Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Misc Discussion Boards => Conspiracy Theories Board => Topic started by: quadzilla456 on August 27, 2011, 10:59:36 PM
-
WOW is all I can say after watching this!
-
Ed Asner must be broke....
-
But what are your thoughts on the contents of the video?? You have nothing to say because you know WTC 7 can only have been a demolition - which takes days to setup. Yet the building was imploded on 9/11. Which means the building was rigged with explosives days in advance of 9/11.
-
Fbi helped bombing the wtc in 1993. a former fbi boss admitted this. there are things that can just happen without keeping people awake at night. people believe the official story.
-
Fbi helped bombing the wtc in 1993. a former fbi boss admitted this. there are things that can just happen without keeping people awake at night. people believe the official story.
An acquaintance of mine knows two cops that say the whole thing was engineered by the government. The one's brother inlaw was in the NYPD and quit after the attack because he feels the government no longer serves the people.
-
I hear Santa Claus comes at Christmas time.
5...4...3...2...
-
I hear Santa Claus comes at Christmas time.
5...4...3...2...
Well, you being alive and chatting on Getbig is more crazy than Santa Claus coming for Christmas. The concept of the universe and life one Earth is more crazy than anything you could come up with.
-
How come wtc1 fell across wtc6 and into the side of wtc7 if it was a controlled demo? Don't they fall into their own footprint?
Maybe because a large plane took out one corner of the building?
-
Ed Asner must be broke....
Ed Asner is a will known liberal socialist communist moron.
-
An acquaintance of mine knows two cops that say the whole thing was engineered by the government. The one's brother inlaw was in the NYPD and quit after the attack because he feels the government no longer serves the people.
well, if two cops know what happened, then it must be true.
-
"No way, I did it! Me I say !"
-
try not to cry guys :'(
http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm
-
try not to cry guys :'(
http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm
HAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA try again. That building was brought down. PERIOD
-
HAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA try again. That building was brought down. PERIOD
Sure it was and the PERIOD in caps really proved me dead wrong lol
-
Sure it was and the PERIOD in caps really proved me dead wrong lol
AT LEAST YOU ADMIT YOU'RE WRONG ;D
-
AT LEAST YOU ADMIT YOU'RE WRONG ;D
It's the CAPS that did it ;D
-
Why didn't wtc1 fall straight down like wtc7 if they were both imploded or do truthers believe wtc1 didn't hit wtc7 at all?
-
Well at least we know how to bring a steel building down with out using demo experts and save thousands in the process. Anyone got a match? ;D
-
Well at least we know how to bring a steel building down with out using demo experts and save thousands in the process. Anyone got a match? ;D
Helps if a much larger building already on fire falls into your side opening up a huge gash which damages you and also allows oxygen to fuel any fires.
An early 80's fire system and no water pressure tends to help also.
-
An acquaintance of mine knows two cops that say the whole thing was engineered by the government. The one's brother inlaw was in the NYPD and quit after the attack because he feels the government no longer serves the people.
I'm a cop and I will tell you that those two cops are full of shit or your acquaintance is full of shit. We just aren't in the know on that kind of thing.
-
HAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA try again. That building was brought down. PERIOD
Agreed.
-
Why didn't wtc1 fall straight down like wtc7 if they were both imploded or do truthers believe wtc1 didn't hit wtc7 at all?
We are not talking about WTC 1 right now. WTC 7 fell straight down in it's own footprint, demolition style. WTC 7 did not have significant damage from the North and South towers that collapsed earlier. Did you look at the video?
-
I'm a cop and I will tell you that those two cops are full of shit or your acquaintance is full of shit. We just aren't in the know on that kind of thing.
I think a cop at ground zero would be more in the know than you - unless you were there. In this video I posted the cops or firefighters are saying WTC 7 is going to blow and to get out of there. Watch the video.
-
Would have taken months and months and months to rig both towers with explosives, its loud, noisy and involves drilling in to the core beams to place them on every floor, funny how everyone working there never saw or heard anyone doing this, or that the planes didnt set them all off when they crashed in to the building ::)
-
Would have taken months and months and months to rig both towers with explosives, its loud, noisy and involves drilling in to the core beams to place them on every floor, funny how everyone working there never saw or heard anyone doing this, or that the planes didnt set them all off when they crashed in to the building ::)
Dont bother using logic with these idiots. Any who knows about demolition will tell you it literally does take months and months to blow up a 20 story building. The building columns have to be drilled, walls need to be knocked down and striped..etc.. But Moran's will tell you they used some highly secret super scientific explosives..
And the truthers all know because they all have a cousin who was there and is in the know.
-
We are not talking about WTC 1 right now. WTC 7 fell straight down in it's own footprint, demolition style. WTC 7 did not have significant damage from the North and South towers that collapsed earlier. Did you look at the video?
WTC7 is in great shape here! ::)
-
I think a cop at ground zero would be more in the know than you - unless you were there. In this video I posted the cops or firefighters are saying WTC 7 is going to blow and to get out of there. Watch the video.
Sorry, cops didn't know anything more than anyone else on scene.
-
WTC7 is in great shape here! ::)
You need to watch the video. They have structural engineers that go on record saying the probability of all columns in WTC 7 failing at the same time is 0% based on the damage to the corner.
And that is precisely what happened when WTC 7 pancaked at the speed of gravity. All columns failed and there was no structural resistance during the collapse. This is only possible if all columns were severed at the base. If the corner damage from the taller towers caused the collapse of WTC 7 it would have collapsed a lot different. But don't take my word for it - look at the experts in the video. Over 1000 architects and engineers. Even the family members of the victim say the official story is BS.
And Larry Silverstein, owner of the complex, admits they pulled the building.
How much more do you need JWB? Are you really that gullible and willing to listen to the BS from a group of people with a history of lying to you. Really?? WOW!
-
Sorry, cops didn't know anything more than anyone else on scene.
They did - because everyone else had to get out of there. The cops and firefighter went in and heard explosions.
But how do you know they did not know anything more than anyone else?
-
Many people are trying to get the word out that the term "Pull it," as said by Larry Silverstein in reference to WTC7 means to "pull the firefighters out of the building."
The 9-11 Truth Movement has discovered that "Pull it" actually means "to pull the building down" or to demolish a building.
Watch the video and decide for yourself.
-
They did - because everyone else had to get out of there. The cops and firefighter went in and heard explosions.
But how do you know they did not know anything more than anyone else?
Im a former NYPD sargent.. Ya the cops knew 911 was a hoax ::) stupidest thing I've herd in my life
-
You need to watch the video. They have structural engineers that go on record saying the probability of all columns in WTC 7 failing at the same time is 0% based on the damage to the corner.
And that is precisely what happened when WTC 7 pancaked at the speed of gravity. All columns failed and there was no structural resistance during the collapse. This is only possible if all columns were severed at the base. If the corner damage from the taller towers caused the collapse of WTC 7 it would have collapsed a lot different. But don't take my word for it - look at the experts in the video. Over 1000 architects and engineers. Even the family members of the victim say the official story is BS.
And Larry Silverstein, owner of the complex, admits they pulled the building.
How much more do you need JWB? Are you really that gullible and willing to listen to the BS from a group of people with a history of lying to you. Really?? WOW!
Are you really as retarded as you sound?
-
Many people are trying to get the word out that the term "Pull it," as said by Larry Silverstein in reference to WTC7 means to "pull the firefighters out of the building."
The 9-11 Truth Movement has discovered that "Pull it" actually means "to pull the building down" or to demolish a building.
Watch the video and decide for yourself.
First of all, just for the record, I don't know shitt about this or don't have an opinion, but when watch the guy in the vid talking I understood it as pull firefighters out.
-
Would have taken months and months and months to rig both towers with explosives, its loud, noisy and involves drilling in to the core beams to place them on every floor, funny how everyone working there never saw or heard anyone doing this, or that the planes didnt set them all off when they crashed in to the building ::)
Actually, the weekend before the attacks, the power was shut down for a large chunk of the buildings.
The bomb dogs were actually removed 5 days before the attack.
http://www.nynewsday.com/news/local/manhattan/wtc/ny-nyaler122362178sep12,0,6794009.story
Despite the power being down, large number of engineers going in and out of the building
http://69.28.73.17/thornarticles/powerdown.html
There's also lots of video out there from WTC1/2 workers with detailed accounts of loud machinery on empty floors the 2 weeks before the attacks.
This doesn't prove or disprove a thing - but it sure does sound weird they'd have huge power downs and remove all the bomb sniffing dogs at the same time much of the electronic security was down. That's not conspiracy theory stuff, that's simple police work lol...
You could ask the WTC security director about it - he is actual GW Bush's cousin- and he moved a huge group of buddies across the street an hour before the attacks that day....
http://web.archive.org/web/20040411172330/http:/www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_401406.html
Little things like this.... well, they certainly fuel speculationt hat somethign smells funny.
-
Im a former NYPD sargent.. Ya the cops knew 911 was a hoax ::) stupidest thing I've herd in my life
"sargent" correct spelling, "sergeant".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergeant
kh300, I dig your posts, particularly about motorcycles, but you gotta have a few beers in you to spell the word wrong in 2 places, if that was your job title.
-
???
-
"sargent" correct spelling, "sergeant".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergeant
kh300, I dig your posts, particularly about motorcycles, but you gotta have a few beers in you to spell the word wrong in 2 places, if that was your job title.
thanks professor
-
Would have taken months and months and months to rig both towers with explosives, its loud, noisy and involves drilling in to the core beams to place them on every floor, funny how everyone working there never saw or heard anyone doing this, or that the planes didnt set them all off when they crashed in to the building ::)
And you don't see any irony in your argument here?
-
They did - because everyone else had to get out of there. The cops and firefighter went in and heard explosions.
But how do you know they did not know anything more than anyone else?
It just doesn't work that way. Plus, your source is a friend of a friend... not very compelling
-
People on both extreme sides of the argument are just plain off.
Was it Dubya with a plunger? No. He was baffled and confused and manipulated that day in some way.
Was it 19 pricks with boxcutters alone? At the very least, teh actions of those in charge show they were well aware something was happening. It wasn't al-Q betting that airline stocks would fall that morning ;)
When you consider the people that argue the loudest that "people who question the official story are crazy!"... they often are just unaware of the events. Personally, I wanted to fight a guy who suggested "inside job" back in 2005. Then, when I saw some of the events and other evidence... well, it smells funny. The govt fighting an investigation for 441 days (when pearl harbor, challenger, columbia, and other major events are investigated within a week)...
Very odd.
-
Are you really as retarded as you sound?
Ahh, I see, you resort to insults when you can't debate.
Btw, how do you know what I sound like?
-
I hear Santa Claus comes at Christmas time.
5...4...3...2...
Wrong!
-
And you don't see any irony in your argument here?
No, please tell me
-
Dont bother using logic with these idiots. Any who knows about demolition will tell you it literally does take months and months to blow up a 20 story building. The building columns have to be drilled, walls need to be knocked down and striped..etc.. But Moran's will tell you they used some highly secret super scientific explosives..
And the truthers all know because they all have a cousin who was there and is in the know.
Bullshit. It's not about logic, it's about cold hard science.
I'm a Structural Engineer who has worked on controlled demolitions.
With the state of the art tools it can be done very quickly.
Plus there are chemicals we don't even know about that the CIA can use to bring down large buildings in a short time, they do it all the time. I know this personally and anyone with a Chemical Engineering degree can confirm. I am no truther but you're wrong, very wrong.
I don't care to argue, but WTC7 was a controlled demo. Go watch 1000 controlled demo videos like i have and then watch the WTC7 fall and tell me it is not identical.
Archs and Engineers get paid to lie all the time, so take all that shit with a grain of salt. It is our job to answer the tough questions and when money is involved humans are easily swayed.
8)
-
First of all, just for the record, I don't know shitt about this or don't have an opinion, but when watch the guy in the vid talking I understood it as pull firefighters out.
When Silverstein is saying "pull it", he is referring to the building, which is an "it". People don't normally refer to other people or a group of people as "it".
You don't say:
"It" really put out that fire quickly.
No, of course you don't.
You say:
"Firefighters" really put out that fire quickly.
You also don't refer to buildings as people. So nobody would say "pull him" when referring to a building.
Hope that helps. English 101.
-
So silverstein knew planes were going to hit wtc1 thereby creating a cover to use CD to make wtc1 fall onto wtc7 and start fires that in turn created a cover to bring down wtc7 via CD so he could collect on the insurance?
-
No, please tell me
You are telling how difficult it is to bring a house down with explosives when it came down from minor damage and fire. You are arguing against yourself.
-
Bullshit. It's not about logic, it's about cold hard science.
I'm a Structural Engineer who has worked on controlled demolitions.
With the state of the art tools it can be done very quickly.
Plus there are chemicals we don't even know about that the CIA can use to bring down large buildings in a short time, they do it all the time. I know this personally and anyone with a Chemical Engineering degree can confirm. I am no truther but you're wrong, very wrong.
I don't care to argue, but WTC7 was a controlled demo. Go watch 1000 controlled demo videos like i have and then watch the WTC7 fall and tell me it is not identical.
Archs and Engineers get paid to lie all the time, so take all that shit with a grain of salt. It is our job to answer the tough questions and when money is involved humans are easily swayed.
8)
A lot of the stuff, Pentagon, WTC1/2 is so ambiguous it could be argued either way......but they really fucked up with WTC7.
-
building a fraction of the size of wtc7 being demoed
wtc7
-
When Silverstein is saying "pull it", he is referring to the building, which is an "it". People don't normally refer to other people or a group of people as "it".
You don't say:
"It" really put out that fire quickly.
No, of course you don't.
You say:
"Firefighters" really put out that fire quickly.
You also don't refer to buildings as people. So nobody would say "pull him" when referring to a building.
Hope that helps. English 101.
Ya, I know that now, my post was referring to the first time i watched that but after what you said now Im thinking what your thinking, makes more sense.
-
When Silverstein is saying "pull it", he is referring to the building, which is an "it". People don't normally refer to other people or a group of people as "it".
You don't say:
"It" really put out that fire quickly.
No, of course you don't.
You say:
"Firefighters" really put out that fire quickly.
You also don't refer to buildings as people. So nobody would say "pull him" when referring to a building.
Hope that helps. English 101.
Lol what the fuck are you arguing? No shit hes referring to the building. Pull means get the fuck out. Hes telling everyone by referring to the building.
Besides your whole basis for the argument that wtc7 was a controlled demo is based on youtube video of someone trying to twist around the use of two words. lol. This is why after 10 years theres still not one credible piece of evidence this was a conspiracy.
-
building a fraction of the size of wtc7 being demoed
wtc7
Hey that first building didn't fall straight down or even within its own footprint so it can't have been CD!
-
Hey that first building didn't fall straight down or even within its own footprint so it can't have been CD!
The thing is listen to how loud it was. There is no video of the wtc's with any explosions,let alone the amount required to take own such large buildings compared to this small 15 story building.
-
The thing is listen to how loud it was. There is no video of the wtc's with any explosions,let alone the amount required to take own such large buildings compared to this small 15 story building.
Yeah I know that was your point of comparison but the brainiacs here will just say they used some silent thermite bullshit.
I wanna know how they expect a building that large to fall if fire did cause columns to fail as opposed to explosives causing columns to fail?
Btw, there is another video around showing wtc7 falls forward and to the left somewhat but truthers only use this video showing only the top 1/3 of the building fall down out of view because of the building in the way. There were 40 floors hidden behind that building we don't see fall.
-
Bullshit. It's not about logic, it's about cold hard science.
I'm a Structural Engineer who has worked on controlled demolitions.
With the state of the art tools it can be done very quickly.
Plus there are chemicals we don't even know about that the CIA can use to bring down large buildings in a short time, they do it all the time. I know this personally and anyone with a Chemical Engineering degree can confirm. I am no truther but you're wrong, very wrong.
I don't care to argue, but WTC7 was a controlled demo. Go watch 1000 controlled demo videos like i have and then watch the WTC7 fall and tell me it is not identical.
Archs and Engineers get paid to lie all the time, so take all that shit with a grain of salt. It is our job to answer the tough questions and when money is involved humans are easily swayed.
8)
kh300 won't respond to this post ;)
-
Yeah I know that was your point of comparison but the brainiacs here will just say they used some silent thermite bullshit.
I wanna know how they expect a building that large to fall if fire did cause columns to fail as opposed to explosives causing columns to fail?
Btw, there is another video around showing wtc7 falls forward and to the left somewhat but truthers only use this video showing only the top 1/3 of the building fall down out of view because of the building in the way. There were 40 floors hidden behind that building we don't see fall.
Exactly
Wether controlled or not a building will always fall in on it's self, that argument is stupid, what do people think that a building will just tip over, ah no
-
Exactly
Wether controlled or not a building will always fall in on it's self, that argument is stupid, what do people think that a building will just tip over, ah no
till it do it at freefall speed? No.
WTC7 fell in under 10 seconds. There was no resistance from either of the central columns nor any of the floors. They all failed simultaneously. They all dropped at freefall speed - in fact, I think they fell a little faster when measured, which is because the explosions removed all of the air and thus air resistance.
You look at all of the events of 911, and it doesn't pass the smell test. If Hitler pulled that shit on the german people - missing planes, buildings falling, NORAD taking the day off, etc... we'd look at it historically and laugh at the stupidity of his people. Um, Reichtag fire.
But since "our guys" did it, we believe it. We all shit our pants that day. I was the strongest republican out there. I was on the GB General board bashing the shit out of kerry/Edwards in 2004. I drove people to vote Dubya in 2000 and 2004... made my whole family vote.
In 2005, I tried to start a fight with some idiot who implied 911 inside job. Two months later, having done months of research, I was shocked at the very least at the refusal of our leaders to investigate something that so obviously stinks.
over time, i've spent tons of time debating it, and really, these days I don't bother. The resources are out there. The day stinks to shit. once somebody gets partisan political about it, and argues against arguments they have not researched, it's time to end taht conversation. I talk to getbiggers who laugh at things they have no idea about... shrug it off and tell them to leave their list for Santa. It's just where they are. live and let live.
-
The thing is listen to how loud it was. There is no video of the wtc's with any explosions,let alone the amount required to take own such large buildings compared to this small 15 story building.
Yes there is. There is a vid of a firefighter talking on the phone to I think his wife when there is a loud explotion. It's then that they are told to leave the area as they are going to lose the building.
-
I think you are confusing looking at websites from people with agendas such as selling their books to actual research 240.
-
Yes there is. There is a vid of a firefighter talking on the phone to I think his wife when there is a loud explotion. It's then that they are told to leave the area as they are going to lose the building.
I saw that video it was one bang probably a burning car going up. If they used normal explosives there would have been a lot more than one bang, that building had around 80 steel columns.
-
I think I see something odd in this picture, but maybe not.
-
I saw that video it was one bang probably a burning car going up. If they used normal explosives there would have been a lot more than one bang, that building had around 80 steel columns.
Did you ever see the thermite drilling from WTC 1 an2 right before the collapse?
it's at :46 of this video.
Watch the other 90 seconds of the video, and you'll learn abuot the existence of "hot spots" of molten metal under WTC 1,2, AND 7 for 6 weeks after the attacks... yes, temperature higher than jet fuel can ever attain, 6 weeks later in NYC winter. That's evidence of explosives... nothing else can attain that temperature. Thermite sure can.
-
till it do it at freefall speed? No.
WTC7 fell in under 10 seconds. There was no resistance from either of the central columns nor any of the floors. They all failed simultaneously. They all dropped at freefall speed - in fact, I think they fell a little faster when measured, which is because the explosions removed all of the air and thus air resistance.
You look at all of the events of 911, and it doesn't pass the smell test. If Hitler pulled that shit on the german people - missing planes, buildings falling, NORAD taking the day off, etc... we'd look at it historically and laugh at the stupidity of his people. Um, Reichtag fire.
But since "our guys" did it, we believe it. We all shit our pants that day. I was the strongest republican out there. I was on the GB General board bashing the shit out of kerry/Edwards in 2004. I drove people to vote Dubya in 2000 and 2004... made my whole family vote.
In 2005, I tried to start a fight with some idiot who implied 911 inside job. Two months later, having done months of research, I was shocked at the very least at the refusal of our leaders to investigate something that so obviously stinks.
over time, i've spent tons of time debating it, and really, these days I don't bother. The resources are out there. The day stinks to shit. once somebody gets partisan political about it, and argues against arguments they have not researched, it's time to end taht conversation. I talk to getbiggers who laugh at things they have no idea about... shrug it off and tell them to leave their list for Santa. It's just where they are. live and let live.
I really am not on either side of any argument but to mei t's it's believable that if one portion of the building is weak at the foundation the building can callapse, I don't see the problem with this, so it's a stupid argument, now falling at certain speed, that is valid argument and one that needs an explanation I suppose but not the first argument, pretty stupid one.
-
Did you ever see the thermite drilling from WTC 1 an2 right before the collapse?
it's at :46 of this video.
Watch the other 90 seconds of the video, and you'll learn abuot the existence of "hot spots" of molten metal under WTC 1,2, AND 7 for 6 weeks after the attacks... yes, temperature higher than jet fuel can ever attain, 6 weeks later in NYC winter. That's evidence of explosives... nothing else can attain that temperature. Thermite sure can.
Lucky they knew exactly which floor the planes would hit so they could rig the floors just below with thermite!
Those guys were great pilots!
-
To not smell huge whiffs of bullshit surrounding the entire debacle of 9/11 is plain stupidity. Of course it didn't happen as they'd like us to believe it did. And no, I do not have the answers. But what I do have is a semi-OK-thinking brain that tells me that all the contrary evidence points to there being WAY more to the story than what is told.
I feel it was planned exactly as it occured for reasons that, while complex, are rooted in what is transpiring right now in America and, in general, the world.
The powers-that-be do what they want.
-
WTC7 was NOT in the 911 report, just as the pools of molten lava (far exceeding jet fuel) were not in the report. Just like the insanely high stock market put options, betting that those 2 airlines would sink that tuesday morning.
Why?
Because they had nothing to do with al-Quida. That's what the report said.
-
Oklahoma city building after the bombing.... didn't call down until the brought the wrecking ball months later
(http://cache.blippitt.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/oklahomacitybombing.jpg)
-
No-one even felt the need to question the design of the building that was maybe the first major building to have a total failure. That I think is a little surprising.
-
Oklahoma city building after the bombing.... didn't call down until the brought the wrecking ball months later
(http://cache.blippitt.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/oklahomacitybombing.jpg)
That is a concrete building not steel tube. Plus the base is larger than it's height.
-
No-one even felt the need to question the design of the building that was maybe the first major building to have a total failure. That I think is a little surprising.
The largest plane when the building was designed was a Boeing 707 which is a single aisle just like the current Boeing 737. The planes that hit were twin aisle Boeing 767, a much larger and heavier plane.
The towers were designed to handle a lost in fog 707 hit it at approach speed not full speed as they were actually hit. The empire state building was once hit by a lost in fog plane btw so they did take it into account.
-
That is a concrete building not steel tube. Plus the base is larger than it's height.
so your saying Concrete is stronger then Steel ???
funny cus i saw all the concrete on the towers turn to dust
-
The largest plane when the building was designed was a Boeing 707 which is a single aisle just like the current Boeing 737. The planes that hit were twin aisle Boeing 767, a much larger and heavier plane.
The towers were designed to handle a lost in fog 707 hit it at approach speed not full speed as they were actually hit. The empire state building was once hit by a lost in fog plane btw so they did take it into account.
I was talking about the building 7. Now I realise that the towers fell before 7. Oh well, atleast they had some kind of reason to do that...
-
so your saying Concrete is stronger then Steel ???
funny cus i saw all the concrete on the towers turn to dust
You realize the towers were just bolted together don't you?
-
And the concrete in the towers was not reinforced but simply 100mm thick slabs poured for each floor.
-
I was talking about the building 7. Now I realise that the towers fell before 7. Oh well, atleast they had some kind of reason to do that...
The thing is neither Osama or Bush if he was in on it (wanting a war) needed any buildings to fall that day to achieve what they wanted.
The planes going into the towers and killing many many people was enough of a result to achieve their goals.
Osama had no idea the buildings would fall and he didn't care he just wanted them to get hit.
-
You realize the towers were just bolted together don't you?
So bolts alone were able to hold up two 110 story buildings ... interesting
Now , everyone knows that HEAT rises, how was it possible that people 2 or 3 floors above where the planes hit, and jet fuel was melting this steel down, were still able to still be alive and yelling from the windows above the flames ???
Does Jet fuel only melt steel and not human flesh
(http://ironfiremen.com/files/2011/07/Victims-in-the-windows-of-twin-towers-9-11-2001.jpg)
-
Watch that top right corner of screen...
-
watch bottom right of screeen lol... you think there's debate about the collapse? what about the object from above right as plane #2 hits? lol
-
Watch that top right corner of screen...
-
??? I have no doubt that 10 pricks flew 2 planes into the towers that day.
In both of these clips, I see a THIRD object flying in very quickly from ABOVE THE TOWERS. it's not one of the planes. I don't claim to know what it is. But the cameras (from multiple angles) do not lie. *Something* came in from above.
-
Fire in Madrid
On February 13, 2005 a fire broke out in the 32 story Windsor building. Fire burned in excess of 800 degrees Celsius for two days. This steel structure building, and others like it, barring the Twin Towers and Building Seven, withstood the damage and did not collapse into piles of rubble.
(http://wtcbuilding7.com/gallery/1/spain_fire6.jpg)
The top six floors collapsed onto the rest of the building, but the steel core remained and thus held the building up.
Connection to building seven? An aircraft neither hit building seven, nor had the accelerant (jet fuel) that some claim was the demise to the Twin Towers. Building seven just had a couple smaller fires that supposedly brought the building down by the end of the first day.
(http://wtcbuilding7.com/gallery/1/windsor_tower_2.jpg)
(http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/windsor14.jpeg)
-
Much larger Beijing Fire, Did not collapse building:
(http://latimes.image2.trb.com/lanews/media/photo/2009-02/44997420.jpg)
-
Parque Central Building Fire Venezuela. Did not collapse
(http://daniel-venezuela.blogspot.com/parque%20central.jpg)
(http://www.net4truthusa.com/Photos/ParqueCentralFire.gif)
-
First Interstate Bank, Los Angeles bank, burns 3.5 hours, did not collapse:
(http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/analysis/compare/lafire_firstinterstate_files/050488_interstate_fire_lg.gif)
-
WTC 7: Allegedly collapsed due to fire
(http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/april2008/100408wtc3.jpg)
-
The most bizarre, provable aspect: The building fell at, or faster than free fall. Proving that it faced absolutely zero resistance. The softest steel would put up some resistance.
-
-
So bolts alone were able to hold up two 110 story buildings ... interesting
Now , everyone knows that HEAT rises, how was it possible that people 2 or 3 floors above where the planes hit, and jet fuel was melting this steel down, were still able to still be alive and yelling from the windows above the flames ???
Does Jet fuel only melt steel and not human flesh
(http://ironfiremen.com/files/2011/07/Victims-in-the-windows-of-twin-towers-9-11-2001.jpg)
where the hell is the plane entry point in that picture they could be on the other side of the building. there isn't much smoke either which points to that.
-
Fire in Madrid
On February 13, 2005 a fire broke out in the 32 story Windsor building. Fire burned in excess of 800 degrees Celsius for two days. This steel structure building, and others like it, barring the Twin Towers and Building Seven, withstood the damage and did not collapse into piles of rubble.
(http://wtcbuilding7.com/gallery/1/spain_fire6.jpg)
The top six floors collapsed onto the rest of the building, but the steel core remained and thus held the building up.
Connection to building seven? An aircraft neither hit building seven, nor had the accelerant (jet fuel) that some claim was the demise to the Twin Towers. Building seven just had a couple smaller fires that supposedly brought the building down by the end of the first day.
(http://wtcbuilding7.com/gallery/1/windsor_tower_2.jpg)
(http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/windsor14.jpeg)
firstly that building had a reinforced concrete core you can see it plain as day and it is mentioned on wiki.
2, this fire was fought with all the resources available for over 24 hours straight.
3, the steel structure above the fire did fall exactly the same as both the towers and building 7. the weight of only 6 floors above it, and the concrete core, prevented it from total collapse. Don't forget the tower hit second but lower fell first on 9/11. The main fire in wtc7 was on the 5th floor so there were around 40 floors above it. that is a lot of weight.
-
The most bizarre, provable aspect: The building fell at, or faster than free fall. Proving that it faced absolutely zero resistance. The softest steel would put up some resistance.
Post the scientific paper stating this please.
-
watch bottom right of screeen lol... you think there's debate about the collapse? what about the object from above right as plane #2 hits? lol
you lost me on this one what are you talking about?
-
you lost me on this one what are you talking about?
Some object flies in at a very high speed from ABOVE about 1 second after plane #2 hits.
I do'nt claim to know what it is - but it landed in WTC6. And this is what WTC-6 looked like afterwards.
I don't want to get all "conspiracy guy" on you here... but if something shoots out of the sky - timed exactly at the time a plane hits - and it destroys #6 of 7 properties owned by the same guy... and it had a big crater-shaped hole in it... Well, I have to wonder why this was never investigated. Your thoughts as to what flew from the sky, and why it created a giant crater in a building full of people?
-
Post the scientific paper stating this please.
WTC 7 Falls in under 7 seconds. The rate of free fall for the 47 story building is 6.8 seconds.
jwb, I'm not hating on you man. You seem to be an educated dude. My guess is that if you spend a little time looking at the events of 911, you'll scratch your head and say "you know, I think those nutjobs might be right... something smells funny here - and at the VERY least, these things should have been investigated thoroughly. Nobody asked what came from above the buildings and put a crater in WT6. Nobody asked how in the world a building fell at freefall speed (possibly only in a vacuum without oxygen, possible only in event of an explosion to remove oxygen)...
Anyway, not trying to disrespect, but I hope you scratch your head and say "Wow, something smells here..."
-
We're not even talking about the people in the BASEMENT who walked out bloody from the giant explosion down there. Google janitor willie rodriguez.
And the giant explosion recorded on seismograph devices 14 seconds BEFORE the plane hits, which registers a much smaller seismographic impact, since those explosions were 800 feet of building from the ground.
And the lobby windows all blown out - something impossible from the planes since the elevators were hermetically sealed to prevent fire from traveling down - albeit most of the jet fuel burned up on the OUTSIDE of the building upon impact.
And dude, this is all from memory and I haven't looked at the 911 bullshit in years. This shit is just common sense. the day stinks. Look at video of firefighters in the blown out LOBBY on the 1st floor. Nothing to do with the plane, homie ;)
-
240,
I have read/watched plenty of info from 9/11 truth and simply don't agree with their conclusions.
The big thing to think about is this.... no buildings needed to fall once the towers were hit. The PR job for both sides was completed with that act alone.
Btw, WTC1 fell over wtc6 before it hit wtc7.
-
Serious question for 240 (I have not studied this to the extent u have by any means). Is there any evidence that any of the anomilies that contributed to the weird nature of the building collapses can be attributable to operatives in collusion with the highjackers? Was it impossible/improbable that terrorists performed the subterfuge necessary to ensure the towers would fall?
-
Serious question for 240 (I have not studied this to the extent u have by any means). Is there any evidence that any of the anomilies that contributed to the weird nature of the building collapses can be attributable to operatives in collusion with the highjackers? Was it impossible/improbable that terrorists performed the subterfuge necessary to ensure the towers would fall?
The hijackers' mission was to hit the towers period. They didn't even think about whether they would fall and they didn't need them to fall to get their message across. Hitting them was big enough.
-
Serious question for 240 (I have not studied this to the extent u have by any means). Is there any evidence that any of the anomilies that contributed to the weird nature of the building collapses can be attributable to operatives in collusion with the highjackers? Was it impossible/improbable that terrorists performed the subterfuge necessary to ensure the towers would fall?
those 19 pricks on teh plane... they were partying on a cruise boat before the attacks. they sure weren't doing anything to any buildings.
we'll never know the truth of that day. sure is fun to argue it tho, I spose.
-
firstly that building had a reinforced concrete core you can see it plain as day and it is mentioned on wiki.
2, this fire was fought with all the resources available for over 24 hours straight.
3, the steel structure above the fire did fall exactly the same as both the towers and building 7. the weight of only 6 floors above it, and the concrete core, prevented it from total collapse. Don't forget the tower hit second but lower fell first on 9/11. The main fire in wtc7 was on the 5th floor so there were around 40 floors above it. that is a lot of weight.
I have news for you, all skyscrapers have reinforced concrete cores. What the hell do you think the elevator shafts are? All the WTC towers had a shit load of elevator shafts. And in most 50 stories plus skyscrapers the floor structure consists of steel trusses or steel beams. Including the Empire State Building. These steel trusses or beams then tie into the concrete core. WTC 7 was no different.
Look at the WTC 7 floor plan below. Do you see the concrete cores?
(http://img114.imageshack.us/img114/2222/wtc7plan022vl.jpg)
And WTC 1 / 2 below. Those are concrete cores buddy.
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/47john_lear/04images/911/Floor_Plan_001.png)
-
I'm a cop and I will tell you that those two cops are full of shit or your acquaintance is full of shit. We just aren't in the know on that kind of thing.
I know a guy who dresses like a cop and everyone in the town thinks he's a cop but he's really in deep cover for something much bigger.
-
It just doesn't work that way. Plus, your source is a friend of a friend... not very compelling
If he said it was his father or cousin, it could mean people's jobs or lives.
-
I have news for you, all skyscrapers have reinforced concrete cores. What the hell do you think the elevator shafts are? All the WTC towers had a shit load of elevator shafts. And in most 50 stories plus skyscrapers the floor structure consists of steel trusses or steel beams. Including the Empire State Building. These steel trusses or beams then tie into the concrete core. WTC 7 was no different.
And WTC 1 / 2 below. Those are concrete cores buddy.
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/47john_lear/04images/911/Floor_Plan_001.png)
Did the Madrid building have large planes fly into its concrete core?
You think the Madrid building would not have collapsed if the fire was way down on the 5th floor and not fought at all by firefighters? It was fought like crazy for a whole day and part of it still came down.
-
On September 10, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld announced a "war on waste" after an internal audit found that the Pentagon was "missing" 2.3 trillion dollars in unaccounted assets. It had the potential to be one of the biggest stories in decades.
On September 11th, it was as good as forgotten.
-
anyone who believes it was an inside job should read spying blind by amy zegart and richard clarkes against all enemies.
-
The test of truth here is to obtain the original videos and not watch something on the net. Only then will you be able to see if other objects were in the frames.
We have no guarantee that any video we have is the original. Thus, conspiracy theories will proliferate and 'evidence' will be presented as proof. I remain unconvinced.
Some people know the truth but the Flotsam have no clue whatever. I would hate to think they come to Getbig for illumination!
-
Or we could use common sense and believe the 3 year investigation using the best computer models by the NIST.
People who think all these professionals lied need think for a minute. Since 2008 when the report was done there is bound to be some people who have left employment there under bad circumstances (they got the fired) yet nobody has come forward saying the results were a fraud.
Shit they even had the balls to say their first theories were incorrect on wtc7.
-
The Explosion plumes look like a Wolf or fox atop a two chickens
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=393086.0;attach=425835;image)
-
Those who watched the TV news live at the time will never forget that morning. It was late at night in Sydney. You can see buildings collapse with smoke and dust but among that debris
were human beings. Humans were in those planes that hit the two towers. Workers were inside the building. Firefighters and police were doing their best and many lost their lives. People were jumping from the top
when there was too much heat and no hope of being rescued. It was really a dreadful, gut-wrenching thing to watch. It left scars in millions of people around the world.
-
watch bottom right of screeen lol... you think there's debate about the collapse? what about the object from above right as plane #2 hits? lol
It is probably a bird flying past close to the camera. The bird is not in focus so it is burred.
-
The thing is neither Osama or Bush if he was in on it (wanting a war) needed any buildings to fall that day to achieve what they wanted.
The planes going into the towers and killing many many people was enough of a result to achieve their goals.
Osama had no idea the buildings would fall and he didn't care he just wanted them to get hit.
I think destroying the buildings in a grandiose manner was necessary.
-
WOW is all I can say after watching this!
^^^^
NO ONE notice on the screen- B A S I L E??????????????????? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
In one day, we went from being a country unconcerned with pursuing obvious foreign hijackers to a country that nixes the most basic and fundamental rights we were once "guaranteed".
How convenient.
-
It is probably a bird flying past close to the camera. The bird is not in focus so it is burred.
That "bird" showed up on multiple angles, took a chunk out of the side of the building, and landed in WTC6 and caused a giant crater.
helluva bird!
-
anyone who believes it was an inside job should read spying blind by amy zegart and richard clarkes against all enemies.
clarke = 30 year loyal govt employee who didn't get a slap on the wrist for gross negligence on 911... nobody did.
Then he promptly retired, got a job for a thinktank, and got rich rich rich !!!! $$$.
IMO, not exactly the most objective voice. In fact, if you were writing a book about a ficticious 911, you'd probably enlist a govt tool lifer to facilitate the days' events, then allow him to retire without disgrace and get rich a year after the event.
-
Its amazing how people can see the video and still not question it.... We are all pawns in THEIR chess game.
after 10 years
Your already picked your side of the controversy and won't be switching teams no matter what
-
I realized today, it's like arguing who will win the 2075 Super Bowl.
We'll all either be long gone, or crapping in diaper senile, by the time anything comes to light.
But we sure do love to argue about whether teams we're not sure wil/do even exist are superior.
Pointless, really. Whatever happened, they got away with it. Let's focus on the 2011 Olympia - shit that is still highly relevant today!
-
The loose threads on this thing are just incredible. In nature and in number. Just fucking incredible.
-
The biggest proof the gov't at least new about this was the fact the 9/11 commision wanted to interview Bush and Cheney separately yet they refused to and said they would only testify together at the same time and then anything they did divulge was put into secret hell by Bush using his presidential power in sealing that document forever. WTF were they hiding?
Then the followup. A week earlier the US was low on soldier recruits willing to go to war the next day they had to turn down wannabe recruits as they were getting overwhelmed and then Bush ordered the Iraq war. At the same time a 200,000 Department of Homeland security was created with all of Bush's crony friends. There is no way the DHS gets formed if they tried a week earlier but 9/11 was their ticket.
My theory. The gov't didn't do this, but they knew about it and let it happen, maybe even pushed those guys in the right direction.
-
LOL @ other nations being alerted in summer 2001 that we'd be invading Afghanistan in mid-october 2001.
Invasion started... oct 18th?
LOL @ us spending a year slowly setting up ships in Gulf beforehand.
LOL @ Taleban accepting $43 million in cash from USA in summer 01, welching on the contract, and turning over drilling rights to a firm from Argentinia instead.
LOL @ people who claim they know that the hell happened. Nobody does. Truthers/skeptics don't know, and those reciting the official story - something its author even calls a "whitewash" - are equally stupid. We'll never know. Team Clueless!
-
WTC?
(http://i51.tinypic.com/21eujhh.jpg)
-
CIT's stuff on the Pentagon attack is pretty interesting. ;)
-
I think destroying the buildings in a grandiose manner was necessary.
bullshit.
Osama knew the planes wouldn't destroy the entire pentagon yet he still had one fly into the side of it and many people died.
He wanted 4 planes to crash into SYMBOLS of America to make his point. One of the missions failed and ended up in a field so he only had a 75% success rate.
It's the difference between a girl getting raped then murdered or just raped. Either way she still got fucked...
-
One of the missions failed and ended up in a field
Since you opened that box...
debris spread over 8 miles... US claims we didn't shoot it down. Lie?
-
No offense to the "officials" in this case regarding Flight 93, but I'll take the seismic records as fact. They differed by three full minutes.
-
Since you opened that box...
debris spread over 8 miles... US claims we didn't shoot it down. Lie?
Jwb will say the plane was brought down by the brave passangers just like reported... and when it crashed it blew up to a trillion pieces that's why you cant see any remaining parts of it on the field
Jwb... How was it family members were making phone calls on their cells phones while in the air ??? i had/have forgotten to turn my phone of at times on a plane and notice i NEVER have any reception until i land... how was this possible
-
No offense to the "officials" in this case regarding Flight 93, but I'll take the seismic records as fact. They differed by three full minutes.
but that would imply the govt lied about some parts of the 9/11 events.
they wouldn't do that.
I mean, we all know politicians are full of shite. We know the media lies 24/7. We know they're all con artists intent on sending us to war, taking our tax dollars, and manipulating us every chance they get.
But lying about 911? They just wouldn't do that. :D
-
I can somewhat understand the benefit of a massive conspiracy to bring down the twin towers,so what the fuck did anyone have to gain from a secret conspiracy to do a controlled demo of wtc7? The thing probably would have been demoed anyway considering the damage to it. Makes no sense at all, someone explain.
-
Many believe WTC7 was the "control center" for the days' events. Rudy had bombproof sectiosn of the building. Emergency Mgmt of NYC, I believe. IF IF IF there was a controlled demo, this was the building it would have been guided from.
Also, it was used to house Enron records for that trial. Coincidence!?
-
I can somewhat understand the benefit of a massive conspiracy to bring down the twin towers,so what the fuck did anyone have to gain from a secret conspiracy to do a controlled demo of wtc7? The thing probably would have been demoed anyway considering the damage to it. Makes no sense at all, someone explain.
its all about $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ trillions of dollars of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
(http://costsofwar.org/sites/default/files/imagecache/wysiwyg_imageupload_shadowbox_preset/wysiwyg_imageupload/3/iceberg_small.jpg)
(http://lh3.ggpht.com/-4p2A6KIc_2w/Te7TvOIgz1I/AAAAAAAAGts/cKa68bRwKU4/clip_image003%25255B3%25255D.jpg)
-
Jwb will say the plane was brought down by the brave passangers just like reported... and when it crashed it blew up to a trillion pieces that's why you cant see any remaining parts of it on the field
Jwb... How was it family members were making phone calls on their cells phones while in the air ??? i had/have forgotten to turn my phone of at times on a plane and notice i NEVER have any reception until i land... how was this possible
Do your proper research. Only two calls from any of the four planes were made on cell phones and both of those cut out after less than two minutes. 60 plus calls were made from the phones on the plane you swipe your credit card to use.
Cell phones towers in cities are designed for only a small range because of call volume. Cell towers in rural areas can have a range up to 8 miles or so.
-
Many believe WTC7 was the "control center" for the days' events. Rudy had bombproof sectiosn of the building. Emergency Mgmt of NYC, I believe. IF IF IF there was a controlled demo, this was the building it would have been guided from.
Also, it was used to house Enron records for that trial. Coincidence!?
Yeah they pulled the switch from a building right next door that might get hit by debris? It would have made more sense to detonate it from a chopper or even a boat just off the island they had a good view.
-
but that would imply the govt lied about some parts of the 9/11 events.
they wouldn't do that.
I mean, we all know politicians are full of shite. We know the media lies 24/7. We know they're all con artists intent on sending us to war, taking our tax dollars, and manipulating us every chance they get.
But lying about 911? They just wouldn't do that. :D
Every time I come upon another WTF moment while reviewing information about 9-11, where the only reasonable conclusion would be to accept that we've been deliberately misled, it actually makes my brain hurt.
Maybe that explains the behavior of all the tools out there. The people who automatically buy the official line as they automatically dismiss all questioners. They're just trying to keep their brains from hurting.
-
Every time I come upon another WTF moment while reviewing information about 9-11, where the only reasonable conclusion would be to accept that we've been deliberately misled, it actually makes my brain hurt.
Maybe that explains the behavior of all the tools out there. The people who automatically buy the official line as they automatically dismiss all questioners. They're just trying to keep their brains from hurting.
Some of us question everything and us our own logic. Seeing something on YouTube is different than reading peer reviewed journals about a subject.
-
Lol at people that gullible. Is it like that elsewhere in their lives? Their woman comes home from work smelling like 10 flavora of semen and drunk off her ass.. "honey, how was church?"
Lmao.., gullible.
-
Do your proper research. Only two calls from any of the four planes were made on cell phones and both of those cut out after less than two minutes. 60 plus calls were made from the phones on the plane you swipe your credit card to use.
Cell phones towers in cities are designed for only a small range because of call volume. Cell towers in rural areas can have a range up to 8 miles or so.
so your saying only 2 of these passanger cellphones had the magic touch.. i see... funny how 10 yr old technology is better then my iphone4 when it comes to reception while in the air ...
so yours saying all 4 of these planes had Phones in their seats? And the Terriorist were allowing all these people to talk freely on phones ??? Which planes and airlines have these Phones, i have only seen them in the first class seating and that's up front where i would imagine the box cutting maniacs were
-
WTC7 also housed the SEC, at a time when the SEC was still a fairly legitimate agency. Information connected to hundreds of live fraud investigations was lost forever.
Not saying that was the sole reason, but it would sure make for a great side effect.
-
Some of us question everything and us our own logic. Seeing something on YouTube is different than reading peer reviewed journals about a subject.
where were you on the day of sept 11 2001 ?
just curious because eye witness at the site fireman, workers,... have all said they heard bombs.
i wanna know how close you were to the action to believe you over them , where you in the crowed or inside the ring as the wrestling match took place
-
Some of us question everything and us our own logic. Seeing something on YouTube is different than reading peer reviewed journals about a subject.
Beside the fact that these events defied all conventional logic, enough to turn the greatest nation in history on its head within a span of hours, I'd like to know which articles in which "peer reviewed journals" has had the biggest impact on your reasoning?
-
lol when he says Pop mech...
-
anyone who believes it was an inside job should read spying blind by amy zegart and richard clarkes against all enemies.
x2
-
Beside the fact that these events defied all conventional logic, enough to turn the greatest nation in history on its head within a span of hours, I'd like to know which articles in which "peer reviewed journals" has had the biggest impact on your reasoning?
Z. P. Bazant and Y. Zhou,
"Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse?",
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics News, vol. 34, No. 8 (October, 2001).
Bazant, Z.P., & Zhou, Y.
"Addendum to 'Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? - Simple Analysis" (pdf)
Journal of Engineering Mechanics v. 128, no. 3, (2002): 369-370.
Brannigan, F.L.
"WTC: Lightweight Steel and High-Rise Buildings"
Fire Engineering v.155, no. 4, (2002): 145-150.
Clifton, Charles G.
Elaboration on Aspects of the Postulated Collapse of the World Trade Centre Twin Towers
HERA: Innovation in Metals. 2001. 13 December 2001.
"Construction and Collapse Factors"
Fire Engineering v.155, no. 10, (2002): 106-108.
Corbett, G.P.
"Learning and Applying the Lessons of the WTC Disaster"
Fire Engineering v.155, no. 10, (2002.): 133-135.
"Dissecting the Collapses"
Civil Engineering ASCE v. 72, no. 5, (2002): 36-46.
Eagar, T.W., & Musso, C.
"Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation"
JOM v. 53, no. 12, (2001): 8-12.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Therese McAllister, report editor.
World Trade Center Building Performance Study: Data Collection, Preliminary Observations, and Recommendations
Gabrielson, T.B., Poese, M.E., & Atchley, A.A.
"Acoustic and Vibration Background Noise in the Collapsed Structure of the World Trade Center"
The Journal of Acoustical Society of America v. 113, no. 1, (2003): 45-48.
"Collapse Lessons"
Fire Engineering v. 155, no. 10, (2002): 97-103
Marechaux, T.G.
"TMS Hot Topic Symposium Examines WTC Collapse and Building Engineering"
JOM, v. 54, no. 4, (2002): 13-17.
Monahan, B.
"World Trade Center Collapse-Civil Engineering Considerations"
Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction v. 7, no. 3, (2002): 134-135.
Newland, D.E., & Cebon, D.
"Could the World Trade Center Have Been Modified to Prevent Its Collapse?"
Journal of Engineering Mechanics v. 128, no. 7, (2002):795-800.
National Instititue of Stamdards and Technology: Congressional and Legislative Affairs
“Learning from 9/11: Understanding the Collapse of the World Trade Center”
Statement of Dr. Arden L. Bement, Jr., before Committee of Science House of Representatives, United States Congress on March 6, 2002.
Pinsker, Lisa, M.
"Applying Geology at the World Trade Center Site"
Geotimes v. 46, no. 11, (2001).
Post, N.M.
"No Code Changes Recommended in World Trade Center Report"
ENR v. 248, no. 14, (2002): 14.
Post, N.M.
"Study Absolves Twin Tower Trusses, Fireproofing"
ENR v. 249, no. 19, (2002): 12-14.
The University of Sydney, Department of Civil Engineering
World Trade Center - Some Engineering Aspects
A resource site.
"WTC Engineers Credit Design in Saving Thousands of Lives"
ENR v. 247, no. 16, (2001): 12.
-
did you really read all those? or just googled some random shite?
-
did you really read all those? or just googled some random shite?
x2 :D
-
did you really read all those? or just googled some random shite?
You read them then we can have an adult conversation.
-
You read them then we can have an adult conversation.
ok, will do. I'll be back by 2014.
-
ok, will do. I'll be back by 2014.
Journal articles are only 5-6 pages long and they have abstracts which summarize the findings. These can be read in one day.
240, do you believe what the scholars for 9/11 say such as Dr Jones?
-
did you really read all those? or just googled some random shite?
x3
if he believe every single aspect of 9/11 why waste his time , why not just read the 9/11 commision report and be done with it
-
When did I ever say the I wouldn't be surprised if the CIA didn't know what was about to happen? That would not shock me at all.
We have only been talking about the collapse of wtc1, wtc7.
-
240, do you believe what the scholars for 9/11 say such as Dr Jones?
Dr jones has analyzed materials from 9/11 scene which showed traces of thermite.
He's also delivered video evidence of thermite use, and quite a detailed explanation of how the molten pools under the towers 1,2,7 could only be result of explosions.
this is your chance to now diffuse all of this evidence with something unrelated that you dislike about him to try to deflect any discussion of thermite.
What's the point, brah? is the NFL preseason on tonight or what?
-
Dr jones has analyzed materials from 9/11 scene which showed traces of thermite.
He's also delivered video evidence of thermite use, and quite a detailed explanation of how the molten pools under the towers 1,2,7 could only be result of explosions.
this is your chance to now diffuse all of this evidence with something unrelated that you dislike about him to try to deflect any discussion of thermite.
What's the point, brah? is the NFL preseason on tonight or what?
Jones never had access to ground zero he has only ever commented on the findings of the EPA which found large amounts of sulfur which is indeed a byproduct of thermite. It is also a byproduct of burned plastic. How many plastic covered computers and office equipment were in the towers? A frickin lot.
-
Wrong, jones was given documented metals from towers from workers, employers and bustanders. Really.
-
So basically the planes were a decoy to divert our attentions from the bombs that went off.
-
Wrong, jones was given documented metals from towers from workers, employers and bustanders. Really.
He was sent dust from a house nearby that contained dust from the collapse and also dust already in the loft (they didn't sterilize the place that morning after all). A loft,mind you, that a sculptor who uses welding equipment happens to live and work in also.
All he has to do is give some of that dust to other scientists to analyze which he refuses to do.
As for he two papers in peer reviewed journals, people upset about those papers were offered a chance to refute them so long as they paid the $700-$3000 publishing fee Jones paid to get published.
-
Both of America's entrys in to the world wars were false flag operations, they also had plans that have subsequently been released to do the same with Cuba. Countless coups, terrorist funding and drugs running are also their favorite past times, zero doubt that 911 was false flag, just look at history.
-
::)
-
This was on the other night on the BBC over here in England.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0148yz5/The_Conspiracy_Files_9_11_Ten_Years_On/
-
Interesting part at 31.47 with Professor Niels Harrit talking about the red and grey chips,which he says were thermite.Officials say it was chips of paint.
-
::)
C'mon, bro. Lose the attitude. Conspiracy theories are the constant solace of the uneducated, and the dispossessed.
/hey. who's got a relative that knows all about area 51!? ::)
-
C'mon, bro. Lose the attitude. Conspiracy theories are the constant solace of the uneducated, and the dispossessed.
/hey. who's got a relative that knows all about area 51!? ::)
For an intelligent guy that's a pretty ignorant perspective to have.
Declassified documents emerge everyday, that would go some way toward making even the most ridiculous viewpoint have some validity.
-
Z. P. Bazant and Y. Zhou,
"Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse?",
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics News, vol. 34, No. 8 (October, 2001).
Bazant, Z.P., & Zhou, Y.
"Addendum to 'Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? - Simple Analysis" (pdf)
Journal of Engineering Mechanics v. 128, no. 3, (2002): 369-370.
Brannigan, F.L.
"WTC: Lightweight Steel and High-Rise Buildings"
Fire Engineering v.155, no. 4, (2002): 145-150.
Clifton, Charles G.
Elaboration on Aspects of the Postulated Collapse of the World Trade Centre Twin Towers
HERA: Innovation in Metals. 2001. 13 December 2001.
"Construction and Collapse Factors"
Fire Engineering v.155, no. 10, (2002): 106-108.
Corbett, G.P.
"Learning and Applying the Lessons of the WTC Disaster"
Fire Engineering v.155, no. 10, (2002.): 133-135.
"Dissecting the Collapses"
Civil Engineering ASCE v. 72, no. 5, (2002): 36-46.
Eagar, T.W., & Musso, C.
"Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation"
JOM v. 53, no. 12, (2001): 8-12.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Therese McAllister, report editor.
World Trade Center Building Performance Study: Data Collection, Preliminary Observations, and Recommendations
Gabrielson, T.B., Poese, M.E., & Atchley, A.A.
"Acoustic and Vibration Background Noise in the Collapsed Structure of the World Trade Center"
The Journal of Acoustical Society of America v. 113, no. 1, (2003): 45-48.
"Collapse Lessons"
Fire Engineering v. 155, no. 10, (2002): 97-103
Marechaux, T.G.
"TMS Hot Topic Symposium Examines WTC Collapse and Building Engineering"
JOM, v. 54, no. 4, (2002): 13-17.
Monahan, B.
"World Trade Center Collapse-Civil Engineering Considerations"
Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction v. 7, no. 3, (2002): 134-135.
Newland, D.E., & Cebon, D.
"Could the World Trade Center Have Been Modified to Prevent Its Collapse?"
Journal of Engineering Mechanics v. 128, no. 7, (2002):795-800.
National Instititue of Stamdards and Technology: Congressional and Legislative Affairs
“Learning from 9/11: Understanding the Collapse of the World Trade Center”
Statement of Dr. Arden L. Bement, Jr., before Committee of Science House of Representatives, United States Congress on March 6, 2002.
Pinsker, Lisa, M.
"Applying Geology at the World Trade Center Site"
Geotimes v. 46, no. 11, (2001).
Post, N.M.
"No Code Changes Recommended in World Trade Center Report"
ENR v. 248, no. 14, (2002): 14.
Post, N.M.
"Study Absolves Twin Tower Trusses, Fireproofing"
ENR v. 249, no. 19, (2002): 12-14.
The University of Sydney, Department of Civil Engineering
World Trade Center - Some Engineering Aspects
A resource site.
"WTC Engineers Credit Design in Saving Thousands of Lives"
ENR v. 247, no. 16, (2001): 12.
C'mon, bro. It took me 15 seconds to find several websites using this list.
When did I ever say the I wouldn't be surprised if the CIA didn't know what was about to happen? That would not shock me at all.
Now we're getting somewhere! What makes you say that? IF some figures in the CIA knew beforehand, why do you think they chose to allow the death and destruction? I'd be very interested to know what you think about this.
-
C'mon, bro. Lose the attitude. Conspiracy theories are the constant solace of the uneducated, and the dispossessed.
/hey. who's got a relative that knows all about area 51!? ::)
Honestly, Chimps, comparing area 51 with this particular subject just shows you haven't thought about it at all. And you're a lot better than that.
Sorry, bro.
-
Honestly, Chimps, comparing area 51 with this particular subject just shows you haven't thought about it
x2
-
Jack,
Simply because the track record of the CIA is terrible, including the treatment of US citizens.
In regards to the dust samples Jones found many types of Spherules but only mentioned 3. If there was thermite he would have found mainly the same type in high volume since the amount of thermite to bring down three buildings would have been enormous. Also, spherules can come from many many sources including plastics, fly ash, welding flume, grinding residue.
The ONLY way he can use this dust is to compare it to control samples from several high rise construction sites.
-
Jack,
Simply because the track record of the CIA is terrible, including the treatment of US citizens.
In regards to the dust samples Jones found many types of Spherules but only mentioned 3. If there was thermite he would have found mainly the same type in high volume since the amount of thermite to bring down three buildings would have been enormous. Also, spherules can come from many many sources including plastics, fly ash, welding flume, grinding residue.
The ONLY way he can use this dust is to compare it to control samples from several high rise construction sites.
The CIA did not receive a bad track record by accident. They achieved this via the very criminal type of behavior they and the government are accused of regarding 911. You cannot divorce the two. A bad track record does not happen because they were good guys. Then they would have a good track record - lol!
-
And the concrete in the towers was not reinforced but simply 100mm thick slabs poured for each floor.
The slabs have nothing to do with resisting the urge of the building to collapse under gravity. That is the job of the steel columns, concrete columns, concrete footings, and concrete shafts. Every skyscraper on the planet have massive amounts of concrete in them, even all steel structures. The footings are always concrete.
But the 100mm thick slabs most likely still had steel bars in them. And so do the buildings that burned in the examples I gave you. Most likely they had metal deck flooring with concrete pours. Sometimes the floors have prefabbed concrete floor planks. And of course they are supported by either steel beams or steel trusses.
No modern skyscraper consists exclusively of concrete columns, beams and flooring throughout or steel for that matter. Not even the Empire State Building. And certainly not the burning examples I gave. There is almost always a lot of steel and concrete combined.
Don't for a second think these buildings that burned and did not collapse were much different structurally from WTC 7.
-
anyone who believes it was an inside job should read spying blind by amy zegart and richard clarkes against all enemies.
-
anyone who believes it was an inside job should read spying blind by amy zegart and richard clarkes against all enemies.
(http://www.lowbird.com/data/images/2011/07/wordpress-awjeeznotthisshitagain.jpg)
-
Quad,
The thing can never be known is how badly the debris from wtc1 actually damaged wtc7.
The black guy interviewed who was stuck in the building said he got down to around floor six and the fire escape was missing beneath his feet so he had to go back up and across to the undamaged side of the building and use the fire escape there.
Wtc6 between wtc7 and wtc1 was smashed like a pancake by wtc1.
Don't forget wtc7 had a foundation smaller than it's footprint because of the subway station and power substation underneath it so it was supported by cross trusses on around floor 5. That is very different than a normal building.
We also know from pictures taken throughout the day that there were chunks of wtc7 collapsing off the sides and NYFD guys have said the building was losing its shape.
The big thing is, as someone mentioned, they would of had to cd wtc7 anyway after the fires went out. They still would have gotten the insurance money. The building in Madrid wasn't fixed it was destroyed because of the damage. The columns in wtc7 would have been warped from the fire alone.
The building didn't need to come down that day.
-
Quad,
The thing can never be known is how badly the debris from wtc1 actually damaged wtc7.
The black guy interviewed who was stuck in the building said he got down to around floor six and the fire escape was missing beneath his feet so he had to go back up and across to the undamaged side of the building and use the fire escape there.
Wtc6 between wtc7 and wtc1 was smashed like a pancake by wtc1.
Don't forget wtc7 had a foundation smaller than it's footprint because of the subway station and power substation underneath it so it was supported by cross trusses on around floor 5. That is very different than a normal building.
We also know from pictures taken throughout the day that there were chunks of wtc7 collapsing off the sides and NYFD guys have said the building was losing its shape.
The big thing is, as someone mentioned, they would of had to cd wtc7 anyway after the fires went out. They still would have gotten the insurance money. The building in Madrid wasn't fixed it was destroyed because of the damage. The columns in wtc7 would have been warped from the fire alone.
The building didn't need to come down that day.
The only problem is that no matter how badly it was damaged the building would not have collapsed free fall like it did with all the columns giving away simultaneously. That is impossible.
Now if a mountain the size of Everest fell on WTC 7 it would collapse at the speed at which the mountain is falling - gravity. But this collapse would happen immediately as the mountain came down on it. This would happen because the massive weight of the mountain would instantly overwhelm all the columns at the base. They were never designed to withstand such a massive load. And thus you would expect all the columns to fail simultaneously. But under it's own weight there is no chance in hell of this happening to all the columns. One or two yes, but not all of them. The columns were designed to support loads many times the dead weight of the building and live loads added on to it.
So you are saying WTC 1 & 2 fell on WTC 7 and damaged it. Fine, but then WTC 7 stood for hours. And suddenly it collapses demolition style as if a mountain came down on it?? It would not have stood for hours and then suddenly collapsed uniformly like it did. Many columns at the base would have remained and provided resistance. This building would have collapsed partially if the damage was that bad.
-
(http://www.lowbird.com/data/images/2011/07/wordpress-awjeeznotthisshitagain.jpg)
anyone who believes it was an inside job should read spying blind by amy zegart and richard clarkes against all enemies.
-
Simply because the track record of the CIA is terrible, including the treatment of US citizens.
So would you then put it past rogue members of the CIA to help cultivate such a plot as the hijackings? After all, if in fact they allowed it to happen with foreknowledge, it would suggest they wanted it to happen.
-
So would you then put it past rogue members of the CIA to help cultivate such a plot as the hijackings? After all, if in fact they allowed it to happen with foreknowledge, it would suggest they wanted it to happen.
Serious question.
Info may not have been acted upon properly in a self serving manner is all I wouldn't be surprised happened.
-
the cia and fbi had information that if shared with eachother could have prevented at least one of the planes.
but the two organizations have a very thick atmosphere of competitiveness between them and do not like each other nor cooperate with each other even though there were several attempts made throughout the 90's to get them to work together.
if you read those two books i listed you will know about the reason for intelligence failures and all about al qaeda and how they had been planning these attacks for a decade. the amy zegart book goes into detail about the problems that existed at the cia and fbi.. mainly a culture which didnt promote cooperation, incentives which promoted real time data instead of long term analysis, and a lack of focus on key issues.. the richard clarke book goe sinto detail about al qaeda's planning and lead up to 9/11..
if this were an inside job the people in charge of it must have mind control powers and started planning t decades in advance because the people who carried out the attacks planned them on their own, for their own reasons.. and even a few of them got caught in the process. for example a lap top was discovered in the phillipenes after two high level al qaeda operatives were arrested which contained plannes for hi-jacking airplanes and flying them ito buildings.. this was mid 90's..
theres countless other facts and details which strongly support the notion that the story we heard from the government is the true story..
i will admit the way the buildings fell sure does look like a demolition though.
-
Info may not have been acted upon properly in a self serving manner is all I wouldn't be surprised happened.
Meaning that individual figures in the CIA may have allowed simple laziness to stop them from acting properly upon intelligence, or...?
Trying to get at what you're saying here.
-
the cia and fbi had information that if shared with eachother could have prevented at least one of the planes.
but the two organizations have a very thick atmosphere of competitiveness between them and do not like each other nor cooperate with each other even though there were several attempts made throughout the 90's to get them to work together.
if you read those two books i listed you will know about the reason for intelligence failures and all about al qaeda and how they had been planning these attacks for a decade. the amy zegart book goes into detail about the problems that existed at the cia and fbi.. mainly a culture which didnt promote cooperation, incentives which promoted real time data instead of long term analysis, and a lack of focus on key issues.. the richard clarke book goe sinto detail about al qaeda's planning and lead up to 9/11..
if this were an inside job the people in charge of it must have mind control powers and started planning t decades in advance because the people who carried out the attacks planned them on their own, for their own reasons.. and even a few of them got caught in the process. for example a lap top was discovered in the phillipenes after two high level al qaeda operatives were arrested which contained plannes for hi-jacking airplanes and flying them ito buildings.. this was mid 90's..
theres countless other facts and details which strongly support the notion that the story we heard from the government is the true story..
i will admit the way the buildings fell sure does look like a demolition though.
I've read Clarke's book. I'll check out the other probably toward the end of this month.
-
Meaning that individual figures in the CIA may have allowed simple laziness to stop them from acting properly upon intelligence, or...?
Trying to get at what you're saying here.
letting something (eg. a hyjacking) take place because it might give you a greater mandate to do some things you wanna do.
-
letting something (eg. a hyjacking) take place because it might give you a greater mandate to do some things you wanna do.
Judging by that, it sounds like they wouldn't be above either helping to cultivate such a plot, cultivating the origin of the plot themselves, or even supplementing the results of such a plot in order to help create the desired effects from the plot.
Would you agree with that?
-
Judging by that, it sounds like they wouldn't be above either helping to cultivate such a plot, cultivating the origin of the plot themselves, or even supplementing the results of such a plot in order to help create the desired effects from the plot.
Would you agree with that?
Notice how I say "I wouldn't be surprised" if such and such happened. That doesn't mean I think something happened or I believe it happened.
I would be surprised if the CIA was ACTIVE in the manner you elude to though.
-
LIHOP "let it happen on purpose"
or
MIHOP "made it happen on purpose"
Doesn't matter - either way, it's obvious from the lack of investigation, military stand down, and before-event betting that some white people in ties knew what the 19 pricks were doing.
And when those white dudes in ties are legally bound to protect us, having sworn to do so and collecting a paycheck to do so... that's kinda a big deal.
-
LIHOP "let it happen on purpose"
or
MIHOP "made it happen on purpose"
Doesn't matter - either way, it's obvious from the lack of investigation, military stand down, and before-event betting that some white people in ties knew what the 19 pricks were doing.
And when those white dudes in ties are legally bound to protect us, having sworn to do so and collecting a paycheck to do so... that's kinda a big deal.
no one let it happen
-
(http://www.pacificfreepress.com/images/stories/new2/wtc%20falling.jpg)
http://www.pacificfreepress.com/news/1-/9603-911-the-big-magic-trick-ten-years-later.html (http://www.pacificfreepress.com/news/1-/9603-911-the-big-magic-trick-ten-years-later.html)
9/11: “The Big Magic Trick” Ten Years Later
President Barack Obama’s bizarre claim on May 2nd that U.S. commandos had “killed” the long-dead Osama bin Laden in Pakistan is just the latest – and one of the most preposterous – in a long series of official lies about the so-called “terrorist attacks” of September 11th, 2001.
As veteran U.S. intelligence analyst Dr. Steve Pieczenik wryly observed: “This was the first commando raid in history in which the commandos killed a guy who had already been dead for almost ten years.”
Sadly, however, the mindless cheering triggered by Obama’s announcement and all the related lies and fabrications that have poured out of Cass Sunstein’s disinformation factory in the White House demonstrates once again that if you tell big enough lies and repeat them often enough, they will usually be believed.
As we approach the tenth anniversary of 9/11, the U.S. authorities will undoubtedly tell us more new lies and repeat a lot of old ones as they desperately try to keep the lid on Pandora’s Box and counter the growing worldwide awareness that the so-called “terrorist attacks” of September 11th, 2001, were a fraud.
This article is dedicated to the memory of Hal Sisson, the distinguished lawyer, author and activist who was among the first to question “the official 9/11 fairy tale” and who inspired me and others to investigate the events of September 11th, 2001, to try to discover the truth about what really happened that day.
-
continued ...
In Germany, for example, a recent opinion poll by the prestigious Emnid Institute showed 89.5 per cent of Germans no longer believe the official story that the “attacks” were carried out by Osama bin Laden and 19 Arab “hijackers.” And more than 1,400 professional architects and engineers from all over the world have now signed a petition saying they believe it was physically impossible for the twin towers to have come down in the way the authorities claim.
Indeed, after ten years there is now overwhelming evidence that the “terrorist attacks” on the twin towers in New York City were actually orchestrated by a small cabal at the pinnacle of U.S. power to provide a pretext for waging two phony wars, pillaging the energy resources of the Middle East and Central Asia, drastically curtailing civil liberties and diverting hundreds of billions of dollars of public money into the coffers of oil, arms and security companies.
Let me first confess that at the time of 9/11 I was taken in by the official lies and deceptions along with most people around the world. The events that day were so shocking and spectacular that it seemed to me the story the authorities were telling us must surely be at least basically true. Indeed, for five years thereafter I continued to accept the official version of 9/11 without seriously questioning it since I didn’t have the time, or initially even the inclination, to undertake the huge task of personally examining all of the massive amount of evidence available on 9/11.
But in 2006, after prodding from some friends, I began to carry out an intensive study into the 9/11 issue, and, on the basis of my five years of investigations, I now believe it is as clear and certain as anything can ever be in historical research that the events of September 11th, 2001, were masterminded, not from some cave in Afghanistan by Osama bin Laden, but from the inner sanctum of power in Washington, D.C., by a small cabal headed by then Vice-President Dick Cheney.
Like many other incidents that have occurred in history over the centuries, the 9/11 “attacks” have turned out to be what is known as a “false-flag” operation – that is, a clandestine operation which the leaders of one country carry out in such a way that they deny responsibility for their actions and instead falsely accuse some of their foreign enemies of having perpetrated the incident, thereby providing a pretext to wage war against those enemies.
This has now become clear even to a number of retired U.S. military officers who have taken the time to study this issue and are brave enough to face the truth. For example, Lieutenant Colonel Guy Razer, who served for many years as a fighter-pilot and commanding officer in the U.S. Air Force, says: “After four years of research, I am 100 per cent convinced the 9/11 attacks were planned, organized and committed by treasonous perpetrators at the highest levels of our government.”
Veteran U.S. Air Force fighter-pilot Jeff Dahlstrom says: “This was definitely a false-flag operation. It was an attack on America by Americans – and was used to justify the Patriot Act, which took away half of the Bill of Rights.” Another retired U.S. Air Force Lieutenant Colonel, Robert Bowman, who served as Director of the “Star Wars” Defense Program under Presidents Ford and Carter, calls the official report of the 9/11 commission “a sham and a whitewash” and thinks the “prime suspect” for mastermind of 9/11 is Dick Cheney.
Retired U.S. Air Force Captain Russ Wittenberg, who was a fighter-pilot in Vietnam and flew military and commercial planes for more than 40 years, is even more blunt in dismissing the official version of 9/11: “The story our government has told us about 9/11 is total bullshit, plain and simple.”
Those views are shared by American theologian Dr. David Ray Griffin, who has long been considered one of America’s foremost theological scholars but who has become better known in recent years as perhaps the world’s leading independent expert on 9/11. Griffin, who has written nine meticulously documented books about 9/11, says “The truth about 9/11 is so shocking and has such horrifying implications that I can understand why so many people can’t bring themselves to face the reality – just as I couldn’t at first. But the evidence is indisputable. The truth is that 9/11 was an inside job, orchestrated by forces within our own government. It was a false-flag “attack,” with evidence planted to make it appear to have been planned and carried out by Arab Muslims… The Bush-Cheney administration had already decided, months before 9/11, to attack Afghanistan and Iraq. In planning and carrying out the 9/11 “attacks,” the perpetrators planted evidence to implicate Middle Eastern Muslims – evidence which, when examined, can easily be seen to have been fabricated… it is especially shocking that these “attacks” were orchestrated to pave the way for launching unprovoked wars on two countries that provided no threat – imminent or long-term – to the people of the United States.”
Although it took quite a long time for me and some others to understand what really happened on 9/11, one man realized right away that the story the authorities were telling us that day wasn’t true. He was William Rodriguez, who was on duty on 9/11 as chief custodian in the WTC North Tower when American Airlines Flight 11 crashed into the building at 8:46 a.m.
A few seconds before the plane hit the tower, Rodriguez says he and 14 others who were with him heard and felt a large explosion below them in the sub-basement of the building, and they later heard a series of smaller explosions along the walls far below the level where the plane struck. Many others also heard such explosions in all three of the buildings that collapsed. For example, one of Rodriguez’s co-workers in the North Tower, Teresa Veliz, says: “There were explosions going off everywhere. I was convinced there were bombs planted all over the place and someone was sitting at a control panel pushing detonator buttons.”
It should also be noted that 118 of the firefighters who fought the blazes that broke out in the three WTC buildings testified they heard what sounded to them like the kind of explosions that occur during controlled demolitions. For example, firefighter John Schroder, who arrived in the lobby of the North Tower shortly after the first plane struck, said: “Everything in the lobby was exploded, blown out. It wasn’t from the jet fuel – no way! It looked like a bomb went off in the lobby. There was no fire – it just looked like a bomb went off.”
Firefighter Louie Cacchioli said: “In the lobby we saw elevator doors completely blown out and people being hit with debris – we all thought there were bombs set in the building.” Firefighter Dennis Tardio said he heard a series of explosions: “It was as if they had detonators and they planned to take out a building – boom, boom, boom.” Firefighter Kenneth Rogers said: “There were explosions floor after floor after floor… I figured it was a bomb because it looked like a synchronized deliberate kind of thing.” Firefighter Richard Banaciski, who was one of the first responders in the South Tower, said: “There were explosions like on television when they blow up buildings. These explosions seemed to be going all the way around the building like a belt.”
Outspoken firefighter Paul Isaac Jr. says most of the firemen and policemen who were on duty that day know the official story about 9/11 is a lie but they are afraid to say so publicly for fear of reprisals against themselves and their families. “There is no question,” Isaac says, “that explosives were used in the buildings. I know 9/11 was an inside job. The police know it and the firefighters know it too.”
Custodian William Rodriguez says he was shocked when he heard the authorities claim that fire and the impact of the planes had caused the buildings to collapse since it had been obvious to practically everyone in the buildings that they had actually been brought down by controlled demolition. On the morning of 9/11 Rodriguez bravely fought through billows of smoke and dust to lead hundreds of people out of the doomed North Tower – and for the past decade, perhaps even more bravely, he has fought through billows of official lies and deceptions, as well as constant threats and harassment, to insist that the authorities tell the truth about what happened on 9/11.
Ironically, Rodriguez had once worked as a magician’s assistant, so he was no stranger to the world of trickery and deception – and he drew on that experience to summarize what happened on 9/11. “It’s easy,” Rodriguez says, “to do misdirection – to make people look in one direction while you do the magic with the other hand. That’s the real story of 9/11. It was just a big magic trick. It was an illusion.”
After studying the 9/11 issue for five years, I fully agree with Rodriguez. In fact, we could easily fill every page of every edition of Victoria Street Newz for the next year describing all of the “magic tricks” (i.e. the lies and deceptions) that the U.S. authorities used in planning, carrying out and covering up the “attacks” of 9/11. While that obviously won’t be possible, we will take a look at a dozen of the most significant of these lies and deceptions: four in this issue and four more in each of the October and November editions.
• The alleged ring-leader of the 9/11 “terrorists,” Mohamed Atta, wasn’t really an ascetic, fanatically devoted follower of Osama bin Laden as the authorities claimed – he was actually a very worldly, wild-living young fellow who had close ties, not to al Qaeda, but to the CIA-backed Pakistani intelligence agency, the ISI.
This supposedly devout, Koran-obsessed warrior of Allah actually spent much of his time drinking alcohol, dabbling in cocaine and other drugs, eating pork and other foods shunned by fundamentalist Muslims and watching pornographic videos. He sometimes lived with prostitutes and frequently visited Las Vegas where he gambled, cavorted with lap dancers and often brought call girls to his room. So much for the official claim that Atta “hated America’s freedoms and was determined to strike a blow against U.S. decadence”!
For several months prior to 9/11, Atta was being closely monitored – and apparently also manipulated – by U.S. intelligence agents. He was also receiving money, not from al Qaeda, but from the U.S.-backed Pakistani intelligence agency, the ISI.
Indeed, even the FBI now acknowledges that a payment of $100,000 was sent from the ISI to Atta’s Florida bank account on the personal orders of the head of the ISI, General Mahoud Ahmed, shortly before 9/11.
And, by the strangest of “coincidences,” General Ahmed just happened to be in Washington, D.C., on September 11th, 2001, conferring with then CIA Director George Tenet and other senior U.S. intelligence officials.
It is now also clear that the “incriminating evidence” against Atta “found” at Logan Airport in Boston was planted, rather clumsily, by the authorities. Their story about how and where this “evidence” turned up changed many times in the days following 9/11, as David Ray Griffin explains in detail in his book Cognitive Infiltration.
-
continued ...
The authorities moved with dazzling speed to produce the names and photos of the 19 alleged hijackers. We were immediately told, in effect, that these were the men who had committed the crime, and we should all blindly believe that claim and not ask any embarrassing questions.
In fact, however, no remains or other physical evidence of the “hijackers” was ever found at the crash sites – except for five identification documents and one red bandana which, we are told, somehow miraculously survived three of the plane crashes and were found in remarkably good condition.
According to the official story, the passport of alleged hijacker Satam al Suqami magically survived the fiery crash of Flight 11 into the North Tower and was found in the rubble in near-perfect condition. And in Pennsylvania at the site where Flight 93 was said to have spiralled into the ground, there was, astonishingly, no wreckage of the plane or bodies of any of the people on board – just the “magic passport” of alleged hijacker Ziad Jarrah and a red bandana supposedly belonging to one of the “hijackers.”
An even greater “miracle” – or actually three “miracles” – occurred in Washington, D.C., where Flight 77 allegedly struck the Pentagon. Again there was no plane wreckage or bodies of any of those on board – the only items that somehow magically survived were three identification cards belonging to alleged hijackers Majed Moqed, Nawaf al Hamzi and Salem al Hamzi.
Moreover, in the days following 9/11, several of the “suicide hijackers” turned up very much alive. For example, it turned out that “hijacker” Abdul Aziz al Omari had been working at his office at Saudi Telecom in Riyadh on 9/11. Another “hijacker,” a young pilot for Saudi Airlines named Saeed al Ghamdi, was in Tunisia attending a flight training course when some friends came rushing up to him a couple of days after 9/11 with a newspaper showing his picture on the front page and describing him as “one of the 9/11 suicide pilots.”
Alleged hijacker Salem al Hamzi was found working at a petrochemical plant in Yanbou, Saudi Arabia. And another “hijacker,” Waleed al Shehri, who was working as a pilot in Morocco at the time of 9/11, saw his picture in a Casablanca newspaper and notified the authorities that he was still alive.
Indeed, nine days after 9/11, Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal met at the White House with President George Bush and after that meeting Al-Faisal told reporters: “It has been proved that at least five of the men on the FBI list had nothing to do with what happened on 9/11.”
All of the still-alive “hijackers” offered to appear before the official 9/11 commission and to submit to any tests or investigations required to prove their identity. But the commission and other U.S. officials simply ignored them, and to this day the American authorities continue to stonewall and use the clearly phony 19-photo collage of the “hijackers.”
It should also be noted that none of the names of the 19 alleged “hijackers” appeared on the original passenger lists for the four “hijacked” flights, which were released by American Airlines and United Airlines immediately after 9/11, even though all of them had supposedly purchased tickets in advance. It was only after this rather embarrassing discrepancy was reported on CNN and some other news outlets that the authorities issued revised versions of the passenger lists on which the names of all the “hijackers” now magically appeared.
Moreover, if hijackers had really broken into the cockpits of the planes on 9/11, surely the pilots would have followed standard procedure and “squawked” the universal hijack code (7500) on their transponders, an act that takes only a couple of seconds. But, amazingly, that was not done by even one of the eight pilots on the four “hijacked” planes.
In their “explanation” for why the planes weren’t intercepted, the authorities tried to muddify the fuzzification, as Allan Fotheringham used to say, by producing three mutually contradictory versions of the timelines for the flights of the “hijacked” planes. This is eerily reminiscent of what happened after President John Kennedy was assassinated on November 22nd, 1963, when the authorities produced three contradictory versions of the Dallas Police radio log for that day. It’s d»já fraud all over again, so to speak!
In any case, if we cut through all the flim-flam and disinformation, there is clear evidence that the U.S. authorities learned of the “hijackings” of: Flight 11 at least 31 minutes before it struck the North Tower, Flight 175 at least 20 minutes before it hit the South Tower, Flight 77 at least 38 minutes before it allegedly hit the Pentagon, and Flight 93 at least 31 minutes before it crashed in Pennsylvania.
Under standard U.S. air defense procedure, any planes veering off course without explanation are routinely intercepted within about 10 minutes. On 9/11 there was clearly ample time for the 14 jet-fighters available at four bases in the Northeast Air Defense Sector to have intercepted all of the “hijacked” planes.
It is especially mind-boggling that no fighter-jets were deployed from Andrews Air Force Base in Washington, the main military base protecting the U.S. capital, until 10:42 a.m. – more than an hour after the Pentagon was struck. As former British cabinet minister Michael Meacher says: “There is simply no rational way to explain why planes weren’t deployed immediately from Andrews, which is just 11 miles from the Pentagon and which had always said it maintained scramble-ready fighter-jets around the clock.”
So why didn’t the air force follow normal procedure on 9/11 and intercept the “hijacked” planes? Quite simply because it had been ordered not to do so. According to Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, who was in the basement bunker of the White House where Dick Cheney was directing operations that morning, an alarmed-looking young officer came into the room three times reporting on the movements of the “hijacked” Flight 77. The third time the young man asked Cheney, “Do the orders still stand?” and Cheney reportedly snapped, “Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?” Not surprisingly, there is no mention of Mineta’s stunning testimony in the official 9/11 report.
But veteran CIA operative Ray McGovern says he and other intelligence experts who have studied this issue believe that the Mineta testimony, along with other factors, clearly indicates Cheney had issued a stand-down order.
There were also a number of reports across the U.S. on 9/11 that a stand-down order had been given. For example, at Los Angeles International Airport, security expert Charles Lewis said he and others monitoring FAA and NORAD communications were shocked when they learned that “a stand-down order had come from the highest level of the White House.” Lewis says that in a private conversation he had in 2006 with La Ponda Fitchpatrick, head of security operations at the Los Angeles airport on 9/11, “she told me LAX security was well aware that 9/11 was an inside job.”
-
continued ...
There is simply no way the 656 huge solid-steel beams supporting the three buildings (287 in each of the twin towers and 82 in Building 7) could have been melted and cut by fires fed by jet fuel, which burns at a maximum temperature of 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit. Steel requires a temperature of at least 2,800 degrees Fahrenheit to even begin melting, and the pools of molten steel that flowed like lava in the debris of the fallen buildings for weeks after 9/11 couldn’t have been produced without a temperature of at least 3,500 degrees Fahrenheit.
In addition, some melted molybdenum was found in the rubble at Ground Zero – and that substance requires a temperature of at least 4,753 degrees Fahrenheit to melt. And there were also pieces of steel that appeared to have been partly evaporated – a process that would have required a temperature of at least 5,182 degrees Fahrenheit. Temperatures of this kind couldn’t possibly have been generated by jet fuel.
Moreover, all three of the buildings collapsed in just a few seconds at near free-fall speed – and this couldn’t have happened without the use of pre-positioned cutter charge explosives, according to physicist Dr. Steven E. Jones, who has carried out by far the most detailed independent study of the WTC collapses, using elaborate scale-models of the buildings. After several years of tests and analysis, Jones said: “There is only one honest conclusion that can be made: the buildings couldn’t have collapsed the way the authorities claimed without violating several of the basic laws of physics.” Jones had been a long-time physics professor at Brigham Young University in Utah but was fired when he refused to either suppress his 9/11 research or lie about it.
Internationally renowned architect and New York City planner David A. Johnson, who has also carefully studied the WTC collapses, says: “I am very familiar with these buildings and their design, and I know they couldn’t possibly have come down the way they did without using explosives and severing the core columns at the base.”
Another prominent expert on the WTC collapses, San Francisco architect Richard Gage, studied all of the fires that have broken out in steel-framed high-rise buildings around the world and concluded: “In more than 100 steel framed high-rise fires which have occurred before and after 9/11 (most of them very hot, very large and very long-lasting), not one of these buildings has collapsed, ever.”
Gage believes it was physically impossible for the WTC buildings to have come down the way they did without the use of high-powered explosives and he has circulated a petition calling for a new, honest investigation into why the structures collapsed. As we noted earlier, that petition has now been signed by more than 1,400 professional engineers and architects from all over the world.
It should also be noted that several huge pieces of steel from the towers – some weighing as much as 50 tons – were propelled laterally more than 500 feet, which couldn’t possibly have happened in a gravity-driven collapse. Indeed, Dwain Deets, a former director of research engineering at NASA, says: “The fact that these massive chunks of steel were hurled horizontally for such distances leaves no doubt in my mind that explosives were involved.”
When the buildings collapsed, there were also huge pyroclastic clouds of pulverized concrete, which drifted across much of Lower Manhattan – the type of clouds often produced by controlled demolitions, but not by fires or gravity-driven building collapses.
Moreover, the 9/11 commission blatantly lied when it said there was a hollow shaft at the core of each of the twin towers. Actually there were 47 gigantic solid-steel girders at the core of each tower, and after the towers fell on 9/11 most of these girders were found in quite neatly cut 30-foot-long pieces – just the right size to be loaded on to flatbed trucks and quickly whisked away from the site (more than 40 truckloads were removed in the first 24 hours). Such precision “slicing” of steel is quite common in carefully planned demolitions but never occurs in random hydrocarbon fires.
One man who became fascinated by all the controversy about the WTC building collapses was the respected Danish scientist Dr. Niels Harrit, who taught chemistry at the University of Copenhagen for 34 years and has published more than 60 articles in major scientific journals.
Harrit and eight colleagues decided to get to the bottom of the matter by carrying out an intensive independent study. As part of their investigations, these scientists examined samples of dust from the WTC rubble and were astonished to find millions of microscopic chips of nanothermite – an ultra-high-tech incendiary explosive which is capable of slicing through steel beams.
At the end of their two-year study, Harrit concluded: “The evidence couldn’t be more clear. Anyone with two eyes and a brain can see that all three of the WTC buildings were brought down by controlled demolition involving extraordinarily high temperatures and enormous explosive force – not by random hydrocarbon fires and the relatively minor impact of the planes.”
As Harrit notes, even though the images of the jetliners crashing into the towers were so dramatic, the impact of the planes would actually have caused only relatively minor structural damage. Indeed, the towers had been specifically designed to withstand multiple impacts from a four-engine jetliner travelling at up to 600 miles per hour. On 9/11 the north tower was hit by a two-engine jet travelling at 440 miles per hour and the south tower by a two-engine jet travelling at 540 miles per hour.
Hyman Brown, the construction manager at the time the twin towers were built, said: “The buildings were over-designed to withstand almost anything, including hurricanes, bombings and an airplane hitting them.”
Sadly, the WTC’s construction manager at the time of 9/11, Frank DeMartini, perished in the “attack” on the north tower. But, in what turned out to be a remarkably prescient interview in January, 2001, he said: “I believe the towers could probably sustain multiple impacts from jetliners because their structure is like the mosquito netting on a screen door – the jet plane would be just like a pencil puncturing that screen netting.”
And one last point about the buildings: some might wonder how agents of the Cheney-led cabal could have gained access to the WTC buildings to plant the cutter-charge explosives. Actually, however, that wasn’t much of a problem since the company in charge of security at the WTC complex, Securacom, was headed by none other than George W. Bush’s brother Marvin and cousin Wirt Walker III.
-
if you believe the official story, you haven't taken the time to research it with an objective eye.
I was the biggest repub a-hole in the room. took months of studying 911 to shake my head and accept it.
-
A 2 year old could recognize no plane crashed in Shanksville as reported that day. Your government is LYING to you. No titanium engines, no bodies and not a drop of blood. The coroner who is quoted after 20 minutes on site as saying there was no point of him being there to examine the “plane crash”.
-
(http://www.pacificfreepress.com/images/stories/new2/wtc%20falling.jpg)
http://www.pacificfreepress.com/news/1-/9603-911-the-big-magic-trick-ten-years-later.html (http://www.pacificfreepress.com/news/1-/9603-911-the-big-magic-trick-ten-years-later.html)
9/11: “The Big Magic Trick” Ten Years Later
President Barack Obama’s bizarre claim on May 2nd that U.S. commandos had “killed” the long-dead Osama bin Laden in Pakistan is just the latest – and one of the most preposterous – in a long series of official lies about the so-called “terrorist attacks” of September 11th, 2001.
As veteran U.S. intelligence analyst Dr. Steve Pieczenik wryly observed: “This was the first commando raid in history in which the commandos killed a guy who had already been dead for almost ten years.”
Sadly, however, the mindless cheering triggered by Obama’s announcement and all the related lies and fabrications that have poured out of Cass Sunstein’s disinformation factory in the White House demonstrates once again that if you tell big enough lies and repeat them often enough, they will usually be believed.
As we approach the tenth anniversary of 9/11, the U.S. authorities will undoubtedly tell us more new lies and repeat a lot of old ones as they desperately try to keep the lid on Pandora’s Box and counter the growing worldwide awareness that the so-called “terrorist attacks” of September 11th, 2001, were a fraud.
This article is dedicated to the memory of Hal Sisson, the distinguished lawyer, author and activist who was among the first to question “the official 9/11 fairy tale” and who inspired me and others to investigate the events of September 11th, 2001, to try to discover the truth about what really happened that day.
Multiple islamic militant org's confirmed bin laden died in that raid. Al qaeda and others.
Whats there to discuss?
-
Notice how I say "I wouldn't be surprised" if such and such happened. That doesn't mean I think something happened or I believe it happened.
Keep believing, bro. It'll save your brain from hurting.
-
I won't let myself pretend to know what happened here. But something very wrong did happen. The fact that certain members of the intelligence agencies HAD TO KNOW what was developing, combined with the resulting sweeps in the losses of our rights, combined with an incredible shifting of wealth, makes me look at the situation MUCH more closely.
And when I look at the situation more closely, adding up more gaddamned loose ends than a Barcelona Gay Pride Parade, it tells me something very wrong has happened here.
My "brain hurting" theory stands with me at this point. I cannot see how any person with mature reasoning has accepted the results of that day otherwise.
-
I won't let myself pretend to know what happened here. But something very wrong did happen. The fact that certain members of the intelligence agencies HAD TO KNOW what was developing, combined with the resulting sweeps in the losses of our rights, combined with an incredible shifting of wealth, makes me look at the situation MUCH more closely.
And when I look at the situation more closely, adding up more gaddamned loose ends than a Barcelona Gay Pride Parade, it tells me something very wrong has happened here.
My "brain hurting" theory stands with me at this point. I cannot see how any person with mature reasoning has accepted the results of that day otherwise.
the main reason you think it was an inside job is because of the way in which the towers fell, right? you dont think they could have possibly been brought down by a plane ?
-
the main reason you think it was an inside job is because of the way in which the towers fell, right? you dont think they could have possibly been brought down by a plane ?
As for the collapses, I just don't have the right background to form an opinion.
-
As for the collapses, I just don't have the right background to form an opinion.
if i thought there was any truth to the "inside job" theory it would be because of the manner in which the buildings fell and the apparent explosions going off throughout the buildings. although i think its possible these could be explained, im not sure i see any reason outside of that to believ it was an inside job.
-
if i thought there was any truth to the "inside job" theory it would be because of the manner in which the buildings fell and the apparent explosions going off throughout the buildings. although i think its possible these could be explained, im not sure i see any reason outside of that to believ it was an inside job.
The best educated guess, because that is all anybody can do, is from the NIST. They spent the longest and had the right people on the job. They have solved some of the hardest plane crashes you could imagine they are true scientists.
People who say everyone who works there are part of the conspiracy are crazy.
Btw, the architects and engineers for 9/11 are made up of architects and engineers but their leader has never designed a building above 3 stories high and some of their engineers work with sewers and solar power. They are just Internet cowboys like us.
-
1: America spends more money on its deffence than any other nation on earth. If you think a dozen cavemen can go through it so easily, think again.
2: An airliner is not flown in a 'aim and point the nose where you want to go' fashion, like a small Cessna is. Visibility is very poor and you can't see downwards. You fly it by instruments, coordinates AND BY RADIO CONTACT.
-
if i thought there was any truth to the "inside job" theory it would be because of the manner in which the buildings fell and the apparent explosions going off throughout the buildings. although i think its possible these could be explained, im not sure i see any reason outside of that to believ it was an inside job.
For me, the simple fact that these hijackers were all but handed over personally to people who are bound to protect us, tells so much. It tells of intent, and it creates a certain path of plausibility and likelihood when you consider the events of that day and what's happened in the ten years of aftermath.
-
Didn't they find one of the hijackers passport on the ground after 911? I can see how a piece of paper can be undamaged after such a fire. ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
-
Good thread
-
Didn't they find one of the hijackers passport on the ground after 911? I can see how a piece of paper can be undamaged after such a fire. ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
Makes perfect sense if you watch the planes hit the towers.
The first plane hits flush in the middle of the building but a nanosecond later there is debris that flys out the left side of the building which is likely the result of the cockpit bouncing off the concrete core of the tower and back out, in pieces obviously, the side of the building. The towers had open floor plans there were no columns between the core and the outer shell just office furniture and people.
The second plane hit the building towards the side and goes through and some of it, in pieces again, flys out the side adjacent.
The passport itself was likely in the guys pocket and may have even been inside a pouch that many countries provide their citizens to protect their passports from damage. It may even have been inside his travel documents since remember there were paper tickets back then that were often held in cardboard sleeves.
-
Btw, the passport was not found by the FBI as has been reported it was found by a new yorker who handed it to a cop on the street.
-
I have a hard time believing that we staged 9/11 ourselves, only to justify us going to war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Most Americans pre 9/11 hated those guys already, and wouldn't have batted an eye-lash if we started an anti-terrorism war without 9/11 even happening.
-
Btw, the passport was not found by the FBI as has been reported it was found by a new yorker who handed it to a cop on the street.
Doesn't matter who found it and like you said it was found by itself not in a pouch. So apparently this guys passport was in his pocket inside a wallet or wherever and this guy was sitting inside the plan obviously and the plane blew apart with a massive force and there was this huge fireball, but the passport just magically blew out of this wallet beyond the fireball and floated like a butterfly on the pavement below. Yep I can see that.
-
Can anyone refute this, from quadzilla's post above:
So why didn’t the air force follow normal procedure on 9/11 and intercept the “hijacked” planes? Quite simply because it had been ordered not to do so. According to Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, who was in the basement bunker of the White House where Dick Cheney was directing operations that morning, an alarmed-looking young officer came into the room three times reporting on the movements of the “hijacked” Flight 77. The third time the young man asked Cheney, “Do the orders still stand?” and Cheney reportedly snapped, “Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?”
-
Doesn't matter who found it and like you said it was found by itself not in a pouch. So apparently this guys passport was in his pocket inside a wallet or wherever and this guy was sitting inside the plan obviously and the plane blew apart with a massive force and there was this huge fireball, but the passport just magically blew out of this wallet beyond the fireball and floated like a butterfly on the pavement below. Yep I can see that.
x2. The passport(s) are one of the more ridiculous stories of the day.
-
The passport isn't needed to tie the guys to the planes you morons.
They used their real names to buy tickets and there is security footage of them at the airports boarding the planes.
The passport was found before either building collapsed as was a seat cushion that flew out the side of the building too.
Btw, remember when the space shuttle blew up on reentry in 2003? They found a canister containing Worms that were being used for an experiment on the shuttle. They opened it up and the worms were still alive.
The only way the passport being found on the sidewalk would seem fishy is if you believe planes never hit the tower or they used a drone plane to hit the towers. What do you believe?
-
Keep believing, bro. It'll save your brain from hurting.
there it is. over time, people look into it and accept that something smells about that day -
or they keep believe what they wanna believe.
it's FCKING scary to think the govt we elect and pay to protect us would allow/create some events like this. Sure, in the "bigger scheme", letting a 911 happen justifies our invading, setting up bases which will help with oil & defense for the next 500 years in that region. So yes, 3000 lives in tradeoff for keeping dollar stable or keeping a line of bases against china and other powers in the region, is a very smart thing to do.
Evil in the moral sense, but perfectly smart in the utilitarian sense. Any good general in the world would send 10 men to die if it meant winning an entire war, right? Maybe our leaders just decided 3000 on 9/11 and 4500 in afghanistan - less than 10,000 lives - was well worth establishing 80 military bases in that region (just as the saudis told us to get those bases out of their country).
10k lives for 500 years of military bases anywhere we want in afghanistan and Iraq? Sheeeit, you bet your ass any leader would take that deal.
-
Most people will use 3 lines when denying 911 stinks.
1) They wouldn't do that. They would. Look up Operation northwoods. Our govt approved it in the 1960s, it's declassified now. We almost blew up our own planes and blamed Cuba. JFK was the last man stopping it after congress & JC gave it the green light. If you need any more convincing - admit the fact that we all agree the govt lies about tons of shit every day, the media is full of crap and tells a nice narrative - but we suddenly think they all got honest on Sept 11th?
2) The govt is too incompetent. The smartest thing the govt ever did was convince the world he didn't exist. We have weapons that can blow up an anthill in Iraq from a computer screen in Tampa. We have weapons that can neutralize entire cities in seconds. You don't think we can bring down a building?
3) Somebody would say something. Money and guns fixes this. $2.3 trillion goes missing on 9/10/2001. That buys a lot of silence. And 3000 got killed the next day. if you talk about it, I bet your ass is next. And the fact the media won't talk about it either.
Let's face it... 911 may have been a case of "protect long term interests with a little short term pain". All the victims' families got $3.1 million each. It sucks, but it's how the world works. Napolean and leaders 10,000 years before would regularly send men to their death for the greater good, and slaughter innocents for the greater good. It's how the world works. If you don't like it, build a spaceship and start your own planet where people are nice to each other :)
-
Most people will use 3 lines when denying 911 stinks.
1) They wouldn't do that. They would. Look up Operation northwoods. Our govt approved it in the 1960s, it's declassified now. We almost blew up our own planes and blamed Cuba. JFK was the last man stopping it after congress & JC gave it the green light. If you need any more convincing - admit the fact that we all agree the govt lies about tons of shit every day, the media is full of crap and tells a nice narrative - but we suddenly think they all got honest on Sept 11th?
2) The govt is too incompetent. The smartest thing the govt ever did was convince the world he didn't exist. We have weapons that can blow up an anthill in Iraq from a computer screen in Tampa. We have weapons that can neutralize entire cities in seconds. You don't think we can bring down a building?
3) Somebody would say something. Money and guns fixes this. $2.3 trillion goes missing on 9/10/2001. That buys a lot of silence. And 3000 got killed the next day. if you talk about it, I bet your ass is next. And the fact the media won't talk about it either.
Let's face it... 911 may have been a case of "protect long term interests with a little short term pain". All the victims' families got $3.1 million each. It sucks, but it's how the world works. Napolean and leaders 10,000 years before would regularly send men to their death for the greater good, and slaughter innocents for the greater good. It's how the world works. If you don't like it, build a spaceship and start your own planet where people are nice to each other :)
Yes it was a brilliant operation and a couple of yahoos on the internet uncovered it all ::) give me a break
-
Yes it was a
LOL!
a couples of jerkoffs on the web were the first to put together a movie that caught fire. But french authors wrote "the big lie" first. And that same week, the USA introduced "freedom fries" and suddenly discovered a few slides of the pentagon attacks.
it's an information war. They knew french were trying to undermine our war efforts by pointing out the major holes in the pentagon attack. They tried to pre-empt that by painting the french as unpatriotic puzzies, and so people would say "that book is crazy, I just saw the plane slides yesterday on MSNBC..."
History is full of attacks that were allowed to happen for the greater good. thousands of people with phds and experience in the area of structural collapse have come fwd with questions about WTC7. They're not all internet dbags.
-
Could 1,500 Architects and Engineers Be Wrong?
Did you know that over 1,500 professional architects and engineers have come together to call for a independent, unbiased investigation of the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC 7) on 9/11? There are many important questions which the official government report by NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) failed to answer on the collapse of this 47-story skyscraper at 5:20 PM on September 11, 2001. Can 1,500 architects and engineers all be wrong?
These concerned professionals have created an eye-opening website filled with reliable information which examines the WTC 7 collapse. They conclude beyond any reasonable doubt that it must have been a controlled demolition. They have also found many problems with official story on the collapse of the main two World Trade Center towers. Click here for this information-packed website.
http://www.ae911truth.org /
-
And here are 14 conspiracy theories that have been proven to be true... this year alone.
http://beforeitsnews.com/story/1001/856/14_Conspiracy_Theories_That_The_Media_Now_Admits_Are_Conspiracy_Facts.html
-
240 your doing yourself and your cause an injustice with all your posts, you dont sound very smart, you sound eager about the idea of a conspiracy and the fact that you talk about it like its fact shows how unreasonable you are. the way the buildings fell is very suspicious but theres tons and tons of evidence to prove the official story. prodding this issue and making people aware is one thing, going about it the way you are just turns people off because you dont sound like someone who is objective.
-
LOL!
a couples of jerkoffs on the web were the first to put together a movie that caught fire. But french authors wrote "the big lie" first. And that same week, the USA introduced "freedom fries" and suddenly discovered a few slides of the pentagon attacks.
it's an information war. They knew french were trying to undermine our war efforts by pointing out the major holes in the pentagon attack. They tried to pre-empt that by painting the french as unpatriotic puzzies, and so people would say "that book is crazy, I just saw the plane slides yesterday on MSNBC..."
History is full of attacks that were allowed to happen for the greater good. thousands of people with phds and experience in the area of structural collapse have come fwd with questions about WTC7. They're not all internet dbags.
Again it was such a brilliant plan yet everyone with a blog seemed to figure it out , which is it? a master stroke of Oliver Stonesque Coup d'état or was it a not so well laid out plan that everyone on the internets figured out?
Noam Chomsky on 9-11 conspiracy theorists
Oh that's right he's just a leftist gate-keeper ::)
-
240 your doing yourself and your cause an injustice with all your posts, you dont sound very smart, you sound eager about the idea of a conspiracy and the fact that you talk about it like its fact shows how unreasonable you are. the way the buildings fell is very suspicious but theres tons and tons of evidence to prove the official story. prodding this issue and making people aware is one thing, going about it the way you are just turns people off because you dont sound like someone who is objective.
He's not , he's made up his mind and he's now obligated to enlighten the rest of us about The Matrix ::)
-
there it is. over time, people look into it and accept that something smells about that day -
or they keep believe what they wanna believe.
Yes. People crave continuity and safety in thought. Some people will go absolutely bugshit without it. And the brain WILL hurt when that continuity is interupted. It explains a lot of behavior on this thread.
it's FCKING scary to think the govt we elect and pay to protect us would allow/create some events like this. Sure, in the "bigger scheme", letting a 911 happen justifies our invading, setting up bases which will help with oil & defense for the next 500 years in that region. So yes, 3000 lives in tradeoff for keeping dollar stable or keeping a line of bases against china and other powers in the region, is a very smart thing to do.
Evil in the moral sense, but perfectly smart in the utilitarian sense. Any good general in the world would send 10 men to die if it meant winning an entire war, right? Maybe our leaders just decided 3000 on 9/11 and 4500 in afghanistan - less than 10,000 lives - was well worth establishing 80 military bases in that region (just as the saudis told us to get those bases out of their country).
10k lives for 500 years of military bases anywhere we want in afghanistan and Iraq? Sheeeit, you bet your ass any leader would take that deal.
Man, how that's been lost in this shuffle. The psychology of justification. It can explain to an observer the most outrageous behavior, and again, allow the perpetrator a continuity of safe thought after performing some of the most dastardly shit imaginable.
Read 'em and weep, boys.
-
Yes. People crave continuity and safety in thought. Some people will go absolutely bugshit without it. And the brain WILL hurt when that continuity is interupted. It explains a lot of behavior on this thread.
Man, how that's been lost in this shuffle. The psychology of justification. It can explain to an observer the most outrageous behavior, and again, allow the perpetrator a continuity of safe thought after performing some of the most dastardly shit imaginable.
Read 'em and weep, boys.
Lets say it's true and the .Gov was behind this, now what? what's your recourse? bitching on-line? or are you just satisfied knowing you figured it out and the rest of haven't? entertaining it is true what do you do with the ' knowledge ' ?
-
Plus wouldn't truthers lives be in danger for telling others the truth?
You guys should watch out for guys in dark suits!
-
And here are 14 conspiracy theories that have been proven to be true... this year alone.
http://beforeitsnews.com/story/1001/856/14_Conspiracy_Theories_That_The_Media_Now_Admits_Are_Conspiracy_Facts.html
::) those are all bullshit
#1 .. the conspiracy that is supposedly fact is that much of northern japan is uninhabitable due to radioactivity. the proof? a blip in the new york times that said some areas around the nuclear reactor would might be decalred uninhabitable. .. ya, thats much of northern japan ::)
#2.. the war in libya... this one doesnt even make sense.. there was no hiding the fact we got involved in this... it was out in the open.. and no we dont have any ground troops outisde of a very small number of special forces that are not doing fighting but guiding aircrafts and gathering intel.
#3.. the conspiracy is that humans around the world would be forced to be implanted with chips so that the government could keep track of everyone.. the proof its happening? some people in mexico had it done to themselves to prevent being kidnapped.. ::)
#4... 2000 gold... and this is a conspiracy how?
#5 .. the conspiracy is obama would give amnesty to all illegals... the proof? the fact that deportation cases will now be done individually with criminals givin first priority .. ya, thats amnesty all right ::)
# 6... the conspiracy is that the united states was helping to fund and support mexican drug cartels by providing them weapons.. the proof? a failed program to track and find the cartel by implanting tracking chips into guns placed in shops where the cartel would probably buy them.. ya, were really supporting the cartel by trying to trace there whereabouts ::)
# 7 ... the conspiracy is the the government was poisoning us with flouride.. the proof? a new lower recommendation for the levels of flouride in drinking water after it was found out that some children were getting mild teeth issues due to the flouride content.... ya, were really poisoning ourselves.. and thats why when we found out a very mild problem was occuring we instantly decided to lower the levels.. :D
# 8 ...conspiracy = federal reserve is corrupt and serves only the interest of large banks.. the proof? the bail out program that helped keep the economy from dipping into a depression.. yup, corruption at the fed, for sure !! ::)
# 9 ...
not even going to finish because i have chicken to eat.. stop being a dumbass 240
-
240 your doing yourself and your cause an injustice with all your posts, you dont sound very smart, you sound eager about the idea of a conspiracy and the fact that you talk about it like its fact shows how unreasonable you are. the way the buildings fell is very suspicious but theres tons and tons of evidence to prove the official story. prodding this issue and making people aware is one thing, going about it the way you are just turns people off because you dont sound like someone who is objective.
like most people, i'd like to see a complete investigation into the death of 3000 americans. that's all. i sure don't claim to have all the answer :)
-
not even going to finish because i have chicken to eat.. stop being a dumbass 240
;D
-
Plus wouldn't truthers lives be in danger for telling others the truth?
You guys should watch out for guys in dark suits!
LMFAO don't talk logic to these guys , they don't hear it.
Watch when 240 doesn't post anymore we all know what happened to him
p.i.p 240 he he was assassinated by Agents from the Matrix to get us the truth slipped on a banana-peel cracked his head open
-
Lets say it's true and the .Gov was behind this, now what? what's your recourse? bitching on-line? or are you just satisfied knowing you figured it out and the rest of haven't? entertaining it is true what do you do with the ' knowledge ' ?
We're talking about a totally independent move. It wasn't "the government", whatever the meaning of that word is.
-
240 your doing yourself and your cause an injustice with all your posts, you dont sound very smart, you sound eager about the idea of a conspiracy and the fact that you talk about it like its fact shows how unreasonable you are. the way the buildings fell is very suspicious but theres tons and tons of evidence to prove the official story. prodding this issue and making people aware is one thing, going about it the way you are just turns people off because you dont sound like someone who is objective.
What makes you say that?
-
LOL!
-
-
1. Why were fighter jets not scrambled to intercept the hijacked planes when they went off course? Even after the first plane hit?? How does this not happen again, to allow an alleged plane to hit the Pentagon, which would be restricted and severely protected air space to begin with?
2. How does fire bring down not 1, not 2, but 3 steel framed sky scrapers in a controlled, symmetrical, free fall fashion? Something that had never before occurred? Especially puzzling for building 7, which had minimal damage and fire, and was not hit by a plane.
3. How do three buildings free fall through the path of most resistance on their own footprint, if not with the assistance of explosives?
4. Why was there traces of thermite at the scene?
-
1. Why were fighter jets not scrambled to intercept the hijacked planes when they went off course? Even after the first plane hit?? How does this not happen again, to allow an alleged plane to hit the Pentagon, which would be restricted and severely protected air space to begin with?
2. How does fire bring down not 1, not 2, but 3 steel framed sky scrapers in a controlled, symmetrical, free fall fashion? Something that had never before occurred? Especially puzzling for building 7, which had minimal damage and fire, and was not hit by a plane.
3. How do three buildings free fall through the path of most resistance on their own footprint, if not with the assistance of explosives?
4. Why was there traces of thermite at the scene?
You need to establish if something happened before asking why it happened.
I have a question for you...
Why are there clearly pieces of the towers falling faster and hitting the ground well before the main part of the building? Were they going faster than freefall?
-
well, if two cops know what happened, then it must be true.
;D ;D ;D
Stan: "So if you pooped in the urinal, who blew up the World Trade Center?'"
Kyle: "A bunch of pissed off Muslims you dumb ass."
-
Proof of a Conspiracy
-
Proof of a Conspiracy
I don't know if you are serious, or even if the picture is being serious but I think it's pretty much established by all that those were made by the rescue personnel.
-
I don't know if you are serious, or even if the picture is being serious but I think it's pretty much established by all that those were made by the rescue personnel.
Holy shit if truthers are using this as proof they have lost their minds there are loads of pics of demo guys oxycutting the columns to make it safer for them the work there.
-
Holy shit if truthers are using this as proof they have lost their minds there are loads of pics of demo guys oxycutting the columns to make it safer for them the work there.
No, that guy is a shill that the government puts in forums like this to point to stupid evidence so we can say "If that is your proof, you're wrong, so it must not be a conspiracy"
Clever bastards, those government operatives..
-
No, that guy is a shill that the government puts in forums like this to point to stupid evidence so we can say "If that is your proof, you're wrong, so it must not be a conspiracy"
Clever bastards, those government operatives..
Report Calls for 'Infiltration' of 9/11 Sites
A new report released by a think tank called Demos warns of the hazardous effects of conspiracy theories on society and recommends strategies for governments to mitigate these effects, including the infiltration of websites.
The report, called The Power of Unreason: Conspiracy Theories, Extremism and Counterterrorism, says "most notoriously and influentially, the �9/11 truth movement' has questioned the official accounts of 9/11 and has become a large and growing political force."
The authors note that the 9/11 truth movement is "peaceful", but make no distinction between the legitimate questioning of the official account of 9/11 and any number of unrelated, and often racist, conspiracy theories.
The Demos report acknowledges that "some conspiracies have turned out to be true. Our institutions and governments have deceived the population to advance hidden and unstated interests", and goes on to cite Operations Northwoods, the Joint Chief of Staff's unimplemented plan to stage a false flag Cuban terror attack in 1963, as well as the CIA's involvement in the Chilean coup of 1973.
But the report is only concerned with limiting the effects of conspiracy theories on operations of the state, not with justice or the accuracy of the historical record. It states:
More broadly, conspiracy theories drive a wedge of distrust between governments and particular communities. Conspiracy theories -- such as those that claim 7/7 or 9/11 were 'inside jobs' -- demolish the mutuality and trust that people have in institutions of government, with social and political ramifications that we still don't fully understand. This can especially hinder community-level efforts to fight violent extremism.
Demos makes a number of recommendations for governments to combat conspiracy theories, including a call for more government openness.
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20100829144303310 (http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20100829144303310)
-
-
Where the hell are the black boxes from the planes? The official report states they were not found. Another first.
-
Why were fighter jets not scrambled to intercept the hijacked planes when they went off course? Even after the first plane hit?? How does this not happen again, to allow an alleged plane to hit the Pentagon, which would be restricted and severely protected air space to begin with?
This to this:
So why didn't the air force follow normal procedure on 9/11 and intercept the “hijacked” planes? Quite simply because it had been ordered not to do so. According to Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, who was in the basement bunker of the White House where Dick Cheney was directing operations that morning, an alarmed-looking young officer came into the room three times reporting on the movements of the “hijacked” Flight 77. The third time the young man asked Cheney, “Do the orders still stand?” and Cheney reportedly snapped, “Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?”
Secretary Norman Mineta's exact words:
“During the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the vice-president, ‘The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out.’ And when it got down to, ‘The plane is 10 miles out,’ the young man also said to the vice-president, ‘Do the orders still stand?’ And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said, ‘Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?’”
Secretary Mineta also contradicts Cheney's timeline for events by nearly 40 minutes:
Mineta’s testimony places Cheney in the PEOC almost 40 minutes before the 9/11 Commission officially states he arrived. In fact, Mineta states that Cheney was already present in the control room when he arrived at 9:20.
*Presidential Emergency Operations Center
Anyone?
-
This to this:
Secretary Norman Mineta's exact words:
Secretary Mineta also contradicts Cheney's timeline for events by nearly 40 minutes:
Anyone?
Fighters were in the air by the time the first plane hit. Of course, they would not have shot that plane down since, if you know anything about the history of hyjackings, planes had never before been flown into buildings so they would have just tailed the plane anyway.
What about the second plane? The time between the it being taken and crashing was just over ten minutes, much less time than the first one.
-
Fighters were in the air by the time the first plane hit. Of course, they would not have shot that plane down since, if you know anything about the history of hyjackings, planes had never before been flown into buildings so they would have just tailed the plane anyway.
What about the second plane? The time between the it being taken and crashing was just over ten minutes, much less time than the first one.
Stick with me here, jwb. This is about the plane that hit the Pentagon, approximately 50 minutes after the first attack.
And what about Mineta's testimony, which differed so sharply from Cheney?
I really want to believe the official line, but I need some help here. I've searched and searched again, but there are just so many serious inconsistencies a person can take.
-
Where the hell are the black boxes from the planes? The official report states they were not found. Another first.
They did find a Passport of a hijacker that flew out the airplane after impact and landed safely a few blocks away ::) ::)
-
Report Calls for 'Infiltration' of 9/11 Sites
A new report released by a think tank called Demos warns of the hazardous effects of conspiracy theories on society and recommends strategies for governments to mitigate these effects, including the infiltration of websites.
The report, called The Power of Unreason: Conspiracy Theories, Extremism and Counterterrorism, says "most notoriously and influentially, the �9/11 truth movement' has questioned the official accounts of 9/11 and has become a large and growing political force."
The authors note that the 9/11 truth movement is "peaceful", but make no distinction between the legitimate questioning of the official account of 9/11 and any number of unrelated, and often racist, conspiracy theories.
The Demos report acknowledges that "some conspiracies have turned out to be true. Our institutions and governments have deceived the population to advance hidden and unstated interests", and goes on to cite Operations Northwoods, the Joint Chief of Staff's unimplemented plan to stage a false flag Cuban terror attack in 1963, as well as the CIA's involvement in the Chilean coup of 1973.
But the report is only concerned with limiting the effects of conspiracy theories on operations of the state, not with justice or the accuracy of the historical record. It states:
More broadly, conspiracy theories drive a wedge of distrust between governments and particular communities. Conspiracy theories -- such as those that claim 7/7 or 9/11 were 'inside jobs' -- demolish the mutuality and trust that people have in institutions of government, with social and political ramifications that we still don't fully understand. This can especially hinder community-level efforts to fight violent extremism.
Demos makes a number of recommendations for governments to combat conspiracy theories, including a call for more government openness.
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20100829144303310 (http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20100829144303310)
There's a theory that COINTELPRO has built a program that combs the whole interweb for keywords in forums/sites etc. And then sends out a counter if necessary.
-
I don't know if you are serious, or even if the picture is being serious but I think it's pretty much established by all that those were made by the rescue personnel.
Really?
-
Really?
I couldn't stand to see the thread end this way. Is this supposed to show something? Because honestly, I don't know either way by looking at it. If it is some sort of evidence, I'd love to know what it is.
But if it doesn't really show anything, I don't want it to give ammo to the "::) yeah, yeah" crowd. Let's face it, there ARE a lot of nuts in this race and they DO confuse the issue.
It bugs me that we have these legitimately disturbing questions to be answered about this incredible case, yet people would rather run away than answer to them. People must give a fuck. I want some of these guys who fled the conversation to come back and support their viewpoint.
-
it's cause many people shit their pants scared that day.
to realize it was allowed to happen - or even helped - is some scary shit.
to accept it smells fishy, is to accept your got Punk'D in a major way. No fun.
-
it's cause many people shit their pants scared that day.
to realize it was allowed to happen - or even helped - is some scary shit.
to accept it smells fishy, is to accept your got Punk'D in a major way. No fun.
Yet there were all these people earlier in thread, trying to show how "rational", "sane" and "intelligent" they are by supporting the official line.
-
it is what it is. most of us don't want to talk about colon cancer or high blood pressure either. it's unpleasant. other of us revel in conflict, and find the 911 topic fascinating.
IMO it's up to the families of the victims (and anyone who lives in NYC and had to breathe that shit) to be mad about it - they were wronged, not us message board debaters.
Either side claiming they "know" what happened is gullible. None of us knows.
-
I thought getbiggers would want to fight this one out. I guess all the "rational and intelligent" people are busy on a permanent workout.
Fuck you guys, lol. Have fun watching your rights disappear. Because if you think this thing is done, you are wrong.
-
next time you're at the DMV or any other "government" office, look around and see if the colleagues of those studs are capable of this "operation".
next time you watch the news and see *insert government official* , ask yourself it this guy and his colleagues can pull this off
that alone assures me that no, there was no cover up
-
next time you're at the DMV or any other "government" office, look around and see if the colleagues of those studs are capable of this "operation".
next time you watch the news and see *insert government official* , ask yourself it this guy and his colleagues can pull this off
that alone assures me that no, there was no cover up
I had a really good experience at the DMV yesterday... I doubt the nice Hawaiian lady blew up some buildings though.
I wanna know why the CT trust the people feeding them their info? Alex jones and co have gotten rich off you suckers just like regular preachers.
-
I had a really good experience at the DMV yesterday... I doubt the nice Hawaiian lady blew up some buildings though.
Yeah, I'm relieved to know the DMV isn't involved.
I wanna know why the CT trust the people feeding them their info? Alex jones and co have gotten rich off you suckers just like regular preachers.
Who's that? Serious question. Only time I've ever heard the name is here on getbig.
By the way:
Stick with me here, jwb. This is about the plane that hit the Pentagon, approximately 50 minutes after the first attack.
And what about Mineta's testimony, which differed so sharply from Cheney?
I really want to believe the official line, but I need some help here. I've searched and searched again, but there are just so many serious inconsistencies a person can take.
-
;D ;D ;D
Stan: "So if you pooped in the urinal, who blew up the World Trade Center?'"
Kyle: "A bunch of pissed off Muslims you dumb ass."
;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Jack,
Cheney entered the bunker at 9.37 the same time the plane hit he pentagon. He was leaving the white house because they were told that plane was heading that way.
He gave orders to shoot down flight 93 soon after since it was also headed to DC. The aide telling him it was so many miles out was going off projections of when it would hit when they still had radar contact several minutes earlier. The plane never reached where they thought it did.
-
They didn't know flight 77 was even headed toward DC until 9.25 thereabouts so there would have been no reason to leave the White House for the bunker before then.
-
Jack,
Cheney entered the bunker at 9.37 the same time the plane hit he pentagon. He was leaving the white house because they were told that plane was heading that way.
I have to ask you about this, because the according to The 9/11 Commission Report, Cheney arrived “shortly before 10:00, perhaps at 9:58”.
-
I have to ask you about this, because the according to The 9/11 Commission Report, Cheney arrived “shortly before 10:00, perhaps at 9:58”.
The secret service ordered him out of the white house at 9.35 since flight 77 had just flown over Washington and was circling back and descending towards them again. He was in the tunnel at 9.37 when the pentagon was hit. What time he actually entered the room in the bunker I haven't seen anywhere but probably way before 9.58.
There is no doubt he ordered flight 93 be shot down even though he had no authority by law to actually do so. 93 was lost from radar when it was crashed but they thought it was still in the air since it had been lost from radar when it was taken also. The aide saying it is ten miles out etc is their projection of where it should be if still in the air but it wasn't at that stage.
-
This is interesting.
A 2004 LA times article I just read states that Chenney left the white house for the bunker at 9.37 but stopped at a checkpoint within the tunnel that had a secure phone line and called Bush in Florida. While on the call they got word the pentagon was hit. During the call Bush okayed the order to shoot down planes. Chenney may have indeed then entered the bunker itself as late as 9.58 and been authorized to give the engage order after all.
-
Yes, that's' true. The 9-11 Commission Report ("the official story") states that Cheney arrived in the PEOC at 9:58 - 10:00.
But this contradicts past statements by Richard Clarke, Condoleeza Rice, White House Photographer David Bohrer and sworn testimony by Secretary Norman Mineta - all placing Cheney at the PEOC before 9:20. None of these people were "out to get" Cheney, mind you, rather most of them appear to have just inadvertently brought what would later become the official account into question during the fray.
Seriously, what's going on?
The timeline is very important, because according to the "official story", Cheney was NOT in charge at the PEOC when the plane hit the Pentagon.
Remember, we're talking about the plane that was heading for the Pentagon, and the controversy of this particular piece of the puzzle is that there was apparently a stand-down order, not a shoot-down order.
Another funny little point a person should wonder about, is the question of security recording equipment and the fact that it has timekeeping software built in. It should clear up this particular question once and for all, and as far as I know it's never been offered as evidence. But just as Norman Mineta's testimony was left out of the 9-11 Report, would electronic evidence be left out, too, if it were inconsistent with "the official story"?
I've got some real concerns about this. And it's just a small piece of the problem. The only way you can try to sort through it all is to go from one loose thread to the next. And there are many, many loose threads.
-
No the order is to shoot down and they are talking about flight 93 not flight 77.
-
Yes, that's' true. The 9-11 Commission Report ("the official story") states that Cheney arrived in the PEOC at 9:58 - 10:00.
But this contradicts past statements by Richard Clarke, Condoleeza Rice, White House Photographer David Bohrer and sworn testimony by Secretary Norman Mineta - all placing Cheney at the PEOC before 9:20. None of these people were "out to get" Cheney, mind you, rather most of them appear to have just inadvertently brought what would later become the official account into question during the fray.
Seriously, what's going on?
The ONLY man with power to shoot down those planes - officially goes MISSING for 30 critical minutes on 9/11.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm :)
-
At 9.20 Chenney was in the white house situation room in the west wing and so was Rice etc.
-
9/11 Mythology: The Big Lie of Our Time - by Stephen Lendman
Winston Churchill rightly explained that "(a) lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on." Today, of course, it circulates everywhere instantly.
Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Germany's Reich Minister of Propaganda, once said:
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."
He added that "truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."
Corporate media manipulators love a big story they can hype, distort, and falsify to attract large audiences supportively for the worst imperial crimes.
In fact, the bigger the event, the worse the reporting, sacrificing truth for managed news and opinions everyone should understand and avoid.
Distinguished scholars like David Ray Griffin exposed the 9/11 lie in his exhaustive research and writings. In numerous books, articles, and lectures, he provided convincing evidence about an inside job, not an attack carried out by "crazed Arabs."
In an April 5, 2006 lecture titled, "9/11: The Myth and the Reality," he concluded saying:
"It would seem, for many reasons, that the official story of 9/11, which has served as a religious Myth in the intervening years (and still does), is a myth in the pejorative sense of a story that does not correspond to reality."
It was Griffin's polite way of calling it a Big Lie, the biggest of our time.
On September 11, 2008, his Global Research article headlined, "September 11, 2001: 21 Reasons to Question the Official Story about 9/11," including:
(1) Although the Big Lie holds Osama bin Laden accountable, the FBI admitted it "has no hard evidence connecting" him to the attack (NPHR 206-11).
(2) Although the 9/11 myth claims "devout Muslims (were) ready to die as martyrs to earn a heavenly reward, Mohamed Atta (their alleged leader) and the other alleged hijackers regularly drank heavily, went to strip clubs, and paid for sex (NPHR 153-55)."
(3) Claimed cell phone calls from above 30,000 feet to relatives were falsified as technology at the time made completely them impossible. Later, the FBI changed its story, saying only two were made "from United 93 after it descended to 5,000 feet (NPHR 111-17)."
(4) Then "US Solicitor General Tel Olson's claim that his wife, Barbara Olson, phoned him twice from AA 77," saying hijackers controlled the plane, "was also contradicted by this FBI report," saying one call she attempted was "unconnected" and lasted "0 seconds (NPRH 60-62)."
(5) The FBI lied, saying Atta's left behind luggage included "decisive evidence that al-Qaeda was responsible for the attacks....(NPHR 155-62)."
(6) Evidence of alleged Al Qaeda videos, "passports discovered at the crash sites, and a headband discovered at the crash site of United 93 (showed) clear signs of having been fabricated (NPHR 170-73)."
(7) Evidence shows hijackers WERE NOT on the planes. Moreover, if they broke "into cockpits, the pilots would have 'squawked' the universal highjack code," a simple two second act. However, none aboard the four flights did it (NPHR 175-79).
(Eight) Standard operating procedures to intercept "planes showing signs of an in-flight emergency within about 10 minutes" weren't followed. Instead, a "stand-down order prevented (them) from being carried out (NPHR 1-10, 81-84)."
(9) Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta said Dick Cheney, inside the White House bunker, "apparently confirmed a stand-down order at about 9:25AM," prior to an alleged plane striking the Pentagon. "Another man has reported hearing a member of LAX Security learn that a stand-down order (came) from the 'highest level' of the White House (NPHR 94-96)."
(10) The 9/11 Whitewash Commission ignored Mineta's report, deleted it from the official record, "and claimed that Cheney did not enter the (bunker) until almost 10:00...." They lied (NPHR 91-94).
In fact, Philip Zelikow, head of the 9/11 Commission, was a member of the Bush White House.
(11) The 9/11 Commission even contradicted what Cheney told Tim Russett on "Meet the Press" on September 16 (NPHR 93).
(12) Hani Hanjour, the so-called terrible pilot unable to fly a single-engine aircraft, "could not possibly have executed the amazing (AA 77) trajectory....to hit Wedge 1 of the Pentagon" that even experienced airline pilots would have had trouble negotiating, and never would have tried, fearing they'd crash and burn (NPHR 78-80).
(13) Wedge 1 was the most implausible spot to be struck. It was furthest from offices of Rumsfeld and Pentagon top brass, presumably the targeted high-value officials.
It was also "the only part of the Pentagon that had been reinforced." Its reconstruction wasn't finished, so few people were there. And it presented the most difficult flight path to execute (NPHR 76-78).
(14) Pentagon officials lied, saying they had no warning of an approaching aircraft. In fact, "a military E-4B - the Air Force's most advanced communications, command, and control airplane - was flying over the White House at the time." Astonishingly, the Pentagon "denied it belonged to them (NPHR 96-98)."
Moreover, the Pentagon is the most guarded structure in the world, complete with advanced radar and surface-to-air missiles, able to intercept and destroy any approaching threat.
(15) Without explanation, the Secret Service let George Bush remain at a Sarasota, FL school for 30 minutes after learning the second tower was struck, ignoring standard procedures to secure his safety as presumably high-value officials were targeted.
Only advance knowledge assured them of no danger at a time media reports circulated about America being under attack.
On 9/11's first anniversary, a new White House story emerged, falsely claiming Bush left the school immediately. "The lie was told in major newspapers and on MSNBC and ABC television (NHHR 129-31)."
(16) Their rigid steel columns made it impossible for the towers to crumble, let alone "at virtually free-fall speed - unless (they) had been sliced by means of explosives." In other words, claims about impacting planes and resulting fires being responsible are "scientifically impossible (NPHR 12-25)."
(17) Other features of the towers' destruction "can be explained only in terms of powerful explosives." They include "horizontal ejections of steel beams, the melting of steel, and the sulfidation and thinning of steel." Moreover, "fires could not have come within 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit of the temperature needed to melt steel (NPHR 30-36)."
(Eighteen) New York Fire Department "oral histories shortly after 9/11" provided testimonies of "having witnessed explosions in the Twin Towers. Others toppling WTC 7 as well as the towers were also reported by city officials, WTC employees, and journalists (NPHR 27-30, 45-48, 51)."
(19) On 9/11, Mayor Rudy Giuliani told" told ABC News anchor Peter Jennings that he was informed that the towers would collapse, despite no basis to think so. In fact, the so-called information came from his own Office of Emergency Management that either falsified it or had advance knowledge of the plot (NPH 40).
(20) "NIST, which produced the official reports on the Twin Towers and (recently) WTC 7, has been fully hijacked from the scientific to the political realm...." In fact, its "scientists" are "hired guns (NPHR 11, 238-51)."
(21) Growing numbers of "physicists, chemists, architects, engineers, pilots, former military officers, and former intelligence officers" reject the official 9/11 myth as a bald-faced lie (NPHR xi).
The Commerce Department's National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST - formerly the National Bureau of Standards, NBS) is a measurement standards laboratory, expected to produce scientifically verifiable, not falsified, analysis.
In other writing, Griffin exposed its 9/11 coverup role, saying it suggested that "fire-induced collapses of large steel-frame buildings (like the twin towers) are normal events," when they knew it's impossible.
NIST was also tasked to provide "the definitive explanation" of WTC 7's collapse. Again, coverup was its unstated mandate.
It "committed two kinds of scientific fraud: Ignoring relevant evidence (showing explosives were used) and falsifying evidence."
For example, it suppressed evidence revealed in a peer-reviewed University of Copenhagen report, showing "WTC dust contained unreacted nanothermite. Unlike ordinary thermite, which is an incendiary, nanothermite is a high explosive."
Short of verifiable insider confessions, its presence is as close as it gets to smoking gun proof of controlled demolitions, destroying the twin towers and WTC 7, not fires or other causes.
Scholars for 9/11 Truth
James Fetzer founded Scholars for 9/11 Truth, a non-partisan association of faculty, students, and scholars, dedicated to exposing official lies, removing the shroud of deceit, and revealing truths behind 9/11.
Access his site through the following link:
http://911scholars.org/
A section on it headlines "Why Doubt 9/11," providing 20 examples to debunk the official lie. They include:
(1) The Twin Towers were built to sustain impacts similar to large planes striking them.
(2) Most jet fuel burned "in the first fifteen seconds or so. Below the 96th floor in the North Tower and the 80th in the South, those buildings were stone cold steel, unaffected by" fires above.
(3) Steel melts at 2,800 degrees Fahrenheit, "about 1,000 degrees higher than the maximum" burning jet fuel produces.
(4) "Underwriters Laboratory certified the" building steel to be able to handle temperatures up to 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit "for three or four hours without any significant effects."
The ignited 500 degree fires were more suitable for roasting marshmallows than melting steel.
(5) Had steel melted or weakened the buildings, "the affected floors would have displayed completely different behavior," far short of collapsing that was impossible.
(6) Even when the top 30 floors of the South Tower "pivoted and began to fall to the side when the floors beneath gave way, it wasn't enough "to exert downward pressure on the lower 80 floors."
Moreover, the top 16 floors of the North Tower, "as one unit of downward force," was offset by "199 units of upward force....counteract(ing) it."
(7) Last man out of the North Tower William Rodriguez "reported massive explosions in the sub-basements that (caused) extensive destruction...."
(Eight) He said "the explosion occurred prior to reverberations from upper floors, a claim...substantiated by a Craig Furlong and Gordon Ross" study, titled "Seismic Proof: 9/11 Was an Inside Job," showing the "explosions actually took place as much as 14 and 17 seconds before the presumptive airplane impacts."
(9) "Heavy-steel-construction buildings like" the towers are virtually immune from "pancake collapse," unless rigged explosives cause it.
(10) Both towers collapsing from fires or on their own any other way at free-fall speed is impossible.
(11) Mechanical Engineering Professor Judy Wood compared the phenomenon of the towers collapsing to "two gigantic trees turning to sawdust from the top down."
(12) WTC-7 was a "classic controlled demolition at 5.20PM...."
(13) The twin towers were "destroyed by different modes of demolition."
(14) "The hit point at the Pentagon was too small to accommodate a 100-ton airliner with a 125-foot wingspan and a tail that stands 44-feet high...."
Moreover, the debris found had "no wings, no fuselage, no seats, no bodies, no luggage, no tail," and no engines.
In other words, no plane struck the Pentagon. A likely cruise missile was used, a weapon unavailable to alleged terrorists anywhere, let alone the ability to launch one.
(15) Pentagon videotapes show no Boeing 757 striking the building.
(16) The "official trajectory - flying at high speed barely above ground level - (was) physically impossible..." It was aerodynamically inconceivable to negotiate even for experienced airline pilots. None, of course, would have tried.
(17) Flight recorder data given to Pilots for 9/11 truth by the NTSB "corresponds to a plane with a different approach and altitude...." If followed by a Boeing 757, it would have overflown the Pentagon, not hit it.
(Eighteen) If Flight 93 crashed as reported, efforts would have been made to find survivors post-haste. Instead, coverup to suppress the truth followed, suggesting an incident other than reported.
(19) The alleged hijackers had minimal competence to fly single-engine aircraft, let alone be able to handle commercial jets. Moreover, their "names are not on any original, authenticated passenger manifest."
In fact, several "turned up alive and well and living in the Middle East." Washington never even produced their tickets as evidence because they weren't aboard the planes and had nothing to do with the incidents.
(20) George Bush later acknowledged that Saddam Hussein "had nothing to do with 9/11. The Senate Intelligence Committee" said he had no connection to Al Qaeda. Moreover, the FBI admitted having no evidence linking bin Laden to 9/11.
Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth
AE911Truth is a "non-partisan association of architects, engineers and affiliates dedicated to exposing the falsehoods and to revealing truths about" the Big 9/11 lie, substituting myth for reality.
Its growing membership "is devoted to:
(1) Dispelling misinformation with scientific facts and forensic evidence
(2) Educating and motivating thousands of architects and engineers and the public at large
(3) Procuring a truly independent 9/11 investigation with subpoena power
(4) Achieving 9/11 Truth mainstream coverage
Access AE911Truth's site through the following link:
http://www.ae911truth.org/en/about-us.html
Growing numbers worldwide now dispute the official myth, including Muslims for 9/11 Truth, anyone can connect with through its site, accessed through the following link:
http://m911t.blogspot.com/
More than any others worldwide, Muslims unfairly paid the greatest price - vilified, persecuted and attacked for their faith, ethnicity, locations in resource rich countries, and domestically for political advantage.
The 9/11 lie bears main responsibility for launching a decade of war, persecution and other forms of abuse. Stopping it ahead is job one. Revealing the truth and holding those responsible is how.
In his new book titled, "9/11 - Ten Years Later," David Ray Griffin said the following:
"Getting the 9/11 lie exposed is essential. One obvious reason is simple justice," not only for 9/11 family members never told the truth or compensated in whatever way possible.
"There also needs to be justice in the sense of punishment for those who engineered this crime," including top government and military officials. They perhaps consider themselves patriots. They're, in fact, "guilty of murder and treason."
Revealing 9/11 truth is also vital "for the sake of preventing further crimes against democracy."
"Many lines of evidence show that 9/11 was an inside job." It's virtually indisputable. As a result, it needs to outed so everyone knows to give "never again" real meaning.
A Final Comment
9/11 was the transformative event of our time, for ill, not good. It sparked multiple wars producing more of them, as well as repressive domestic crackdowns.
It also launched a Global War on Terror (GWOT), another on truth, human and civil rights, social justice, rule of law principles, and democratic values wherever America and its NATO partners show up.
September 11, 2011, will mark the 10th anniversary of a day those old enough won't ever forget. Nor should they forgive political Washington for using it to wage war on humanity.
All wars are for wealth and power, never for liberation or other social justice reasons.
Debunking the official 9/11 lie is a vital first step to freeing America of a malignancy that's destroying it and free people everywhere in its grip.
Mark October 6 on your calendar. Stand with most Americans for "human needs, not corporate greed."
"Stop the Machine! Create a New World!" Head to the nation's capital where "hundreds of thousands are expected" to "occupy Freedom Plaza indefinitely until their demands have been met," including:
(1) Taxing the rich and corporations.
(2) Ending imperial wars, bringing US forces home, and cutting military spending.
(3) Protecting America's social safety net, especially Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, as well as public and private pensions.
(4) Ending corporate and other forms of welfare for the rich at the expense of most others.
(5) Transitioning to a clean energy economy, as well as reversing environmental degradation.
(6) Protecting worker rights, including collective bargaining, decent wages and benefits, and initiatives to create jobs.
(7) Getting money out of politics, and
(Eight) Supporting social justice for everyone, not just too-big-to-fail banker crooks, other corporate favorites and America's aristocracy.
Transforming America starts with putting our bodies on the line for change, and not quitting no matter the odds.
There's no other way because the alternative is too grim to accept what only grassroots activism can achieve.
-
(14) Pentagon officials lied, saying they had no warning of an approaching aircraft. In fact, "a military E-4B - the Air Force's most advanced communications, command, and control airplane - was flying over the White House at the time." Astonishingly, the Pentagon "denied it belonged to them (NPHR 96-98)."
So the Pentagon denied this plane belonged to them. Who's plane was then allowed to fly in a no fly zone OVER THE WHITE HOUSE after all flights had been grounded following the attacks?? lol!
-
Why would the air force ask permission from the pentagon to launch that plane?
-
Why would the air force ask permission from the pentagon to launch that plane?
Oh ok, so now the Air Force and Pentagon have ZERO interaction?
The Pentagon is the headquarters of the United States Department of Defense, I think they would be in on anything related to defense in the country.
Face it buddy, this is bullshit. Let me ask you this. I'd love to hear from you.
Do you believe your government officials are 100% honest and truthful servants of the public? If not 100% please give examples where you believe they have not been truthful.
-
So the Pentagon denied this plane belonged to them. Who's plane was then allowed to fly in a no fly zone OVER THE WHITE HOUSE after all flights had been grounded following the attacks?? lol!
LOL @
that's the funniest shit of the day. Nation is on airway shutdown. A huge white military control HQ aircraft is flying over DC and nobody wants to claim it hahahaha.
I got $5 that says the white airplane was controlling whatever the hell hit the pentagon.
Hey, wasn't that same white plane iN NYC about 40 minutes before that? Same big ass blue stripe on tail, same body and nose, same everything...
hahahaha yep yep! nothing but a peanut!
NYC plane:
Pentagon plane:
-
240, you aren't seriously saying a 757 did not hit the pentagon are you?
-
240, you aren't seriously saying a 757 did not hit the pentagon are you?
I am not saying that.
I'm saying there was a huge white military jet with identical tail markings - flying over the NYC carnage, then over the pentagon. All while other aircraft no longer in that area.
I admit I don't have a clue what happened at the pentagon - But I'd love to hear why the Govt denied knowing what the hell this plane was. At both sites? Really?
-
This is the problem with all this crap.. All these youtube videos and all these pictures mean absolutely nothing.
This garbage isnt evidence.. you know how easy it is to edit a plane into a video, or photoshop a picture? I'm not sure if you guys really think this stuff is true, or you just doing it because you like to argue. whatever revs your engine I guess..carry on
-
you prob haven't researched it - on that day, jim michlaeshefsi of NBC detailed the plane flying over the pengaton at the time. weren't you watching that day? That zoom in pic of the white plane was HUGE that day - everyone thought it was coming down too. All the people pointing and thinking it was going to crash next.
kh, that was real.
and the WTC 3rd plane - really? that shit showed up in quite a view channels' coverage.
These things aren't faked. TO me, it's a little creepy that in a no-fly zone, some huge aircraft was coasting by each site and "just" the right time. Maybe it was a govt plane checking on it, and we're not told about it... but wow, it showed up at each place when the collapse/impact happened. Such timing!
Lol probably some high end spy shit, just leave it at that. but if your defense is "it's all fake!", that's just not true man.
-
Anyone who uses Science to back there argument, In example: a building falling Unobstructed at free fall speed.. = Conspiracy theorist = Terrorist.. ;D
-
the Penn plane - debris spread out over 8 miles. Obviously shot down. Denied.
the white plane seen at all 3 crashes, denied it existed...
Just tell us the truth, and you won't foster such CTs. Bullshitting people with easily disprovable lies leads to many CTers that would be avoided if our leaders were just a tad more honest with us.
-
This plane is in DC for sure but I haven't seen proof it was in new York.
YouTube video of said plane in the sky with no new York landmarks but a tag of new York doesn't mean much to me.
-
I spent some time overseas this summer...Seems like everyone outside the united states knows what really happens...
However, the majority of people in the united states believe the official story. no matter how fictitious it really is
-
This plane is in DC for sure but I haven't seen proof it was in new York.
YouTube video of said plane in the sky with no new York landmarks but a tag of new York doesn't mean much to me.
It was there. I've watched so many official network clips of that day. that one is always in the background coasting by at critical moments. WHo knows what it's doing there, but it is identical in markings to the one at the pentagon 40 minutes later.
I'm not claiming to know what it was. But the 911 report denied it. Are you going to believe the 911 commision, or your lying eyes/ haha
I'm not going all Dr Steven Jones, claiming to KNOW anything. But I do find it curious. If there were 3 shootings in my town, and the same shady white car was seen at all 3 events, I'd probably want to have a talk with the driver, wouldn't you? LOL! Watch the NY clips - it circles in the background very clearly.
-
I spent some time overseas this summer...Seems like everyone outside the united states knows what really happens...
what do they say really happened?
IN the USA, we have a lot of theories - from "Let it happen" to "made it happen" and some really crazy theories.
What is the general consensus in the outside world?
-
you prob haven't researched it - on that day, jim michlaeshefsi of NBC detailed the plane flying over the pengaton at the time. weren't you watching that day? That zoom in pic of the white plane was HUGE that day - everyone thought it was coming down too. All the people pointing and thinking it was going to crash next.
kh, that was real.
and the WTC 3rd plane - really? that shit showed up in quite a view channels' coverage.
These things aren't faked. TO me, it's a little creepy that in a no-fly zone, some huge aircraft was coasting by each site and "just" the right time. Maybe it was a govt plane checking on it, and we're not told about it... but wow, it showed up at each place when the collapse/impact happened. Such timing!
Lol probably some high end spy shit, just leave it at that. but if your defense is "it's all fake!", that's just not true man.
Dude I could show you 100 videos covering the sky line that day that wouldn't show another plane. But what would be the point, cuz you would deny it, or change the subject.. you know it didnt exist..How many fucking threads have been made on this subject in the past 10 years. How many hours have been wasted talking about this fantasy of yours. It just goes on and on.
If any of this 'evidence' had an once of authenticity it would be all over the news..Oh wait the government wont let them ::)
Its just as simple as a bunch of muslim fucks hijacked some planes and crashed them..But you guys have turned into into this complex design thats beyond impossible to achieve. You claim the building were rigged with explosives, but you dont even realize the events and the amount of people that would have been involved. you claim theres this mysterious plane flying around..First of all do you think the thousands of people that organized this were too stupid to allow a plane flying around when they know everyone is filming? why is it on youtube and not on the news as you claim? because its faked, just like everything else.
But if this gets you off keep going, you know damn well there is no conspiracy but whatever kills time for ya.
-
This is the problem with all this crap.. All these youtube videos and all these pictures mean absolutely nothing.
This garbage isnt evidence.. you know how easy it is to edit a plane into a video, or photoshop a picture? I'm not sure if you guys really think this stuff is true, or you just doing it because you like to argue. whatever revs your engine I guess..carry on
That is a weak argument. Which proves you have really done zero research. You do deserve the giant dildo being rammed up your ass. Big bro wants you to spread wider! Thanks a bunch.
-
Dude I could show you 100 videos covering the sky line that day that wouldn't show another plane. But what would be the point, cuz you would deny it, or change the subject.. you know it didnt exist..How many fucking threads have been made on this subject in the past 10 years. How many hours have been wasted talking about this fantasy of yours. It just goes on and on.
If any of this 'evidence' had an once of authenticity it would be all over the news..Oh wait the government wont let them ::)
Its just as simple as a bunch of muslim fucks hijacked some planes and crashed them..But you guys have turned into into this complex design thats beyond impossible to achieve. You claim the building were rigged with explosives, but you dont even realize the events and the amount of people that would have been involved. you claim theres this mysterious plane flying around..First of all do you think the thousands of people that organized this were too stupid to allow a plane flying around when they know everyone is filming? why is it on youtube and not on the news as you claim? because its faked, just like everything else.
But if this gets you off keep going, you know damn well there is no conspiracy but whatever kills time for ya.
Give it a rest...
A 50 story building fell controlled demolition style and it was hardly on the news at all.
[/quote]
-
Dude I could show you 100 videos covering the sky line that day that wouldn't show another plane. But what would be the point, cuz you would deny it, or change the subject.. you know it didnt exist..How many fucking threads have been made on this subject in the past 10 years. How many hours have been wasted talking about this fantasy of yours. It just goes on and on.
If any of this 'evidence' had an once of authenticity it would be all over the news..Oh wait the government wont let them ::)
Its just as simple as a bunch of muslim fucks hijacked some planes and crashed them..But you guys have turned into into this complex design thats beyond impossible to achieve. You claim the building were rigged with explosives, but you dont even realize the events and the amount of people that would have been involved. you claim theres this mysterious plane flying around..First of all do you think the thousands of people that organized this were too stupid to allow a plane flying around when they know everyone is filming? why is it on youtube and not on the news as you claim? because its faked, just like everything else.
But if this gets you off keep going, you know damn well there is no conspiracy but whatever kills time for ya.
There is nothing simple about flying those planes into a smallish target like the WTC or Pentagon. Even experience pilots don't think they could pull of the Pentagon impact with an airliner of the size claimed in the official BS. Also funny how the only video footage of the Pentagon crash clearly shows the object crashing into the Pentagon is not big enough to be the airliner.
Do you really believe a bunch of incompetent Muslims pulled this off? Really? Funny how many of these "terrorists" showed up after they were dead!
-
what do they say really happened?
IN the USA, we have a lot of theories - from "Let it happen" to "made it happen" and some really crazy theories.
What is the general consensus in the outside world?
"Let it happen" has zero credibility at this point. "Made it happen" is the obvious truth.
-
There is nothing simple about flying those planes into a smallish target like the WTC or Pentagon. Even experience pilots don't think they could pull of the Pentagon impact with an airliner of the size claimed in the official BS. Also funny how the only video footage of the Pentagon crash clearly shows the object crashing into the Pentagon is not big enough to be the airliner.
Do you really believe a bunch of incompetent Muslims pulled this off? Really? Funny how many of these "terrorists" showed up after they were dead!
I don't think any pilot in the world could pull off that particular move, and hit the pentagon using a Boeing 757-223..
-
There is nothing simple about flying those planes into a smallish target like the WTC or Pentagon. Even experience pilots don't think they could pull of the Pentagon impact with an airliner of the size claimed in the official BS. Also funny how the only video footage of the Pentagon crash clearly shows the object crashing into the Pentagon is not big enough to be the airliner.
Do you really believe a bunch of incompetent Muslims pulled this off? Really? Funny how many of these "terrorists" showed up after they were dead!
Yes it is dipshit.. look it up now. to land a 747 is less then a day in a class room and the next day your doing it on a flight simulator. They land planes on runways the size of city streets, but to hit 2 of the biggest buildings in the world is impossible? God your dumb as a brick..
Sorry but carry on with your worthless arguments, your desire to 'rebel' against your evil government, and resort to saying stupid shit because you have nothing to back up your ludicrous claims. I dont argue with pricks and idiots.
-
Yes it is dipshit.. look it up now. to land a 747 is less then a day in a class room and the next day your doing it on a flight simulator. They land planes on runways the size of city streets, but to hit 2 of the biggest buildings in the world is impossible? God your dumb as a brick..
Sorry but carry on with your worthless arguments, your desire to 'rebel' against your evil government, and resort to saying stupid shit because you have nothing to back up your ludicrous claims. I dont argue with pricks and idiots.
You'd be best served to continue to keep your blinders on and go back to watching "reality" TV with the rest of the going public, so you don't have to face what is really reality.
-
You'd be best served to continue keep your blinders on and go back to watching "reality" TV with the rest of the going public, so you don't have to face what is really reality.
He's a cop so he thinks he's part of the government...he thinks by being a cop he would have been informed like big wigs..haha
-
There is nothing simple about flying those planes into a smallish target like the WTC or Pentagon. Even experience pilots don't think they could pull of the Pentagon impact with an airliner of the size claimed in the official BS. Also funny how the only video footage of the Pentagon crash clearly shows the object crashing into the Pentagon is not big enough to be the airliner.
Do you really believe a bunch of incompetent Muslims pulled this off? Really? Funny how many of these "terrorists" showed up after they were dead!
Sorry bro, you are wrong here. I was in a multi million dollar flight simulater a few weeks ago(my job entails aircraft propulsion work) and the Instructor let us fly the aircraft around. Normally we would just ops check the engines in the simulator setting, but we had extra time so we flew it. I've never flown an aircraft in my life, but successfully landed the aircraft, did a couple touch and gos(landing and taking right back off) and flew at varying altitudes from 30,000 feet all the way down to runway level. This was all in a simulator mind you, but the Instructor said this is as close as it gets to actually flying. And that if we could land it in the simulator, we could do it in real life. Take it for what its worth, but we did all this with zero prepatory time and were literally doing this by the seat of our pants. So if some hajis got a few weeks to a few months of training, I would imagine they could of pulled off what they did pretty easily.
-
Yes it is dipshit.. look it up now. to land a 747 is less then a day in a class room and the next day your doing it on a flight simulator. They land planes on runways the size of city streets, but to hit 2 of the biggest buildings in the world is impossible? God your dumb as a brick..
Sorry but carry on with your worthless arguments, your desire to 'rebel' against your evil government, and resort to saying stupid shit because you have nothing to back up your ludicrous claims. I dont argue with pricks and idiots.
Wow, you are either naive or moronic. Yes, if you are 200 feet away from the WTC it is easy to fly the plane into the building. But try that when you are almost 200 miles away. Millimeter movements on the controls of the airplane would shift it thousands of feet if not miles off course. Please don't tell me you think it is easy to pilot a plane from an airport (Boston) 200 miles away??
-
Sorry bro, you are wrong here. I was in a multi million dollar flight simulater a few weeks ago(my job entails aircraft propulsion work) and the Instructor let us fly the aircraft around. Normally we would just ops check the engines in the simulator setting, but we had extra time so we flew it. I've never flown an aircraft in my life, but successfully landed the aircraft, did a couple touch and gos(landing and taking right back off) and flew at varying altitudes from 30,000 feet all the way down to runway level. This was all in a simulator mind you, but the Instructor said this is as close as it gets to actually flying. And that if we could land it in the simulator, we could do it in real life. Take it for what its worth, but we did all this with zero prepatory time and were literally doing this by the seat of our pants. So if some hajis got a few weeks to a few months of training, I would imagine they could of pulled off what they did pretty easily.
What you described is nothing compared to taking off from an airport and finding a target 200 miles away and not missing it on your first attempt. Plus you were in a flight simulator, not a real plane where you supposedly just overpowered a crew. Completely different ball game.
-
He's a cop so he thinks he's part of the government...he thinks by being a cop he would have been informed like big wigs..haha
Oh man, that explains his denial. Though some cops agree this is BS. Maybe he is a DHS cop??
-
What you described is nothing compared to taking off from an airport and finding a target 200 miles away and not missing it on your first attempt. Plus you were in a flight simulator, not a real plane where you supposedly just overpowered a crew. Completely different ball game.
Dude the muscle hijackers took out the real pilots then their pilot came into the cockpit to take over. The planes would have been on autopilot.
They didn't take off the real pilots did.
-
240, I watched your plane footage over the wtc and that isn't the same plane the CNN footage shows over the white house.
The plane over the white house is all white with the flag on the tail as per their description of the military plane. The plane in your wtc footage has an all blue tail just like Delta jets. The footage showing it also shows only one tower has been hit which makes it highly likely it is a commercial plane in the area at the time of the first attack of which there were several dozen.
-
Dude the muscle hijackers took out the real pilots then their pilot came into the cockpit to take over. The planes would have been on autopilot.
They didn't take off the real pilots did.
And then those dudes crashed the plane and magically survived it. They must be part of the X-Men team!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1559151.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1559151.stm)
They were lightning quick to identify all the hijackers. And then ...
"FBI Director Robert Mueller acknowledged on Thursday that the identity of several of the suicide hijackers is in doubt."
-
What you described is nothing compared to taking off from an airport and finding a target 200 miles away and not missing it on your first attempt. Plus you were in a flight simulator, not a real plane where you supposedly just overpowered a crew. Completely different ball game.
When I was in the simulater, the Instructor showed us how to find the airport with the navigation mfd(multifunction display) and the HUD. Coordinates were already inputted by him, but it was easy to manipulate with any type of training. The mfd was set up to show exactly where the runway was. I just flew around though until I found the runway visually. Now that was just a black runway, on the ground. I would imagine 2 huge towers and a building the size of the Pentagon would be easy to spot if you were anywhere in the general area. Seriously, as long as you knew you were headed to NYC, all you would have to do is find the two tallest buildings in the skyline and there lies your target. It sounds simplistic, but I had first hand experience with this type of thing.
-
And then those dudes crashed the plane and magically survived it. They must be part of the X-Men team!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1559151.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1559151.stm)
They were lightning quick to identify all the hijackers. And then ...
"FBI Director Robert Mueller acknowledged on Thursday that the identity of several of the suicide hijackers is in doubt."
The flight attendants on board called from the phone at the back of the planes (it calls the airlines maintenance dept when coffee machines break and such) and told them what seats the guys were in. They were using their real names don't forget.
-
In his book Black Ice, author Dan Verton identifies this aircraft as an E-4B taking part in the 2001 operational exercise "Global Guardian". The exercise was canceled when the first plane struck the World Trade Center, and the E-4B, operating under call sign "Venus 77", which was waiting on the ramp at Andrews AFB, requested emergency clearance and immediately took off. The aircraft initially requested clearance for a direct route to Wright-Patterson AFB, in Dayton, Ohio, and was in the process of receiving clearance while it was seen circling the capital at low altitude during the attack on the Pentagon. Four minutes later the aircraft requested clearance to circle sixty miles south of Washington D.C. Eight minutes after takeoff the aircraft requested clearance to circle Richmond, Virginia at an altitude of 19,000, where it remained for the duration of the attack.[12]
-
of all the info ive seen on 9/11, the only thing i concentrate on is the lack of a video hitting the pentagon. show me a video of a plane hitting it. then once we can ill buy all the rest of the official story.
but you know what? we havent seen a video of such a thing.
so there you go. thats why people are so called "conspiricy" nuts
and those who put them down, well show the video, and we will not talk about it.
show the video
-
1: America spends more money on its deffence than any other nation on earth. If you think a dozen cavemen can go through it so easily, think again.
You just proved your own point you dumbass. If our defense is so impenetrable, especially by "cavemen". Then they obviously were guided by a third party to help them fly into WTC.
-
I have a hard time believing that we staged 9/11 ourselves, only to justify us going to war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Most Americans pre 9/11 hated those guys already, and wouldn't have batted an eye-lash if we started an anti-terrorism war without 9/11 even happening.
Idiot.
Hated who? WTF are you talking about?
Most americans 10 years ago couldn't tell you which continent Afghanistan was on, much less point to it on a map...and yet we hated them? Those cocksuckers still live in their sandbox...calling them a 3rd world nation would be an extreme compliment. They're still in the dark ages.
-
Idiot.
Hated who? WTF are you talking about?
Most americans 10 years ago couldn't tell you which continent Afghanistan was on, much less point to it on a map...and yet we hated them? Those cocksuckers still live in their sandbox...calling them a 3rd world nation would be an extreme compliment. They're still in the dark ages.
x100
-
240 your doing yourself and your cause an injustice with all your posts, you dont sound very smart, you sound eager about the idea of a conspiracy and the fact that you talk about it like its fact shows how unreasonable you are. the way the buildings fell is very suspicious but theres tons and tons of evidence to prove the official story. prodding this issue and making people aware is one thing, going about it the way you are just turns people off because you dont sound like someone who is objective.
You're like true anus of getbig when he isn't posting...what the fuck do you get out of trolling getbig?
-
Where the hell are the black boxes from the planes? The official report states they were not found. Another first.
But they found the passports of the hijackers!
-
yes, on the street no less!! intact with picture!!
-
next time you're at the DMV or any other "government" office, look around and see if the colleagues of those studs are capable of this "operation".
next time you watch the news and see *insert government official* , ask yourself it this guy and his colleagues can pull this off
that alone assures me that no, there was no cover up
You're comparing apples and oranges son.
The DMV to the CIA & White House? Come on.
-
Like a few others on here said, I'm not trying to prove/disprove anything. I just want to know the truth because I don't believe for a second what the government said. It's like being a little kid and your parents telling you a story about your pet dog going to heaven and a better place because you're not really ready to deal with the concept of death & it's best to believe your parents!
It's almost scary how a lot of the stupid sheep on here do not have a questioning or inquisitve attitude about some of the stories the goverment says and the decisions it does. Fucking do some research ...for starters about the shit the CIA pulled in central american countries 60 years ago. Coups, revolts...etc.
But I guess life is always easier with your head in your ass.
-
try not to cry guys :'(
http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm
TH0SE ARE DISCREDITED S0URCES.
-
You need to watch the video. They have structural engineers that go on record saying the probability of all columns in WTC 7 failing at the same time is 0% based on the damage to the corner.
And that is precisely what happened when WTC 7 pancaked at the speed of gravity. All columns failed and there was no structural resistance during the collapse. This is only possible if all columns were severed at the base. If the corner damage from the taller towers caused the collapse of WTC 7 it would have collapsed a lot different. But don't take my word for it - look at the experts in the video. Over 1000 architects and engineers. Even the family members of the victim say the official story is BS.
And Larry Silverstein, owner of the complex, admits they pulled the building.
How much more do you need JWB? Are you really that gullible and willing to listen to the BS from a group of people with a history of lying to you. Really?? WOW!
NAN0 THERMITE WAS ALREADY F0UND IN THE SCENE ALS0.
-
"Let it happen" has zero credibility at this point. "Made it happen" is the obvious truth.
A L0T 0F PE0PLE BELIEVE THE G0VERNMENT CAN'T PULL IT 0FF. IT WASN'T THE G0VERNMENT. IT WAS A R0GUE NETW0RK WITH A SELECTED GR0UP 0F INDIVIDUALS CUT ACR0SS VARI0US ENTITIES.
-
Interesting comments at the 8.42 mark.
"both towers were still standing when i heard an explosion on the 6th floor of WTC 7,so i had to move up to the 8th floor"
-
-
-
-
No the order is to shoot down and they are talking about flight 93 not flight 77.
jwb - You're getting bogged down with information here, which is easy to do. Please look at Norman Mineta's sworn testimony again:
During the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the vice-president, ‘The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out.’ And when it got down to, ‘The plane is 10 miles out,’ the young man also said to the vice-president, ‘Do the orders still stand?’ And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said, ‘Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?’”
-
N0T T0 MENTI0N THERE WERE 46 DRILLS 0F A HIJACKED PLANE ENTERING THE W0RLD TRADE CENTER 0N THE DAY BEF0RE AND AFTER 9/11. HMM WHAT A C0INCIDENCE. DRILLS ARE D0NE F0R TW0 REAS0NS. T0 GET THE B0MBS IN AND IF CAUGHT T0 SAY IT'S JUST A DRILL UNTIL IT G0ES LIVE.
-
Here is the very basic information we're working with:
American Airlines Flight 11
From: Boston, Massachusetts (Logan Airport)
To: Los Angeles, California
Lives: 92 people on board
Crashed into North Tower of World Trade Center at 8:46 AM
***
United Airlines Flight 175
From: Boston, Massachusetts (Logan Airport)
To: Los Angeles, California
Lives: 65 people on board
Crashed into South Tower of World Trade Center at 9:03 AM
***
American Airlines Flight 77
From: Washington, D.C. (Dulles Airport)
To: Los Angeles, CA
Lives: 64 people on board
Crashed into the Pentagon at 9:38 AM
***
United Airlines Flight 93
From: Newark, New Jersey
To: San Francisco, California
Lives: 44 people on board
Crashed into rural Pennsylvania (southeast of Pittsburgh) at 10:06 AM
-
jwb - You're getting bogged down with information here, which is easy to do. Please look at Norman Mineta's sworn testimony again:
He may be swearing but he is incorrect on which plane he is referring to. Nobody gave a shoot down order until the pentagon had been hit.
And don't tell me it is a stand down order because there was never a standup order in place before 9/11 it simply didn't exist.
Chenney is telling the aide to shoot down flight 93 which they thought was still in the air.
-
He may be swearing but he is incorrect on which plane he is referring to. Nobody gave a shoot down order until the pentagon had been hit.
And don't tell me it is a stand down order because there was never a standup order in place before 9/11 it simply didn't exist.
Chenney is telling the aide to shoot down flight 93 which they thought was still in the air.
Please, bro, stop for a second and think about what you're saying. Think of the timeline, and look at the reference post I made above.
-
See, that's a big part of the problem when people start looking at 9-11. Those few hours on that day created such a massive pile of information, a person can get bogged down within minutes of looking at it. From one perspective, I suppose you could say that's part of its brilliance.
One of the things you can do, though, is to look at related events that happened before this massive pile of information was created. Such as the fact that these individuals were practically handed over in the flesh to people who are legally bound to protect us, yet it didn't result in ANY action that prevented the hijackings. Think about it.
-
So just to recap... instead of 19 Muslim radicals supported by Bin Laden and his cohorts, planning and executing the hijackings which caused the destruction that day..
It was ...........??
-
Please, bro, stop for a second and think about what you're saying. Think of the timeline, and look at the reference post I made above.
I know exactly what I am saying you need to pay attention.
8:54: Flight 77 deviates from its assigned course, turning south over Ohio.
8:56: The transponder on Flight 77 is turned off and even primary radar contact with the aircraft is lost. During radar blackout Flight 77 turns east, unnoticed by flight controllers. When primary radar information is restored at 9:05, controllers searching for Flight 77 to the west of its previous position are unable to find it. Flight 77 travels undetected for 36 minutes on a course heading due east toward Washington, D.C.
9:24: The FAA notifies NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector about the suspected hijacking of Flight 77.
9:32: Controllers at the Dulles Terminal Radar Approach Control in Virginia observe "a primary radar target tracking eastbound at a high rate of speed", referring to Flight 77.
9:33: Tower supervisor at Reagan National Airport tells Secret Service operations center at the White House that "an aircraft is coming at you and not talking with us," referring to Flight 77. The White House is about to be evacuated when the tower reports that Flight 77 has turned and is approaching Reagan International Airport.
9:35: Based on a report that Flight 77 had turned again and was circling back toward the District of Columbia, the Secret Service orders the immediate evacuation of the Vice President from the White House.
9:37: Vice President Cheney enters an underground tunnel leading to a security bunker.
9:38: Flight 77 crashes into the western side of the Pentagon and starts a violent fire.
9.40 to 9.50: Cheney stops at a security checkpoint within the tunnel to call the president. During the call they learn of the Pentagon being hit and they agree to order the shooting down of hyjacked planes.
10:02: Communicators with the Vice President in the security bunker begin receiving reports from the Secret Service of an inbound aircraft — presumably hijacked — heading toward Washington. This is Flight 93.
10:03: United Airlines Flight 93 is crashed by its hijackers and passengers, due to fighting in the cockpit 80 miles (129 km) southeast of Pittsburgh in Somerset County, Pennsylvania.
10:10 to 10:15: Vice President Cheney, unaware that Flight 93 has crashed, authorizes fighter aircraft to engage the inbound plane, reported to be 80 miles (129 km) from Washington, based not on radar (from which it has disappeared) but speed and trajectory projections.
Flight 77 was taken at 8.56 but nobody could find it until 9.32. Cheney was NOT in the bunker at 9.20 ordering planes to be shot down he was still in the White House since the attacks were so far only centered on New York.
-
So just to recap... instead of 19 Muslim radicals supported by Bin Laden and his cohorts, planning and executing the hijackings which caused the destruction that day..
It was ...........??
If you're asking everyone on the thread, I hope you're not expecting a consensus.
-
8:54: Flight 77 deviates from its assigned course, turning south over Ohio.
8:56: The transponder on Flight 77 is turned off and even primary radar contact with the aircraft is lost. During radar blackout Flight 77 turns east, unnoticed by flight controllers. When primary radar information is restored at 9:05, controllers searching for Flight 77 to the west of its previous position are unable to find it. Flight 77 travels undetected for 36 minutes on a course heading due east toward Washington, D.C.
9:24: The FAA notifies NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector about the suspected hijacking of Flight 77.
9:32: Controllers at the Dulles Terminal Radar Approach Control in Virginia observe "a primary radar target tracking eastbound at a high rate of speed", referring to Flight 77.
9:33: Tower supervisor at Reagan National Airport tells Secret Service operations center at the White House that "an aircraft is coming at you and not talking with us," referring to Flight 77. The White House is about to be evacuated when the tower reports that Flight 77 has turned and is approaching Reagan International Airport.
9:35: Based on a report that Flight 77 had turned again and was circling back toward the District of Columbia, the Secret Service orders the immediate evacuation of the Vice President from the White House.
9:37: Vice President Cheney enters an underground tunnel leading to a security bunker.
9:38: Flight 77 crashes into the western side of the Pentagon and starts a violent fire.
9.40 to 9.50: Cheney stops at a security checkpoint within the tunnel to call the president. During the call they learn of the Pentagon being hit and they agree to order the shooting down of hyjacked planes.
10:02: Communicators with the Vice President in the security bunker begin receiving reports from the Secret Service of an inbound aircraft — presumably hijacked — heading toward Washington. This is Flight 93.
10:03: United Airlines Flight 93 is crashed by its hijackers and passengers, due to fighting in the cockpit 80 miles (129 km) southeast of Pittsburgh in Somerset County, Pennsylvania.
10:10 to 10:15: Vice President Cheney, unaware that Flight 93 has crashed, authorizes fighter aircraft to engage the inbound plane, reported to be 80 miles (129 km) from Washington, based not on radar (from which it has disappeared) but speed and trajectory projections.
This is from the 9-11 Commission Report, also known as the "official story". If you look back on the past few pages of this thread, you'll see evidence to show that parts of the official timeline are just plain wrong. Not from some wacko site, not from a questionable video, but straight from the words of respected officials who were present on the scene that day. Again, not people "out to get" Cheney, but people who were honestly and earnestly giving statements which would ultimately conflict with the official story.
Sorry, but this evidence is out there and it isn't going anywhere.
-
This timeline is support by the secret service, the FAA, phone records and plenty more least of which is common sense.
To say that Cheney was directly fighters to not shot down 77 before it hit is ludicrous. The orders were made after ten am and they were to shoot down the final approaching plane which was flight 93.
The second plane hit, Cheney then knew they were under attack so he tried to get a hold of the president which took some time because he was screwing around in that classroom. All this took place in the situation room in the west wing. After they talked which took a while because there were several agencies linked to the call, they got word of a plane approaching DC so they bailed to the bunker. This happened after 9.35.
Mineta is right and all these other people and recorded communications are wrong? Nope.
-
Even the fact that Mineta is out there saying he thought things were happening at 9.20 when everyone and everything else says that weren't shows it was not a conspiracy. You think he would be allow to talk about this if the fix was in?
-
The heart of this particular argument is:
To say that Cheney was directly fighters to not shot down 77 before it hit is ludicrous.
So is it more or is it less ludicrous than the Pentagon being left completely defenseless nearly an hour after the two largest attacks on American soil had taken place?
The second plane hit, Cheney then knew they were under attack so he tried to get a hold of the president which took some time because he was screwing around in that classroom.
And where does this place on the "ludicrous scale"?
Beyond the absolutely ridiculous lag time, if you're saying you believe that Cheney was concerned about somehow being prosecuted for ordering the destruction of ANY plane that day, especially after all that had taken place that morning, I'd say you have entered a state of complete denial.
-
I don't know how old you are but you are forgetting what life was like in 2001... Shit I even talked my way onto a flight at JFK in 1998 with no boarding pass and no ID (I lost it in the terminal somewhere). 4 inch utility knives were legal as CARRY ON luggage!
Once the second tower was hit there was no clear plan of what to do and no idea what was happening. They had no idea there was even a threat on DC until 9.32 and they only got out of the white house because they thought 77 was headed for them not the pentagon. I personally think they may have been headed for the white house but found themselves too high when they reached DC so they looped around and got sight of the pentagon which was also on their target list. They would of had a few places in mind to hit in case their preference wasn't possible IMO.
From when the second plane hit around 9am until 9.35 they were in the white house on the phones trying to figure out what had happened and what to do... Sorry but that is simply fact.
-
Cheney was calling Bush because he was his BOSS.
-
Once the second tower was hit there was no clear plan of what to do and no idea what was happening.
Yes, there was a very good idea of what was happening. Hijacked planes were being used as missiles. Two buildings had been hit. There were additional "missiles" still flying, presumably to be used in the same way.
-
I don't know how old you are but you are forgetting what life was like in 2001... Shit I even talked my way onto a flight at JFK in 1998 with no boarding pass and no ID (I lost it in the terminal somewhere). 4 inch utility knives were legal as CARRY ON luggage!
Once the second tower was hit there was no clear plan of what to do and no idea what was happening. They had no idea there was even a threat on DC until 9.32 and they only got out of the white house because they thought 77 was headed for them not the pentagon. I personally think they may have been headed for the white house but found themselves too high when they reached DC so they looped around and got sight of the pentagon which was also on their target list. They would of had a few places in mind to hit in case their preference wasn't possible IMO.
From when the second plane hit around 9am until 9.35 they were in the white house on the phones trying to figure out what had happened and what to do... Sorry but that is simply fact.
L0L S0 PLANES ENTER N0 FLY Z0NES AND N0THING IS D0NE T0 ST0P 0R SH00T D0WN THE PLANES WITH 0THER FIGHTER JETS. I CAN JUST IMAGINE RUSSIA SENDING PLANES WITH WARHEADS T0 AMERICA AND THE MILITARY STANDING BACK AFTER 100 NUKES HAVE BEEN DR0PPED SAYING WE DIDN'T KN0W WHAT WAS G0ING 0N.
-
L0L S0 PLANES ENTER N0 FLY Z0NES AND N0THING IS D0NE T0 ST0P 0R SH00T D0WN THE PLANES WITH 0THER FIGHTER JETS. I CAN JUST IMAGINE RUSSIA SENDING PLANES WITH WARHEADS T0 AMERICA AND THE MILITARY STANDING BACK AFTER 100 NUKES HAVE BEEN DR0PPED SAYING WE DIDN'T KN0W WHAT WAS G0ING 0N.
Jesus you are dumb. Remember the guy who crashed his plane onto the white house lawn? He wasn't stopped either. There simply isn't time to take out a plane that takes off within DC except to shoot it down from the white house roof. Restricted airspace means shit if you have public airports right next to it.
They didn't identify 77 as coming to DC until 9.32 and it hit at 9.37.
-
Once again people, Osama did not expect the towers to fall and was smart enough to not worry about it much. He simply wanted the targets hit then whatever happened was out of his control.
Bin Laden didn't expect New York towers to fall
By Toby Harnden in Washington12:01AM GMT 10 Dec 2001
A VIDEOTAPE seized by American intelligence agents in Afghanistan shows Osama bin Laden gloating over the attack on the World Trade Centre and expressing surprise that the twin towers had collapsed.
The tape, found in a private home in Jalalabad, throws doubt on whether the two aircraft flown into the towers were deliberately aimed at places where their impact would destroy the entire structure.
It emerged at the weekend that Mohammad Atta, ringleader of the terrorists and the pilot of the first aircraft to crash, had been in New York with another hijacker in spring last year.
The visit was probably to carry out a reconnaissance mission but exact details of their movements have not been established.
On the tape, bin Laden discusses the September 11 attacks in Arabic with a man who appears to be a cleric. He says he was at dinner when he heard the World Trade Centre had been hit - news that was greeted by cheers around the table.
sing outstretched hands, bin Laden says he expected only the top floors of the World Trade Centre to topple. "He does in fact display significant knowledge of what happened and there is no doubt about his responsibility for the attack on September 11," said vice-president Dick Cheney on NBC television. "This is one more piece of evidence confirming his responsibility."
The Bush administration is still debating whether to release the 40-minute tape for broadcast. "We've not been eager to give the guy any extra television time," said Mr Cheney.
There was initial concern that the tape might have been a fake but officials believed it was genuine and probably filmed for al-Qa'eda recruiting purposes.
Paul Wolfowitz, the US deputy defence secretary, said the tape "confirms everything we've known about him already". He added: "Maybe we'll stop hearing any more of these insane conspiracy theories that somehow the US has made this up or somebody else did it."
Some officials hope that making the tape public could counter concern in the Muslim world that bin Laden has been unjustly accused of involvement in the attacks, the Washington Post said.
At the request of the Bush administration, American television networks agreed in October not to air transmissions from bin Laden's al-Qa'eda terrorist network without them being edited first.
Bin Laden has publicly denied having a role in September 11. The day afterwards an aide told al-Jazeera television that the al-Qa'eda leader "had thanked Almighty Allah and bowed before him when he heard this news" but that "he had no information or knowledge about the attack".
He later praised the hijackers, telling al-Jazeera: "I pray to God to elevate their status and bless them."
-
Yes, there was a very good idea of what was happening. Hijacked planes were being used as missiles. Two buildings had been hit. There were additional "missiles" still flying, presumably to be used in the same way.
If all government officials are as dumb as JWB then maybe they REALLY didn't know what the hell was going on!! Maybe he is right after all??!!!
-
If all government officials are as dumb as JWB then maybe they REALLY didn't know what the hell was going on!! Maybe he is right after all??!!!
JWB seems to be the type of guy who would catch his gf/wife fucking in bed with another guy and ask "Hi honey! What you upto?" ...and would believe her when she said, "Just looking for some loose change with my new friend."
It amazes me when there is a smoking gun of evidence laying around, from multiple unaffiliated sources...& people still refuse to ackowledge that there's something out of place. Then to top it all off, they believe every single government report that comes out like it's the word of god.
Again, I'm not asking anyone to start running in the streets, screaming bloody murder. But for fucks sake, don't be blind and refuse to see that clearly there is something fucked up.
He is clearly the sort of sheep that the government wants. Most likely a yes man, believes everything that comes out of the white house and is very detailed in filling out his tax return hahahaha.
-
He is clearly the sort of sheep that the government wants. Most likely a yes man, believes everything that comes out of the white house and is very detailed in filling out his tax return hahahaha.
Considering my wife and I paid over $250,000 in tax last year you can bet we are very detailed when it comes to our taxes.
-
What was falling out of the 81st floor windows? The government says melted aluminum, the CT say Thermite. The truth could be neither.
http://11-settembre.blogspot.com/2007/02/ups-on-81st-floor-of-wtc2.html
This guy has done his homework and most likely solved the puzzle here.
-
...my wife and I paid over $250,000 in tax last year ...
Hahahah.....yet another getbig millionaire revealed!!!!!!!
Welcome to the club buddy!
::) x1,000,000
-
Hahahah.....yet another getbig millionaire revealed!!!!!!!
Welcome to the club buddy!
::) x1,000,000
far from millionaires we still have big loans to pay from medical school and are supporting sick parents also.
What are your comments on the Italian guys' theory about floor 81? It isn't a YouTube video so you will have to read it can you handle that?
-
Now we have an MD on getbig?
Actually we're in the same boat because I know where you're coming from. I have loans to pay back from harvard med, duke law & MIT engineering to pay back. That shit sucks!
Things are getting better here all the time.
Reading makes my brain hurt so I'll have to wait until I get off work. Maybe a getbigger here can tell me in 40 words or less what that wop says?
-
Now we have an MD on getbig?
Things are getting better here all the time.
Reading makes my brain hurt so I'll have to wait until I get off work. Maybe a getbigger here can tell me in 40 words or less what that wop says?
My wife is the MD I have a business related to her practice.
The corner of that floor of wtc2 had reinforced trusses. Why? The tenant Fuji Bank had their UPS room located there. A UPS room consists of a large room full of batteries to supply uninterrupted power in case of power loss. Enough batteries that the floor has to be reinforced means a fire in that area would be an explosive situation.
-
My wife is the MD I have a business related to her practice.
The corner of that floor of wtc2 had reinforced trusses. Why? The tenant Fuji Bank had their UPS room located there. A UPS room consists of a large room full of batteries to supply uninterrupted power in case of power loss. Enough batteries that the floor has to be reinforced means a fire in that area would be an explosive situation.
These guys have made up their minds and no amount of logic and reasoning is gonna change it. They're like conservative Christians because if this doesn't sound right or you don't have an explanation it must be a conspiracy , they want and need this to be an ' inside job ' for what end who knows? they figured it out and now are out to expose the whole thing on internet message boards
-
These guys have made up their minds and no amount of logic and reasoning is gonna change it. They're like conservative Christians because if this doesn't sound right or you don't have an explanation it must be a conspiracy , they want and need this to be an ' inside job ' for what end who knows? they figured it out and now are out to expose the whole thing on internet message boards
I know their minds are made up but hopefully some fencesitters can be saved from the abyss of stupidity by getting another view on things.
-
I know their minds are made up but hopefully some fencesitters can be saved from the abyss of stupidity by getting another view on things.
It's astonishing they think they uncovered this entire plot and now what? their only recourse is to complain on an internet message board? this does what exactly? these people think they are privy to some special information that the rest of us aren't and that they are in rarefied air and the rest of us are just lemmings who bought into the ' official ' story. It's like The Matrix they are the unplugged ones and the rest of us are still in denial , give me a fucking break
you figured it all out Truthers , now what? ::)
-
In the massive pile of information, it's easy to lose sight of some of the most basic questions.
Nothing in this thread has addressed one of the most nagging issues of that morning. Despite the immediate communication we had even way back in 2001, neither the President nor the Secretary of Defense would issue a shoot-down order. Why?
-
In the massive pile of information, it's easy to lose sight of some of the most basic questions.
Nothing in this thread has addressed one of the most nagging issues of that morning. Despite the immediate communication we had even way back in 2001, neither the President nor the Secretary of Defense would issue a shoot-down order. Why?
Thanks for proving my point , because they wouldn't or couldn't or didn't issue a shoot-down order it then by default has to be a conspiracy , just because your question isn't answered to your satisfaction doesn't mean your position wins by default.
-
I'm asking why they didn't issue a shoot-down order.
What are you talking about Cheney did order one after the pentagon was hit.
-
What are you talking about Cheney did order one after the pentagon was hit.
After the second plane hit, during the forty minutes before Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, why wasn't a shoot-down order issued? Was Cheney concerned with his own potential prosecution if he did it himself? And since we had immediate communication even back in 2001, why would he even need to consider it, since both the President and the Secretary of Defense have the power to issue such an order?
Why didn't ANY of these three men issue the order?
-
After the second plane hit, during the forty minutes before Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, why wasn't a shoot-down order issued? Was Cheney concerned with his own potential prosecution if he did it himself? And since we had immediate communication even back in 2001, why would he even need to consider it, since both the President and the Secretary of Defense have the power to issue such an order.
Why didn't ANY of these three men issue the order?
You are talking like they knew a plane was headed for the pentagon before 9am. They didn't know until 9.32 that another plane was headed to DC. As far as they knew until that point the attack was over. Don't forget bush was not available to speak until around 9.10-15am.
-
You are talking like they knew a plane was headed for the pentagon before 9am. They didn't know until 9.32 that another plane was headed to DC. As far as they knew until that point the attack was over. Don't forget bush was not available to speak until around 9.10-15am.
If two hijacked planes had just been used as missiles, why would they think this one was any different?
-
If two hijacked planes had just been used as missiles, why would they think this one was any different?
They didn't think it was different but they didn't know about it until 34 minutes after the towers were hit!
-
They didn't think it was different but they didn't know about it until 34 minutes after the towers were hit!
The plane was hijacked at 8:51.
-
For that matter, why wouldn't a shoot-down order be issued for any aircraft that was not following commands?
-
The plane was hijacked at 8:51.
The white house didn't know about that plane until 9.32 the controllers lost it from radar for 36 minutes it could have been anywhere including crashed.
You are talking like everybody got a text the second something actually occurred.
-
The white house didn't know about that plane until 9.32 the controllers lost it from radar for 36 minutes it could have been anywhere including crashed.
You are talking like everybody got a text the second something actually occurred.
So they assumed that this plane known to be hijacked at 8:51 had crashed, and therefore didn't issue the order...?
I'm trying to get at what you're saying here.
-
So they assumed that this plane known to be hijacked at 8:51 had crashed, and therefore didn't issue the order...?
I'm trying to get at what you're saying here.
No the white house was not informed about this plane until the FAA found on their screens flying full speed towards DC but that was not until 9.32. They first thought it was a military plane because of the great speed it was travelling.
Of course they should have been better prepared as far as what to do they unfortunately were not.
-
No the white house was not informed about this plane until the FAA found on their screens flying full speed towards DC but that was not until 9.32. They first thought it was a military plane because of the great speed it was travelling.
Of course they should have been better prepared as far as what to do they unfortunately were not.
But none of this answers the question of WHY a shoot-down order for all non-compliant planes wasn't issued immediately after the second plane hit.
-
Give's chills every time I watch it. Skip to 6:30 in the clip...crazy. I really don't like re-living this event, I won't turn on the news tomorrow.
I'm not sure exactly what happened (none of us are), but tomorrow is not the time to argue about it. Set aside differences for a day and just think about the people who lost their lives.
-
But none of this answers the question of WHY a shoot-down order for all non-compliant planes wasn't issued immediately after the second plane hit.
I agree what hell was Bush thinking staying in the classroom for so long?
He was probably wishing his daddy was there!
-
I agree what hell was Bush thinking staying in the classroom for so long?
He was probably wishing his daddy was there!
projecting an image of calmness.....and trying to turn the book over so it can be read properly. ;D
-
(http://i.imgur.com/Lh0Ee.gif)
-
Jesus you are dumb. Remember the guy who crashed his plane onto the white house lawn? He wasn't stopped either. There simply isn't time to take out a plane that takes off within DC except to shoot it down from the white house roof. Restricted airspace means shit if you have public airports right next to it.
They didn't identify 77 as coming to DC until 9.32 and it hit at 9.37.
N0T EN0UGH TIME? ARE Y0U INSANE? WE HAVE AUT0MATIC MISSLES THAT SH00T D0WN ANYTHING IN LESS THAN A SEC0ND.
-
N0T EN0UGH TIME? ARE Y0U INSANE? WE HAVE AUT0MATIC MISSLES THAT SH00T D0WN ANYTHING IN LESS THAN A SEC0ND.
Sad to see the clowns couldn't leave this thread alone today...
-
Has anyone else read this? seems to explain building 7 quite succinctly...
http://www-math.mit.edu/~bazant/WTC/WTC-asce.pdf
-
Has anyone else read this? seems to explain building 7 quite succinctly...
http://www-math.mit.edu/~bazant/WTC/WTC-asce.pdf
His paper from 2007 is even better reading.
http://web.archive.org/web/20070809030224/http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/bazant/PDFs/Papers/466.pdf
-
I watched the films over and over and I think I know what happened. As far as I can tell from studying the films, it appears, and I KNOW this sounds crazy, it appears 2 jet liners crashed into the 2 buildings and the resulting damage and intense fires eventually caused the buildings to collapse. Feel free to qoute this finding..
-
But none of this answers the question of WHY a shoot-down order for all non-compliant planes wasn't issued immediately after the second plane hit.
This is just inconceivable.
You're the best researcher I've seen on the official line, jwb. How's this explained?
-
This is just inconceivable.
You're the best researcher I've seen on the official line, jwb. How's this explained?
The protocol in place at the time, from what I have read, is that it could only be issued by the president directly to the secretary of defense. The president was reading a lullaby.
I think the response was poor but the world was different before that day.
-
http://tarpley.net/docs/drills_of_911.pdf
T0 UNDERSTAND H0W THIS IS PULLED 0FF, 0NE FIRST NEEDS T0 UNDERSTAND THE PURP0SE BEHIND DRILLS 0N THE DAY 0F THE ATTACK.
-
http://tarpley.net/docs/drills_of_911.pdf
T0 UNDERSTAND H0W THIS IS PULLED 0FF, 0NE FIRST NEEDS T0 UNDERSTAND THE PURP0SE BEHIND DRILLS 0N THE DAY 0F THE ATTACK.
I've seen this before, and it's very interesting. It can put the schnitzel to the "who'd have imagined it?" claim we've heard so much.
-
IF AFTER 10 YEARS THERE ARE PE0PLE THAT STILL BELIEVE THAT A BUNCH 0F CAVEMEN LIVING IN THE MIDDLE 0F N0WWHERE PULLED THIS 0FF, THEN THERE IS N0 H0PE LEFT F0R Y0U GUYS. PRETTY PATHETIC.
-
The protocol in place at the time, from what I have read, is that it could only be issued by the president directly to the secretary of defense. The president was reading a lullaby.
I think the response was poor but the world was different before that day.
But even way back in the stone ages of 2001, lol, we had immediate communication. And from what I recall, it was every bit as immediate as what we've got now.
Again, it had become obvious that hijacked planes were being used a missiles. Two buildings had already been hit. There were more missiles out there.
Think about this. For nearly one and a half hours, there was no shoot-down order. Despite these circumstances. Really.
In the absolute best case scenario, would you agree this appears to be dereliction of duty?
-
And by the way, Rumsfeld could have issued the order as well.
-
Confusion abounded in Washington that morning. I just read a 2004 article where Cheney told Donald R that they had in fact taken out two planes at around 10am. The truth was the pilots didn't receive any orders to do as such till much later.
My feeling is the military top brass got the order and had some discussions amongst themselves before they passed it on. Don't forget they shot down an passenger plane by mistake several years before. People would think the military would care more about saving some more lives but I think covering their own asses is their main priority.
There have also been some audio tapes released this week if you search the web of controllers and others and they are really floundering about what is happening and what to do.
-
Confusion abounded in Washington that morning.
But again, there was NO confusion about the fact that hijacked planes were being used as missiles. Two buildings had been hit. There were more missiles still flying, to be used in the same way.
Simple enough for even a small child to understand. Seriously.
I just read a 2004 article where Cheney told Donald R that they had in fact taken out two planes at around 10am. The truth was the pilots didn't receive any orders to do as such till much later.
My feeling is the military top brass got the order and had some discussions amongst themselves before they passed it on.
Suggesting that high ranking officers deliberately obstructed the chain of command? I thought you scoffed at anything conspiritorial.
Don't forget they shot down an passenger plane by mistake several years before. People would think the military would care more about saving some more lives but I think covering their own asses is their main priority.
Even with the incredible circumstances of that morning? Even with the stark likelihood that inaction would almost certainly cause far more destruction than any action they could take under such an incredible threat? Think about it.
There have also been some audio tapes released this week if you search the web of controllers and others and they are really floundering about what is happening and what to do.
Yes. There's also a new article that says the military recieved an order from Dick Cheney that was effectively ignored as being an illegal command. This of course just lets loose another avalanche of contradiction from past statements.
-
Yes. There's also a new article that says the military recieved an order from Dick Cheney that was effectively ignored as being an illegal command. This of course just lets loose another avalanche of contradiction from past statements.
AND 0N T0P 0F THE C0NTRADICTI0NS, DICK CHENEY, BUSH, AND RICE ALL WENT 0N T.V. SAYING WE NEVER TH0UGHT A HIJACKED PLANE CAN HIT A T0WER DESPITE THEIR BEING 22 DRILLS 0N THAT DAY RELATED T0 A HIJACKING.
-
AND 0N T0P 0F THE C0NTRADICTI0NS, DICK CHENEY, BUSH, AND RICE ALL WENT 0N T.V. SAYING WE NEVER TH0UGHT A HIJACKED PLANE CAN HIT A T0WER DESPITE THEIR BEING 22 DRILLS 0N THAT DAY RELATED T0 A HIJACKING.
Yes, I know. It's something that hasn't been explored at all by our so-called "reporting agencies". How could officials, especially Rumsfeld for God's sake, dare say that "we could have never imagined this", when they were doing drills for this type of attack practically right up until the time it happened.
You know, it's really been lost in this whole thing, how it's the responsibility of our so-called "reporters" to ask these questions. I know it's completely laughable as a true cause here, as our reporting agencies have decided to operate under an incredibly limited, very "safe" scope -- which makes them completely ineffective in their supposed purpose, of course, but that's another story.
God bless our citizens. We need need it. Because as someone mentioned earlier, this thing isn't over. It's just begun.
-
Yes, I know. It's something that hasn't been explored at all by our so-called "reporting agencies". How could officials, especially Rumsfeld for God's sake, dare say that "we could have never imagined this", when they were doing drills for this type of attack practically right up until the time it happened.
You know, it's really been lost in this whole thing, how it's the responsibility of our so-called "reporters" to ask these questions. I know it's completely laughable as a true cause here, as our reporting agencies have decided to operate under an incredibly limited, very "safe" scope -- which makes them completely ineffective in their supposed purpose, of course, but that's another story.
God bless our citizens. We need need it. Because as someone mentioned earlier, this thing isn't over. It's just begun.
AND THE REP0RTERS ARE A BUNCH 0F SHEEP WH0 JUST D0 WHAT THEY'RE T0LD. THE MEDIA IS HEAVILY C0NTR0LLED BY A SELECTED GR0UP 0F VERY WEALTHY INDIVIDUALS. THEY DECIDE WHAT T0 SH0W AND WHEN.
-
any link to the 20 + drills on that day involving hijackings and planes crashing into the building?
-
RIGHT 0N SP0T.
-
any link to the 20 + drills on that day involving hijackings and planes crashing into the building?
I could be wrong but I don't think it was 20 drills on the day. many of the drills brought up were before 9/11. I think most say 5 drills were happening the day before and the morning of sept. 11.
http://www.911proof.com/9.html
Listen to this on the london bombings... Unreal...
-
I could be wrong but I don't think it was 20 drills on the day. many of the drills brought up were before 9/11. I think most say 5 drills were happening the day before and the morning of sept. 11.
http://www.911proof.com/9.html
Listen to this on the london bombings... Unreal...
N0 THERE WERE 22 0N THE DAY AND 42 T0TAL BEF0RE AND AFTER. TARPLEY DISCL0SED THIS IN HIS NEW B00K.
-
found a list from Tarpley's book:
http://coto2.wordpress.com/2011/08/27/the-46-drills-of-911-by-webster-tarpley/
-
There's very strong evidence to show this was "let to happen". I would challenge anyone to say otherwise and back it up. These offending individuals weren't even placed under the most basic surveillance after our security agencies received very precise tips about their activities related to this plot. Again, they did not track these very same individuals that would board those planes.
And once the attack DID begin, they were allowed to continue for as long as they needed. Think about that. They were allowed to continue for as long as they needed, unstopped for nearly an hour and a half. Think about those undeniable and fundamental facts in this case.
We must face this reality. The evidence says this was at the very least allowed to happen.
So when you slowly and painfully accept that it was allowed to happen, and you consider the required intent involved to "let it happen" in this murderous case, it's just a very small step to assume that it was helped to happen or even made to happen. It's called plausibility. Plain and simple.
THEN when you take it into the realm of hindsight, and the wrenching changes we've suffered as a result: the backwards excuse for "patriotism", the unspeakable loss of our rights, the open-ended wars, the compromising of our most basic values as Americans, the funneling of money to the tune of trillions of dollars, and of course the kneejerk manipulation that has made it all run so smoothly, it should become painfully clear to any rational person.
-
There's very strong evidence to show this was "let to happen". I would challenge anyone to say otherwise and back it up. These offending individuals weren't even placed under the most basic surveillance after our security agencies received very precise tips about their activities related to this plot. Again, they did not track these very same individuals that would board those planes and cause the greatest tragedy in our history.
And once the attack DID begin, they were allowed to continue for as long as they needed. Think about that. They were allowed to continue for as long as they needed, unstopped for nearly an hour and a half. Think about those undeniable and fundamental facts in this case.
We must face this very ugly
reality. The evidence says this was at the very least allowed to happen.
So when you slowly and painfully accept that it was allowed to happen, and you consider the required intent involved to "let it happen" in this murderous case, it's just a very small step to assume that it was helped to happen or even made to happen. It's called plausibility. Plain and simple.
THEN when you take it into the realm of hindsight, and the wrenching changes we've suffered as a result: the backwards excuse for "patriotism", the unspeakable loss of our rights, the open-ended wars, the compromising of our most basic trust as Americans, the funneling of money to the tune of trillions of dollars, and of course the kneejerk manipulation that has made it all run so smoothly, it should become painfully clear to any rational person.
No. It was made it happen. The 12 Arabs were just a bunch of patsies who thought they were participating in a drill until it went live. They needed to get the 12 arabs on the plane to plant the story of a hijacking. THE PE0PLE IN CHARGE 0F ALL THIS W0ULD NEVER PUT FAITH IN 12 GUYS T0 CARRY 0UT A HIJACKING. THIS WAS AN 0RCHESTRATED EVENT. The plane itself had been programmed to crash in the tower.
-
No. It was made it happen. The 12 Arabs were just a bunch of patsies who thought they were participating in a drill until it went live. They needed to get the 12 arabs on the plane to plant the story of a hijacking. THE PE0PLE IN CHARGE 0F ALL THIS W0ULD NEVER PUT FAITH IN 12 GUYS T0 CARRY 0UT A HIJACKING. THIS WAS AN 0RCHESTRATED EVENT. The plane itself had been programmed to crash in the tower.
As I said, when you accept that it was allowed to happen, it becomes logical to believe it was made to happen. Of course.
As for the Arabs believing it was a drill, that's a new one on me. What evidence do you have to support this?
-
As I said, when you accept that it was allowed to happen, it becomes logical to believe it was made to happen. Of course.
As for the Arabs believing it was a drill, that's a new one on me. What evidence do you have to support this?
WELL, THE WH0LE AL QAEDA IS A CREATI0N AND IS C0NTR0LLED BY THE INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES. THE MAIN RECRUITER IS AL LAWKI. HE RECRUITS ALL THE PATSIES. IT'S THE SAME SCENARI0 WITH ALL THE PATSIES. HASSAN, 0SWALD, SUREN, THE UNDERWEAR B0MBER, ETC. THEY ARE ALL INF0RMANTS AND THEN USED AS SCAPEG0ATS. THEY PICK FANATICS AND MENTALLY ILL PE0PLE AND THEN DUPE THEM. THERE IS N0 INDEPENTENT TERR0RIST GR0UP 0PERATING BY THEMSELVES. IT'S ALL PLANNED. THE RINGLEADER ATTA WAS A MEMBER 0F THE MUSLIM BR0THERH00D. A CREATI0N 0F THE BRITISH. THE DRILLS ARE D0NE F0R TW0 REAS0NS. T0 SAY IT'S A DRILL IF THEY ARE CAUGHT BY 0THER LAW ENF0RCEMENT AND T0 GET THE PATSIES AND B0MBS IN. THE DRILL IS THEN FLIPPED LIVE AS WITH THE CASE 0F HASSAN AND THE L0ND0N B0MBINGS. ATTA AND THE HIJACKERS ALS0 0BTAINED LICENSES AND TRAINED IN U.S. BASES. PRI0R T0 9/11. S0 WHY WERE THEY LET 0N THE PLANE AND T00K FLIGHT LESS0NS? T0 MAKE IT SEEM ALL BELIEVABLE THAT THEY ACTUALLY HIJACKED THE PLANE. A PERFECT SET UP. N0NE 0F THE PATSIES KN0W WHAT IS HAPPENING UNTIL IT HAPPENS.
THE PE0PLE WH0 MASTERMINDED 9/11 HAD AN AGENDA AND THEY W0ULD NEVER PLACE FAITH 0N A BUNCH 0F ARABS T0 SUCCEED IN A HIJACKING A PLANE. IT'S T00 RISKY. THERE IS ALWAYS THE P0SSIBILITY THAT THEY D0N'T SUCCEED AND THEIR WH0LE 0PERATI0N IS EXP0SED.
-
INTERESTING. TH0UGHT I'D P0ST THIS. LADY SAID SHE HEARD A B0MB EXPL0DE BEF0RE ANY PLANE HIT THE T0WER. MANY WITNESSES HAD SAID THERE WAS AN EXPL0SI0N BEF0RE THE PLANE HIT THE T0WER. 0F C0URSE, ALL 0F THIS WAS TAKEN 0UT BY 0UR W0NDERFUL FREE MEDIA.
-
The "let to happen" foundation is obvious. A person would have to have their head so far up their ass to deny it, it's not even funny. But of course in a case like this, there's no separation between "let to happen" and "made to happen".
As far as detailing the "made to happen", though, it gets trickier. A person has to make a plausible story with facts to support it. In the end, it needs more than random bits and pieces; it must have as close to a complete reconstruction as possible.
The explosions are a very interesting part of that morning. Many credible people, including several employees of the WTC that knew the environment better than anyone else, have stated without hesitation that there WERE explosions in the half minute or so before the aircraft hit. It is a solid collection of evidence that should go into the "good" drawer until ready to be pulled out.
As for the idea that Atta and others were present on business at our military bases, which are secure sites with checkpoints, I'd like to see some evidence.
-
INTERESTING. TH0UGHT I'D P0ST THIS. LADY SAID SHE HEARD A B0MB EXPL0DE BEF0RE ANY PLANE HIT THE T0WER. MANY WITNESSES HAD SAID THERE WAS AN EXPL0SI0N BEF0RE THE PLANE HIT THE T0WER. 0F C0URSE, ALL 0F THIS WAS TAKEN 0UT BY 0UR W0NDERFUL FREE MEDIA.
HAHA - Ozmo, where are you? We'd like your input on this video!! They must all be in on it.
-
Really Quad?
So multiple witness testimony is always consistent?
So if 170 people hear the same thing, for example 3 gun shiots, all 170 of them will say they heard 3 gun shots?
:)
How many would testify to 4 or 2? 1? 10? 30? Or zero?
-
What would be interesting is to know how many survivors heard explosions and how many heard them before the planes hit.
Maybe some one can present Actual sourced data. Like 2000 survivors reported hearing explosions. "X" reported hearing them before and "Y" reported hearing them after.
Just don't serve up some vague obviously edited string of clips from some wanna be final cut junkie.
P.S. No need to "YELL" your reponses. ;). Thanks.
-
We are not talking about WTC 1 right now. WTC 7 fell straight down in it's own footprint, demolition style. WTC 7 did not have significant damage from the North and South towers that collapsed earlier. Did you look at the video?
All the buildings vertical STEEL columns were cut simultaneously.
No other way possible to bring down a 47 story building... at the SPEED OF GRAVITY.
Prove Building #7 CD incorrect. Just post a video of ANY building in World History that has acted in a similar fashion.
Waiting stooges...
-
As for the idea that Atta and others were present on business at our military bases, which are secure sites with checkpoints, I'd like to see some evidence.
Four days after the attacks, the LA Times reported:
A defense official said two of the hijackers were former Saudi fighter pilots who had studied in exchange programs at the Defense Language School at Lackland Air Force Base in Texas and the Air War College at Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama.
Newsweek, the Washington Post and the Miami Herald all reported as many as seven of the terrorist hijackers in the September 11th attacks received training at secure U.S. Military installations.