majorly impacted by the alleged attack, then that would be a strong point against a false-flag attack.
If, as on the other hand, it appears that the damage is very slight, and large easy targets missed or not even attacked, then it becomes natural to suspect that the attack wasn't real.
Now again I dare you, I triple dog dare you, to produce one, just one fucking eye witness who was at Pearl on that day and corroborates your bullshit no-planes, no-bombs story.
I was able to find some articles on the net stating that US servicemen manning a AAA battery at "snake point" mentioned in an interview by Movietone news (a producer of newsreels) that there had been "no enemy planes" in the sky that day. Since then these sites appear to have been de-listed from major search engines. I was never able to find the original clip which seems to have been online at one point.
Of course, you wouldn't be satisfied with just reading the text, and if you saw the original video clip, I imagine you would just go into denial, the way the vaccinated go into denial when you show them the clip of Billy Gates saying that he intends to use vaccines to depopulate the earth.
(post is archived)