Doomstead Diner Menu => Conspiracy => Topic started by: Surly1 on March 15, 2012, 03:52:59 AM

Title: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Surly1 on March 15, 2012, 03:52:59 AM
Many reasonable people simply roll their eyes at the thought of a "9-11 conspiracy." Even if you can dismiss the facts that fires alone had NEVER brought down a skyscraper, the mystery of Building 7, the thermite found in the dust, the rush to clear the crime scene . . .  you might want to confront this and ask, "why."

‎"Of course the order still stands" Cheney tells his Naval Aide Douglas Cochrane as the unauthorized aircraft, tracked and targeted by military radar, is allowed to come in to strike the Pentagon, NORAD on "stand down", not a single defensive missile launched or even shot fired to defend the building - "The Air National Guard and Air Force air defense units of the United States were prohibited from carrying out their standard intercept procedures as detailed above on the morning of 911; after they had received the alerts from ATC and FAA..These orders came from the executive office of the president"

http://www.standdown.net/FAAstandardinterceptprocedures.htm

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Standard Intercept Procedures

 

It is a fact that standard intercept procedures for dealing with these kinds of situations are totally established, in force and online in these United States 365 days a year, 7 days a week, 24 hours a day.

Regarding rules governing IFR requirements, see FAA Order 7400.2E

'Procedures for Handling Airspace Matters,' Effective Date: December 7, 2000
(Includes Change 1, effective July 7, 2001), Chapter 14-1-2. Full text posted at: http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/AIR/air1401.html#14-1-2FAA

Guide to Basic Flight Information and Air Traffic Control (ATC) Procedures,'
(Includes Change 3, Effective: July 12, 2001) Chapter 5-6-4 "Interception Signals"
Full text posted at: http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/AIM/Chap5/aim0506.html#5-6-4

FAA Order 7110.65M 'Air Traffic Control' (Includes Change 3, Effective: July 12, 2001), Chapter 10-2-5 "Emergency Situations" Full text posted at: http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/ATC/Chp10/atc1002.html#10-2-5

FAA Order 7110.65M 'Air Traffic Control' (Includes Change 3, Effective: July 12, 2001), Chapter 10-1-1 "Emergency Determinations" Full text posted at: http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/ATC/Chp10/atc1001.html#10-1-1

FAA Order 7610.4J 'Special Military Operations' (Effective Date: November 3, 1998; Includes: Change 1, effective July 3, 2000; Change 2, effective July 12, 2001), Chapter 4, Section 5, "Air Defense Liaison Officers (ADLO's)" Full text posted at: http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/MIL/Ch4/mil0405.html#Section%205

FAA Order 7610.4J 'Special Military Operations' (Effective Date: November 3, 1998; Includes: Change 1, effective July 3, 2000; Change 2, effective July 12, 2001), Chapter 7, Section 1-2, "Escort of Hijacked Aircraft: Requests for Service" Full text posted at: http://faa.gov/ATpubs/MIL/Ch7/mil0701.html#7-1-2

'Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction 3610.01A,' 1 June 2001, "Aircraft Piracy (Hijacking) and Destruction of Derelict Airborne Objects," 4. Policy (page 1) PDF available at: http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/cjcsd/cjcsi/3610_01a.pdf

The Air National Guard and Air Force air defense units of the United States were prohibited from carrying out their standard intercept procedures as detailed above on the morning of 911; after they had received the alerts from ATC and FAA. Absolutely no executive-level input of any kind is required for standard intercepts to be scrambled. 
There wasn't any indication in any alerts received by air defense units that "shoot-downs" may be required as opposed to intercepts -- i.e.; that the planes were definitely under control of "hostile" forces -- because ATC/FAA could not have known that.

When the first alerts were received from Air Traffic Control, all that air defense units were required to do was scramble standard interceptors to make contact with the incommunicado and off-course jets. F-16s and other fighter planes would have overtaken every single hijacked plane on September 11, before they had reached their targets. To view locations of air bases: http://www.StandDown.net/USAFbases.htm

If, at the time of interception, it was determined the aircraft were under hostile control and likely to impact targets, high-level air defense commanders at the Pentagon's National Military Command Center (NMCC) are fully authorized under existing and established regulations and procedures to authorize a shoot-down, in order to protect the United States of America from attack.

Yet air defense units that were ready and able on 911 at at least 35 nearby installations were ordered not to scramble interceptors: they were ordered to stand down from carrying out even the first stage of standard intercept procedures.

These orders came from the executive office of the president as well as from complicit individuals in the aforementioned NMCC.

There is no question that if these interceptors had been scrambled at the time alerts were received, they would have intercepted the hijacked planes before targets were approached in every instance.

And there is no way that the office of the President or the NMCC could have known through any standard means that these incommunicado flights required anything other than standard interceptions, because ATC and FAA alerts did not relay any such information. The alerts simply requested that standard intercept procedures be implemented and that interceptors be scrambled forthwith.

Some disingenuous excuse-makers say things like: "Well, there was no air defense response because the U.S. had no procedures for dealing with such 'attacks,' because the U.S. had never been 'attacked' this way before."

This sheer, complete nonsense: fully established procedures for dealing with intercepts of all kinds, including of hostile aircraft, existed on September 11, as detailed above.

Furthermore: when those first alerts were received from ATC/FAA, there was no mention of any "attack" and no need for "unusual" procedures. There was only a need for standard, first-stage interceptions to be scrambled, and higher authorities prevented that.

Other disingenuous excuse-makers then say: "Well, of course higher authorities stepped in, because they had to see what was going on with the whole situation, as 'America was under attack.' "

America was not "under attack" when those first alerts were received; certainly ATC and FAA had no way of knowing so early in the proceedings that the jets which had broken communications and gone off-course were part of any "attack."

So why did the executive branch and high-level military authorities deliberately order the air defense interceptors to stand down? Nobody could have known that early in the proceedings that 'America was under attack"... or could they have known?

Those who ordered the stand down did know that early in the proceedings that "America was under attack" because they were complicit in the attack, and took all possible steps to ensure that the attack would take place, unimpeded by the air defense of the United States.

True patriots in this land who have sworn to protect and defend our Republic must consider these irrefutable facts and set about unswerevingly to bring these complicit individuals to justice.

As I may have told you long ago, I am a tyro at questioning the state. and such a task is not my principal activity. I am a small, specialty manufacturer who has gotten caught up in being disgusted by my government's lies and that has caused me to look at certain events more closely than those who are thought to be responsible for that scrutiny.

As you know by now, I have also been outraged by the monstrous lies that the government has foisted on the public, with the cooperation of the press, concerning the failure of the us military to interdict and prevent the murderously damaging conclusion of 3 or 4 commercial airliners on 911.

Just by searching The New York Times archives, I found the policy and the methodology for intercepting a runaway Lear 35 [Payne Stewart's charter]. The story clearly establishes that F-16's were scrambled to intercept this bizjet within 25 minutes of its failure to report to controllers upon its reaching its cleared altitude of 39,000 feet. These F-16's were scrambled only upon the loss of a radio communication: the transponder never ceased to function.

Air Defenses Stood Down On 911 After ATC Alerts Given

by R. Anderson

Source: http://www.attackonamerica.net/airdefensesstooddownon911.htm
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: JoeP on April 11, 2012, 03:15:38 PM
USA Used Tactical Nuclear Weapons in Afghanistan and Iraq
 (http://orientalreview.org/2012/04/09/the-usa-have-used-tactical-nuclear-weapons-in-afghanistan-and-iraq/)

"Something like this was said after the September 11, 2001. While investigating the New York twin towers incident some experts from different countries came to conclusion the towers went down (together with the third one that was seldom mentioned in the Trade Center attack report) as a result of small yield thermonuclear explosions. The scenario advocates point to seismic shocks on the day of the attack and the fact that some fire fighters and policemen who were at the place of destruction died years after because of cancer."
Title: The 9-11 conspiracy theory in less than five minutes
Post by: Surly1 on April 12, 2012, 10:20:45 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/A_IZaUuK_d0?version=3&feature=player_detailpage
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Danno on April 16, 2012, 07:58:36 PM
Hi,

I thought I would put my F77 page back up. Here it is.

http://www.lakeweb.org/F77/ (http://www.lakeweb.org/F77/)

Best, Dan.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: nobody on April 21, 2012, 12:04:34 PM
This isn't a popular thread for this forum but one very close to my heart.  It seems to me that everything radiates from here, or leads back to this.  I know it didn't start with 9/01/01 but it maintains unequaled significance in denial for me.  I remember at the time -and I was just as innocent as any lamb back then with my little boys and my Beatrix Potter stories -that, watching that horror unfold; I was being entertained.  and royally.  It was a very obvious and recognizable style of the popular genre.  I was perfectly confused by this; astonished into oblivion by the cruelty I knew I was witnessing.  Everyone was excited.  My favorites were the women who called people all day long crying; one of these bothered me and I hung up on her.  I was busy.  Within a year I was talking in my basement to a guy who delivered a used washer to me about this conspiracy.  We didn't even have all the excellent facts displayed here and we didn't need them.  Unequaled significance in the denial arena.  This seems very important to me and I hope people keep talking here.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: nobody on April 23, 2012, 11:27:19 AM
Did I say 09/01/01?  I did.  what a dumbass.  Yet it's the true 9-1-1 and I've always wondered about this date.  If I look it up (concerning numerology), I get too upset by the heavy occult so I'll just correct.  One other thing about the towers.  Were the first responders just collateral damage or a target?
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Surly1 on April 23, 2012, 11:32:41 AM
Hi,

I thought I would put my F77 page back up. Here it is.

http://www.lakeweb.org/F77/ (http://www.lakeweb.org/F77/)

Best, Dan.

Good page.
"When you find falsifications in a hypothesis you throw it out."

Unless, of course, you are hijacking the Constitution of your country, in which case you double down on crazy.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: nobody on April 25, 2012, 07:39:10 AM
The F77 page is quite good.  That 9/11 video is one of my favorites.

"In science, finding falsifications of a hypothesis means you throw it out. It has nothing to do with what one 'feels' about the truth."

Was that meant for me?  Moi? 

If so, everyone's always been too polite to tell me that and it's perfectly ok with me when someone does.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Surly1 on April 25, 2012, 08:36:32 AM
The F77 page is quite good.  That 9/11 video is one of my favorites.

"In science, finding falsifications of a hypothesis means you throw it out. It has nothing to do with what one 'feels' about the truth."

Was that meant for me?  Moi? 

If so, everyone's always been too polite to tell me that and it's perfectly ok with me when someone does.

@ nobody, not at all directed at you. I am far more direct.
My quotation was directed at the comments made on the f77 page, and the tissue of lies and unprovable theories upon which the entire official liturgy of 9-11, and hence the eternal and utterly unwinnable "War on Terror" are ultimately based.

The hijacking of the Constitution and of what used to be our way of life has been perpetrated under cover of this coup, all perpetuated by lies. All of it, all the blood, the treasure, the useless militarization of daily life, the utter bullshit of it all, all based on lies. And benefiting the one per cent of this country.

Not for nothing did Jay Gould famously say, "You can always hire half of the working class in this country to kill the other half."

For my part, I am glad you are back here!
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: nobody on April 25, 2012, 10:36:12 AM
My dear Surly, I need a nap.  Thought I was talking to Dan who reposted the F77 page.  I've been spending more time figuring out the lay of land here, but I'm not there yet!  It's just quite a creation, the Diner.  I am a bit sensitive about not being able to contribute at the highly educated level that's really taken a grip here.  I soldier on.

Thanks for your reassurance; sorry to bother!
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Surly1 on April 25, 2012, 11:27:22 AM
My dear Surly, I need a nap.  Thought I was talking to Dan who reposted the F77 page.  I've been spending more time figuring out the lay of land here, but I'm not there yet!  It's just quite a creation, the Diner.  I am a bit sensitive about not being able to contribute at the highly educated level that's really taken a grip here.  I soldier on.

Thanks for your reassurance; sorry to bother!

No bother at all; never a bother.
In terms of the layout of the Versailles-like expanse of the DD: there is much to learn. Even someone like me, who has never read anything he doesn't want to repost within, and who seems unable to shut up, finds plenty to learn ALL the time. Especially the vagaries of code. Peter soldiers on himself, tinkering with widgets... I imagine him the garage mechanic who wants to see what will happen if he welds the septic spatter onto the gazelle rod. Now how does that exhaust vent?

But the DD SURE kicks out the jams out of the little two room apartment we had over at Yahoo.

Yet here, like there, it is the PEOPLE who make the forum worthwhile. RE's iconoclastic twists and turns of whimsy, Peter's deep understanding of how the world works and a firmly alternative view of same... plus other friends, who gather in this place to warm the rooms a bit and make it feel lived in.

So unpack your portmanteau, throw a sweater over a chair, and wander around. I find DD to be the greatest pleasure and most undeserved gift since my father built me a sandbox when I was six years old.
 :icon_scratch: Surly1
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: nobody on April 25, 2012, 12:12:55 PM
Wrong Surly; you do deserve it and I'm sure the creators agree.  I like that you're on so much and bringing loads of news to the table.  Even when I wasn't often lurking for a few months, I used to check in here first for news.. lots and lots of news conveniently in one spot.  I'm nostalgic about the old yahoo site tho and miss the people who don't post much here.  Like you said, it's the people.. and now there are more and really, RE earned it and Peter created a work of art. 

Back to the conspiracy, aside from messianic media, can it be that the vast majority of people are still deep in the kool-aid about 9/11?  I know "it's still the same old story.." -us against them (always an us; always a them), but I wonder.   I wonder in complete mystification that there is no redress concerning 9/11.   So I really like your thread.
Title: We are not WORTHY!
Post by: RE on April 25, 2012, 10:34:11 PM
But the DD SURE kicks out the jams out of the little two room apartment we had over at Yahoo.

Yet here, like there, it is the PEOPLE who make the forum worthwhile. RE's iconoclastic twists and turns of whimsy, Peter's deep understanding of how the world works and a firmly alternative view of same... plus other friends, who gather in this place to warm the rooms a bit and make it feel lived in.

So unpack your portmanteau, throw a sweater over a chair, and wander around. I find DD to be the greatest pleasure and most undeserved gift since my father built me a sandbox when I was six years old.
 :icon_scratch: Surly1

http://www.youtube.com/v/-FucbvoFFy0

RE
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: reanteben on April 26, 2012, 10:55:26 PM
i just mentioned judy wood in a comment to joe. have you guys checked out her stuff? i'm convinced. the implications of believing in it will take you into el gallinazo territory. check out this gorgeous video. watch it in 720P. is that controlled demolition or is that an explosive disintegration/dustification? then hit the 'show more' tab below the player for a good intro with additional links:

http://www.youtube.com/v/dueVm1UGvXo&feature=player_embedded#!&fs=1
Title: the 9/11 dustification by directed energy weapon
Post by: Surly1 on May 04, 2012, 01:07:37 PM
I stumbled on to this link and 1) don't have the time to give this the attention it deserves, and 2) assume that even if I did, I lack the technical knowledge to assess whether any of this is valid, or is of the headwrapping-with-tinfoil school of thought.

Anyone familiar with this writer or this turf?

http://atrueott.wordpress.com/2011/03/28/scalar-weapons-all-you-need-to-know/ (http://atrueott.wordpress.com/2011/03/28/scalar-weapons-all-you-need-to-know/)
Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: reanteben on May 04, 2012, 05:22:00 PM
from the article

Quote
According to Bill Morgan: “If you can cause an earthquake you can also set it to, say, bring down a single buildings, of pair of buildings. It may be that the collapse of WTC twin towers was actually the first major scalar attack in world history. Because in a certain mode the waves at the interference zone can cause metal to soften, even to melt. If so, the planes crashing into them were merely a cover story to cloak the fact that the Tesla Howitzer had been used.

hey surly. i posted this 9/11 vid...

http://www.youtube.com/v/dueVm1UGvXo&fs=1

...a couple weeks ago and mentioned judy wood, who believes from the physical evidence that the towers were "dustified" -- disintegrated, in other words -- by a scalar weapon. the most obvious clues being the manner in which the towers came apart, and the lack of a rubble pile that should have been some 15 stories high. she has three interviews spanning eight hours at Veritas. there are many other bizarre facts surrounding 9/11 that she covers exhaustively at her website:

http://www.drjudywood.com/ (http://www.drjudywood.com/)

also, unlike bill morgan, above, she does not believe that aluminum planes could penetrate a concrete and steel building. she notes in particular that one of the wtc towers had an imprint of where the wing entered all the way out to the wingtip. at the tip the cutout from the wingtip penetration was just five inches tall. how could an aluminum wingtip penetrate such concrete and/or steel? it seems impossible in my mind. she does not speculate beyond that and therefore does not theorize on the film footage of the planes.

el gallinazo thinks she puts undue emphasis on hurricane erin, which was a few hundred miles off the coast of NYC the night before, and which made an extremely unusual 120deg turn on 9/11.

(http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/erin/hpics/010911_1867.jpeg)

a gif of erin:

(http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/erin/pics/erinpr1.gif)

the idea being that the energy and field effects of erin were potentially directed at the in the form of a (scalar) directed energy weapon (DEW), resulting in erin downgrading from Cat 3 to Cat 1 and changing course so uncommonly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed-energy_weapon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed-energy_weapon)

el gallinazo, despite erin's presence and dramatic change in course thinks that there is no need for TPTB to utilize a hurricane's energy and field effects because they have the capability to generate the beam independently. in fairness to wood, she does not give the impression that she is up to speed on black budget weaponry, so her examination of erin makes perfect sense.

an explosive interview that el gallinazo thinks highly of, that peter and RE have also listened to, is with benjamin fulford, the english language spokesperson for the Dragon Family, an asian consortium that reportedly owned the 100B-plus of US bearer bonds that were confiscated in Chiasso, Switzerland in 2009. fulford is larger than life.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiasso_financial_smuggling_case (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiasso_financial_smuggling_case)

the interview is given by david wilcock. they have great chemistry. it's fuckin far out. an epic, heroic narrative of deep deep politics, involving exotic weaponry, in which the NWO sphere of influence is shrinking and the cartel is desperately fending off a challenge from a powerful collection of adversaries, including a lawsuit that has been filed against the Fed. it's hard to know what to think of this interview but at the very least it is entertaining. perhaps peter or RE can weigh in, although i figure RE doesn't think much of it. 

here's the interview:

http://divinecosmos.com/podcasts/Wilcock_Fulford_2011-9-14.mp3 (http://divinecosmos.com/podcasts/Wilcock_Fulford_2011-9-14.mp3)

(thanks peter for the Save button)

ben


Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: Surly1 on May 04, 2012, 07:18:21 PM
Wow, ben, a lot to chew on here. Many thanks.

But for all this, I am still not sure what to make of Dr. Ott. Scalar weapons aside, he seems to sport a particular hard on for the edomites, and when this sort of diatribe appears, I head for the tinfoil.
Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: nobody on May 05, 2012, 08:31:21 AM
So Ben, this scalar stuff, it's HAARP, right?  I brought it up here months ago.  Started looking into it after there was talk around the net following the devastating earthquakes around 09.  You get into the harnessing of physics by TPTB and there is no purity left.
We are in a world of hurt here.
Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: peter on May 05, 2012, 11:06:22 AM
I have no doubt scalar technology exists well beyond what we can imagine. During his lifetime Tesla demonstrated the potential of such technology beyond question. His research didn't just become forgotten and go away. That the continued research isn't made available to the public is not a good sign as to it's eventual application. If TPTB's intent was goodwill to the masses we would know about this stuff.

In the current propaganda climate it is impossible to know the truth about anything because all the information we have available to us other than what we directly experience ourselves is provided from unverifiable sources. The scope of possibilities ranges from everything is lies to everything is true.

I'm pretty much convinced at this point that there is a massive propaganda effort underway to constantly introduce new conflicting information, whether true or not, in order to keep us mesmerized and confused so we are unable to act against whatever the agenda of TPTB is. We have been well trained not to act until we are convinced we know what we are doing.  If we feel we don't know what's going on we can't act.

To overcome this ennui we need to conclude that regardless of what the truth is we want no part of what is going on and attempt to define and implement another way of life that allows us to act on our own initiative.

Personally I am going where I am going irregardless of where the status quo goes.

I don't pretend to know the truth about 9/11 but will point out some clues that suggest to me what might have happened.

However the pyrotechnics at the top of towers 1 and 2 where achieved, power beams from space, or massive quantities of explosives planted beforehand at the level the planes would hit, there is also lots of information that massive explosions took place in the many below ground level floors before the towers were hit by planes.

The video footage clearly shows the towers falling earthward after the initial pyrotechnics. If it was just a beam from space attacking the towers from the top, the towers would be crushed into themselves from the top down, not free-fall because they no longer had bottoms.

The outside walls of the towers  were not part of the structural components of the building, only the massive columns in the center of the building held it up. The outside of the building was only a thin skin to keep the weather out. There weren't massive exterior concrete walls or columns, only cosmetic panels mostly made of glass and aluminum with a bit of concrete ribbing.  The reason there weren't massive amounts of concrete left over is there weren't massive amounts of concrete to start with. The many sub-groundlevel floors that were somehow turned to molten metal left a huge hole that the towers could fall into placing most of the rubble below ground level.

Even an aluminum plane traveling at a few 100 mph would likely penetrate thin cosmetic, not structural, panels such as the skins of the buildings. A 2x4 traveling on end very fast will easily penetrate concrete as demonstrated in a number of tornadoes.

There where about 20 floors of building above where the planes hit and it appears to me that planted explosives also took out the core supports at the level where the planes hit. 20 floors of building falling through one suddenly missing floor onto the remaining floors below would have a massive amount of momentum which could easily turn the small amount of concrete in the skin to powder as it was crushed from above. Both the top and the bottom were falling at the same time but the bottom of the building would slowdown first as the unsupported remains rammed into the earth. The top of the building would then hit the bottom and start to crush it from the top with it's momentum helping to drive the lower section into the ground just like a hammer hitting on a nail.

WTC7 which I assume was meant to be hit by flight 93, which was shot down, did not explode at the top. The bottom of the building was taken out by explosives and it then fell to earth through empty space. It was likely scheduled to have explosions at the top as well to help mask the obvious characteristics of a planned demolition but because no plane hit it to explain top explosions they had to make a decision to only use the demolition explosions without the pyrotechnics resulting in the  the collapse of WTC7 being a much more obvious demolition job.

Placing enough explosives into buildings to do the damage which occurred is a massive time consuming undertaking not possible to accomplish without having substantial access to the buildings for an extended period of time. Regardless of who was behind 9/11 there is no question in my mind that the insiders that control our government were participants in the plot. Looking at who controlled the security of the structures makes that plain as day.

   
Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: reanteben on May 05, 2012, 12:39:24 PM
So Ben, this scalar stuff, it's HAARP, right?  I brought it up here months ago.  Started looking into it after there was talk around the net following the devastating earthquakes around 09.  You get into the harnessing of physics by TPTB and there is no purity left.
We are in a world of hurt here.

nobody, i know next to nothing about the HAARP installation, but i'm guessing that HAARP has nothing to do with 9/11. it seems more likely it would be a black project of DARPA or SDI (Star Wars) - a satellite equipped with a scalar weapon. a major piece of evidence for this argument are the vertical and almost empty Holes in WTC6, WTC5, and other areas in the complex. (scroll to the right edge of photo.)

(http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/Image141.jpg)

as for HAARP and earthquakes, i did listen to a fantastic interview of steven jones by bonnie faulkner last year in which he explained why he does not believe HAARP can produce deep earthquakes. the relevant material starts at 14.30 but if you have the time i'd recommend the remainder of the interview as jones goes on to discuss the supression of the independent free energy movement.

http://www.kpfa.org/archive/id/7041 (http://www.kpfa.org/archive/id/7041)

Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: nobody on May 05, 2012, 01:19:31 PM
Peter, I just tried to post a response to Ben on this subject but forgot to log in!  -I use different computers.   So it might show up for moderation.

"I'm pretty much convinced at this point that there is a massive propaganda effort underway to constantly introduce new conflicting information, whether true or not, in order to keep us mesmerized and confused so we are unable to act against whatever the agenda of TPTB is."

I wonder if it isn't this enforced confusion that periodically sends me over the top and packing.  I experience it as suffocation.  I got no relief from the latest  bout until I put us on a real path of de-leveraging and heavy planning last week.  I still wake up at night -my mind screaming at me: ..red sky RED SKY at morning..."  Something is up.  The resurgence of occupy is only part of it.  The borg cube which is dc is just buzzing.  Should have known better when we followed employment here; I was thinking, "of course, this area will stay functional longer.... that's why there's work."  I didn't stop to think about my functionality.  When I found this group to talk to, this other part of me has been coming up from great depth, out of a coma. 
Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: peter on May 05, 2012, 03:24:32 PM
I wonder if it isn't this enforced confusion that periodically sends me over the top and packing.  I experience it as suffocation.

The other part of their propaganda campaign is to keep us feeling small and insignificant and feeling we need big brother to protect us from all the big bad meanies out there ranging from terrorists, and ETs  to financial collapse, destructive elemental forces and rogue heavenly bodies.

Boo!





View an album of Boogeyman Posters (http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php?action=media;sa=album;in=7;asc;nw)
Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: peter on May 05, 2012, 04:32:16 PM
a major piece of evidence for this argument are the vertical and almost empty Holes in WTC6, WTC5, and other areas in the complex.

The building with the largest hole in it is WTC 6 which held the Customs and Excise Department Offices which supposedly held a lot of damaging evidence that was soon to see the light of day. An internal explosion created the hole even before the towers fell. WTC 7 also held a lot of 'touchy' information.

The conspiracy is a high level one and most people working for the Federal Government aren't in on it. There were a lot of low level investigations going on that were accumulating a lot of damaging information demonstrating the conspiracy wasn't a theory. 9/11 was an efficient act that served two purposes. It Provided the cover to start the war on terror while burying much of the evidence of past transgressions of powerful people. Never let a good crisis go to waste!



Quote
http://www.thepowerhour.com/911_analysis/wtc6-explosion.htm

Explosion at WTC Complex

 
Despite the fact that the horrible events of Sept. 11 occurred in broad daylight and were widely photographed, significant aspects of the attacks have been completely suppressed by a media blackout.

Exclusive to American Free Press
By Christopher Bollyn

A massive explosion, witnessed by millions of television viewers on CNN, evidently devastated World Trade Center 6, the eight-story U.S. Customs building, although no national newspaper, other than American Free Press, has written a word about it.

Before the smoke had cleared from around the stricken South Tower, a mysterious explosion shot 550 feet into the air above the U.S. Customs House at WTC 6.

The unexplained blast occurred between the burning North Tower and the 47-story Salomon Brothers Building, known as WTC 7, immediately after United Airlines Flight 175 smashed into the South Tower, at about 9:03 a.m.

The explosion at WTC 6 was shown afterward on CNN. But because it was not broadcast as it happened there has been some confusion about when it actually occurred.

The large amount of smoke seen cascading around the South Tower in the video led some observers to mistake the blast for a dust cloud from the subsequent collapse of the tower.

TIMING CONFIRMED

American Free Press contacted CNN to determine exactly when the footage was filmed.

CNN’s Public Affairs Department confirmed that the explosion shown in the footage occurred immediately after the second plane had crashed into the South Tower. When asked if the footage was taken at 9:04 a.m., the CNN archivist said “that’s correct.”

When asked if CNN could offer any explanation about what might have caused the blast that soared higher than the 47-story WTC 7 in the foreground, the archivist said: “We can’t figure it out.”

The affected space between WTC 7 and the North Tower was occupied by the Customs House building, also known as WTC 6. The building housed the offices of 760 employees of the Customs Service, a part of Treasury. Other federal
agencies had offices in the building, including the Departments of Commerce, Agriculture, Labor, and the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms. They did not return calls to AFP about the matter.

A spokesman for the Export-Import Bank of the United States, which had an office with four employees on the sixth floor of the Customs House, confirmed the time of the explosion and told AFP that the employees had survived and been relocated. One private company, Eastco Building Services, Inc., reportedly leased space in the building.

Some 800 workers from WTC 6 were safely evacuated within 12 minutes of the first plane hitting the North Tower at about 8:46 a.m., according to a Sept. 18 Washington Post article by Stephen Barr.

The Barr piece is the only known article published about WTC 6. However, Barr failed to mention the explosion that apparently devastated the building just minutes after the workers had escaped with their lives.

AVOIDING THE SUBJECT

Although the Customs House apparently exploded at 9:04 a.m., the government-sponsored investigation was steered away from looking into what had actually happened.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency funded an investigation by the American Society of Civil Engineers. However, investigators were reportedly blocked from the building by an order from the New York City’s Department.
of Design and Construction .

Kenneth Holden is commissioner of the DDC, having been appointed by the former mayor, Rudolph Giuliani on Dec. 7, 1999.

Regarding the investigation of WTC 4, 5, and 6, FEMA’s “Building Performance” report says, “WTC 5 was the only building accessible for observation.” But, it adds, “the observations, findings, and recommendations are assumed to be applicable to all three buildings.”

A spokesman for FEMA told AFP that because the building was considered by DDC to be “very dangerous,” there was “no data collection” from WTC 6.

Dr. Gene Corley, one of the engineers who led the investigation, told AFP that concerns about loose gold bullion and cash prevented investigators from entering WTC 4.

The FEMA report says, “The buildings [4,5,6] responded as expected to the impact loadings.” Although the report says, “most of the central part of WTC 6 suffered collapse on all floors,” it adds, “damage was consistent with the observed impact load.”

The Customs House had a huge crater in its center. Corley told AFP that he had not seen the CNN photos before and called them “interesting.”

Corley, like other experts, thought the damage at WTC 6 was caused by the collapse of the North Tower. However, not one of the experts could recall seeing the CNN footage before.

A spokesman for the Customs Service told AFP, “It did not blow up. When the tower collapsed it caved in.”

Corley said he had not seen the photos of the extremely high-speed missile-like object seen streaking toward WTC 6 from behind the North Tower as the second plane hit the South Tower.

He noted that parts of the plane’s landing gear and an engine passed through the South Tower, and landed several blocks away.

These objects, however, had a distinctly different trajectory from the streaking missile-like object. Another investigator, Jonathan Barnett, told AFP, “The debris from Tower 2 hit Building 5, not 6.” 

Quote
http://wtc7.net/background.html

What Was In Building 7?

Building 7 was one of New York City's larger buildings. A sleek bronze-colored skyscraper with a trapezoidal footprint, it occupied an entire city block and rose over 600 feet above street level.

Built in 1985, it was formerly the headquarters of the junk-bond firm Drexel Burnham Lambert, which contributed to the Savings and Loans collapse, prompting the $500-billion taxpayer-underwritten bailout of the latter 1980s. At the time of its destruction, it exclusively housed government agencies and financial institutions. It contained offices of the IRS, Secret Service, and SEC.
This list is based on a table published by CNN.com, which did not include CIA, whose tenancy was disclosed after the attack in the New York Times article. 1 

One of the most interesting tenants was then-Mayor Giuliani's Office of Emergency Management, and its emergency command center on the 23rd floor. This floor received 15 million dollars worth of renovations, including independent and secure air and water supplies, and bullet and bomb resistant windows designed to withstand 200 MPH winds. 2   The 1993 bombing must have been part of the rationale for the command center, which overlooked the Twin Towers, a prime terrorist target.

How curious that on the day of the attack, Guiliani and his entourage set up shop in a different headquarters, abandoning the special bunker designed precisely for such an event. 3   
Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: reanteben on May 05, 2012, 06:28:17 PM

In the current propaganda climate it is impossible to know the truth about anything because all the information we have available to us other than what we directly experience ourselves is provided from unverifiable sources. The scope of possibilities ranges from everything is lies to everything is true.

I'm pretty much convinced at this point that there is a massive propaganda effort underway to constantly introduce new conflicting information, whether true or not, in order to keep us mesmerized and confused so we are unable to act against whatever the agenda of TPTB is. We have been well trained not to act until we are convinced we know what we are doing.  If we feel we don't know what's going on we can't act.

i mentioned steven jones regarding HAARP in my previous comment. he is one of the fathers of the classicist nanothermite Truth movement. judy wood believes he has led a witch hunt against her and her theory. she reached out to the movement after she made her findings around 2006 and it put her through the wringer. she considers him to either be colluding with TPTB or coopted by them. i would guess the latter. here's an excerpt from an email i received from el gallinazo (LG) a couple weeks ago:

the idea she presents repeatedly that this was a plan B backup for people that are too savvy to buy the ridiculous boxcutter theory, and she compares it to the JFK grassy knoll back-up.  The way some of my truther "heros" such as Steven Jones and David Ray Griffin have treated her ideas forces me now to regard them with suspicion as collaborators, which is uncomfortable but necessary.  But in both the cases of JFK and 9/11, the diversion could not be to divert the guilt of the top levels of government which were clearly guilty as sin of conspiracy to commit mass murder.  The only purpose would be to attempt to hide the fact that they had such energy beam weaponry in orbit and operational.

adding to the intrigue, judy wood's young assistant was murdered and she says that she herself has received death threats. 

Quote
However the pyrotechnics at the top of towers 1 and 2 where achieved, power beams from space, or massive quantities of explosives planted beforehand at the level the planes would hit, there is also lots of information that massive explosions took place in the many below ground level floors before the towers were hit by planes.

is there physical evidence for massive underground explosions or is it just anecdotal? because if anecdotal then people reporting explosions doesn't necessarily mean that the explosions were caused by explosives. if indeed there were explosions it would not necessarily be inconsistent with wood's scalar theory. she considers the dustification of the building to be the spectacular phase of the transmutation. 

Quote
The video footage clearly shows the towers falling earthward after the initial pyrotechnics. If it was just a beam from space attacking the towers from the top, the towers would be crushed into themselves from the top down, not free-fall because they no longer had bottoms.

wood's theory doesn't involve crushing. she suggests it disintegrates certain physical objects (notably not including paper on 9/11) via a field effect similar to the hutchison effect:

http://drjudywood.com/articles/JJ/JJ4.html (http://drjudywood.com/articles/JJ/JJ4.html)

which might mean that even if the weapon was coming from above it would act on the building in its entirety.

one of the major pieces of supporting evidence for the nanothermite crowd is all the physical evidence (iron spheres, etc) apparently supporting it presence. here is what LG had to say about wood's countering of this article (peter has read this previously):

Jones made a big deal about testing the WTC and finding "unreacted nanothermite."  As a former chemist, listening to Wood I had to give myself a serious dope slap.  What is nanothermite but powered aluminum and iron oxide in the form of an incredibly fine mixed power which increases the reaction rate and temperature of combustion drastically.  But since the skeleton of the WTC was steel and the skin, glass and aluminum, and the scalar energy reduced both to nano dust, and it also apparently removed the small amount of carbon from the steel thus converting it to elemental iron, that is exactly what one would expect to find in the dust without the perps using it.  Of course I might be missing something here, and I would be curious to hear what Jones has to say about it.

peter:
Quote
The outside walls of the towers  were not part of the structural components of the building, only the massive columns in the center of the building held it up. The outside of the building was only a thin skin to keep the weather out. There weren't massive exterior concrete walls or columns, only cosmetic panels mostly made of glass and aluminum with a bit of concrete ribbing.

at exactly the 2min mark this video on the construction of the twin towers says the exterior walls were load-bearing:

 Building the World Trade Center Towers (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3135892053682639810)

the planes, if they were real, also took out several levels of thick concrete slab floor:

http://www.youtube.com/v/px-nflAtHJY&feature=related&fs=1 

Quote
The reason there weren't massive amounts of concrete left over is there weren't massive amounts of concrete to start with. The many sub-groundlevel floors that were somehow turned to molten metal left a huge hole that the towers could fall into placing most of the rubble below ground level.

the 'bathtub' (in purple in the photo) in which the twin towers sat was 7 stories deep and the bottom was bedrock. buildings 3 and 6 also resided in it, as well as the PATH train complex.

(http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/Image89.jpg)

it's certainly conceivable to me that the available remainder of the bathtub could accept the bulk of the collapsed towers but it by no means strikes me as a certainty. the bathtub was not jam-packed with debris after the towers went away. PATH train under tower 2:

(http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/Image87.jpg)

and there was a large hole in sub-basement itself of tower 2:

(http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/Image300.jpg)

inside first sub-basement:

(http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/Image312.jpg)

i wonder how big might the pile have been above ground if there wasn't inch-deep dust covering large areas of lower manhattan, and a massive dust plume that could be seen from space:

(http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/Image124.jpg)

(http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/wtc2_dustification.jpg)

Quote
Even an aluminum plane traveling at a few 100 mph would likely penetrate thin cosmetic, not structural, panels such as the skins of the buildings. A 2x4 traveling on end very fast will easily penetrate concrete as demonstrated in a number of tornadoes.

it is my understanding that 2x4s going through concrete might be attributed to the field effects of tornadoes on objects. this does make me wonder though why wood has not addressed, to my knowledge at least, the possibility that planes did enter the already weakened energy field of the towers. (perhaps because if they were that weakened they wouldn't still be standing? perhaps the phase change from building to dust entailed criticality?)

Quote
There where about 20 floors of building above where the planes hit and it appears to me that planted explosives also took out the core supports at the level where the planes hit. 20 floors of building falling through one suddenly missing floor onto the remaining floors below would have a massive amount of momentum which could easily turn the small amount of concrete in the skin to powder as it was crushed from above. Both the top and the bottom were falling at the same time but the bottom of the building would slowdown first as the unsupported remains rammed into the earth. The top of the building would then hit the bottom and start to crush it from the top with it's momentum helping to drive the lower section into the ground just like a hammer hitting on a nail.

i like that narrative but it also seems to me that the bottom 80 floors could've been rigid enough on the vertical axis that it would've toppled instead of collapsed, since it was no longer anchored at the bottom, and the top floors, only having dropped about 10ft, still had a lot of accelerating to do. also, the top of tower 2 came down at a severe tilt; given this, does it seem plausible the top could've gone off to one side?

http://www.youtube.com/v/9SSS0DDqfm0&fs=1

it does appear to go off to the side to a certain extent... and subsequently turn into dust.

then there's the steel. steel turning to dust. it dustified at different rates:

(http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/GJS-WTC030c_original.jpg)

(http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/Image42.jpg)

gif. wait for it...

(http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/dustspire.gif)

booyah!  :)

Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: reanteben on May 05, 2012, 06:43:46 PM
quote from article on WTC 6:

Quote
A massive explosion, witnessed by millions of television viewers on CNN, evidently devastated World Trade Center 6, the eight-story U.S. Customs building, although no national newspaper, other than American Free Press, has written a word about it.

Before the smoke had cleared from around the stricken South Tower, a mysterious explosion shot 550 feet into the air above the U.S. Customs House at WTC 6.

i really don't think so, peter. check out the CNN footage in question. that smoke plume coming up where i assume WTC 6 is, to me is clearly from the collapse of the south tower. the video footage makes it feel disjointed but it's clearly just the plume spreading out from ground zero. surely there's another angle from the other side of the north tower -- which is partially obscuring the collapse of the south tower -- from which this plume is shot that proves as much. maybe i'll look around for it.

http://www.youtube.com/v/WZBhWRzt-aA&fs=1

here's wood's coverage of building 6, in her section on the Holes:

http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/StarWarsBeam4.html (http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/StarWarsBeam4.html)

cheers.

 
Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: reanteben on May 05, 2012, 07:55:23 PM
in seeking to disprove the narrative, i committed a logical error regarding the cnn vid. while the plume in question looks to my eye to make its appearance in concert with the south tower coming down it could of course also be the scalar creation of the Hole. I don't recall if wood has a time for that occurring but i'll look into it later this evening.
Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: peter on May 05, 2012, 08:31:50 PM
peter:
The outside walls of the towers  were not part of the structural components of the building, only the massive columns in the center of the building held it up. The outside of the building was only a thin skin to keep the weather out. There weren't massive exterior concrete walls or columns, only cosmetic panels mostly made of glass and aluminum with a bit of concrete ribbing.

at exactly the 2min mark this video on the construction of the twin towers says the exterior walls were load-bearing:

 Building the World Trade Center Towers (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3135892053682639810)

the planes, if they were real, also took out several levels of thick concrete slab floor:

I stand partially corrected.

There were load bearing steel columns on the outside of the towers  although the core was the main support structure.




The steel structure was clad on the outside by an aluminum skin that was likely filled by a very light concrete mixture used as insulation and sound deadening which was similar to the concrete used in the floor pans which was apparently 30% lighter than normally used in high rises.  The concrete was not structural in any way. The building was said to have an asbestos problem and a lot of insulation in those days was made of concrete mixed with asbestos.

Open the above picture to full size to see the skin in detail.

The pictures below show that the size of the hole made by the planes was much an illusion.



Notice how large sections of the concrete and aluminum skin were knocked off by the impact but the holes through the steel beams behind are actually much smaller. The main exterior structural integrity was apparently on every 3rd floor where vertical section were joined. It is certainly conceivable to me that a plane could break through such a structure although it would be like putting an egg through an egg slicer and you would mostly have slices of plane left.

The damage to the outer skin suggests to me that at least an object of the right size impacted the building.

Having worked with this light concrete type of insulation around older buildings I know it gets very brittle with age and easily shatters into dust. The steel structure of the towers likely flexed substantially during all the destruction and this flexing compressing the skin could account for it turning to dust.

Quote
Quote

    There where about 20 floors of building above where the planes hit and it appears to me that planted explosives also took out the core supports at the level where the planes hit. 20 floors of building falling through one suddenly missing floor onto the remaining floors below would have a massive amount of momentum which could easily turn the small amount of concrete in the skin to powder as it was crushed from above. Both the top and the bottom were falling at the same time but the bottom of the building would slowdown first as the unsupported remains rammed into the earth. The top of the building would then hit the bottom and start to crush it from the top with it's momentum helping to drive the lower section into the ground just like a hammer hitting on a nail.

i like that narrative but it also seems to me that the bottom 80 floors could've been rigid enough on the vertical axis that it would've toppled instead of collapsed, since it was no longer anchored at the bottom, and the top floors, only having dropped about 10ft, still had a lot of accelerating to do. also, the top of tower 2 came down at a severe tilt; given this, does it seem plausible the top could've gone off to one side?


The floor pans were by far the weakest part of the structure. The outside structural steel was locked together like a large box around the structure. If the top section of steel fell to the inside of this box while tipping to one side, the rigidity of the box would tend to draw it back into vertical collapse if the integrity of the box didn't fail. It wasn't falling on a hinge. It was falling to the inside of the structure below. 
Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: reanteben on May 05, 2012, 08:35:03 PM
me again. I just read the article you posted more clearly, peter, (sorry), and I realize the plume in the cnn vid is supposed to appear before the south tower even comes down. so...is it just me or is that indeed the south tower coming down?
Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: peter on May 05, 2012, 08:46:12 PM
I was watching the coverage live from mexico at the time. I clearly remember video footage of employees from WTC 6 who had just been evacuated standing just outside the building and panicking on camera and saying explosions were starting to go off inside the building.

Regarding visual evidence in the basement of the towers... I'm not sure there is any, only the verbal evidence of the workers there. What there is visual evidence of is massive damage in the lobby  to the point of killing people before the towers collapsed. The exhaust of the explosions in the basement would have exited through the lower floors. The damage in the lobbies collaborates what the employees said.
Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: peter on May 05, 2012, 08:58:51 PM
RE timing of WTC 6 explosion from the article quoted above.

Quote
Some 800 workers from WTC 6 were safely evacuated within 12 minutes of the first plane hitting the North Tower at about 8:46 a.m., according to a Sept. 18 Washington Post article by Stephen Barr.

The video I saw was of the evacuated employees. If the south tower had already fallen they wouldn't have been standing around outside calmly being interviewed until explosions started going off inside WTC6.  The explosions occurred around 9:04am, well before  the south tower collapsed at 9:59am. 
Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: reanteben on May 05, 2012, 09:05:04 PM
thanks. what do you make of the footage then? wrongly spliced together? or do you not see what appears to me to be a tower coming down first? if not, where is the tall dust coming from prior to the plume in the front left?

am i mistakenly assuming the plume front left to be the WTC 6 bomb/dustification going off?
Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: peter on May 05, 2012, 09:18:10 PM
thanks. what do you make of the footage then? wrongly spliced together? or do you not see what appears to me to be a tower coming down first? if not, where is the tall dust coming from prior to the plume in the front left?

am i mistakenly assuming the plume front left to be the WTC 6 bomb/dustification going off?

The article I quoted didn't include a link to the video in question. I'm not sure which video you are referring to. I do remember one video of smoke/dust rising upward as the tower was falling. That makes sense to me either from explosions at the bottom of the building or air being pushed out of the structure of the building at the bottom as it collapsed in on itself. Apparently all the glass had been blown out of the lobby early on and the open area at the lobby level was much larger than higher up in the building.  If you turn an empty and open milk carton upside down and compress it from the top the air inside will blow out from the bottom. 
Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: reanteben on May 05, 2012, 09:27:27 PM
you probably didn't see the vid because i forgot to include it before i posted, and a bit later realized and added it in. here it is.

http://www.youtube.com/v/WZBhWRzt-aA&fs=1
Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: reanteben on May 05, 2012, 09:35:35 PM
goddamit. okay, peter - i think i'm wasting our time in a monumental fashion. i did a search for 'wtc 6 explosion,' which yielded the video. it is posted in german, and underneath the player in the description it says this:

"Einsturz des Südturms; Rauchwolken wurden als Explosionsfolgen in WTC 6 fehlinterpretiert"

which is obviously why the search yielded it. so i think we're just watching a tower come down from a really bad angle... which would seem to be confirmed by 'CNN WTC 2 Einsturz' that is superimposed on the player at the beginning.

sorry.
Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: reanteben on May 06, 2012, 04:31:05 AM
peter said

Quote
The pictures below show that the size of the hole made by the planes was much an illusion.

Notice how large sections of the concrete and aluminum skin were knocked off by the impact but the holes through the steel beams behind are actually much smaller. The main exterior structural integrity was apparently on every 3rd floor where vertical section were joined. It is certainly conceivable to me that a plane could break through such a structure although it would be like putting an egg through an egg slicer and you would mostly have slices of plane left.

the slicing of steel columns and the destruction of concrete slabs are what i find relevant, not what happened to the skin. the pictures you provided were perfect examples of wingtips, well away from where the mass of the engines would have been, slicing through steel. i can conceive of the plane's engines entering, and the fuselage up until the point where the nose reached the core columns, but i have a hard time imagining that at least the tail of the plane wouldn't be sticking out, and the wingtips, if not whole wings, broken off.

(http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2006/WTC-Jones19mar0615.jpg)

instead we got this.

(http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/why/whypics/66_Roadrunner.jpg)

as for the structural integrity of the exterior columns, you said that the vertical sections were only joined every three floors. how much less stiff would a three-story beam be compared to three one-story beams connected by joints. i don't know a thing about engineering. also, the beams may be three-stories but they are horizontally braced by a several feet-high steel plate (spandrel) at every floor.

(http://www.scientistsfor911truth.org/introduction/wtc_col_spandrel.jpg)   

most importantly, it seems to me that the strength of the vast core columns themselves, in the interior of the building, would buttress the exterior columns at every floor by virtue of the fact that concrete slabs are wedged between them. most of the force of the plane was horizontal; would not the horizontal strength at every spandrel in fact be the sum total horizontal strength of steel column, concrete floor, and core column? or, if the floating floor merely transmits force, the sum total horizontal strength of the core and exterior columns?

can anyone (Jb) confirm this?

Quote
Having worked with this light concrete type of insulation around older buildings I know it gets very brittle with age and easily shatters into dust. The steel structure of the towers likely flexed substantially during all the destruction and this flexing compressing the skin could account for it turning to dust.

i have a hard time believing that the insulation could account for more than a tiny fraction of the dust that day.

or are you talking about the photos and .gif of the steel spire turning to dust? if so, i must admit that the video footage i just looked at isn't a terribly convincing piece of evidence. it could just be dust coming off the steel as it collapses, obscuring the metal.

http://www.youtube.com/v/dzm2wfiXdW4&fs=1

Quote
The floor pans were by far the weakest part of the structure. The outside structural steel was locked together like a large box around the structure. If the top section of steel fell to the inside of this box while tipping to one side, the rigidity of the box would tend to draw it back into vertical collapse if the integrity of the box didn't fail. It wasn't falling on a hinge. It was falling to the inside of the structure below.

it seems counterintuitive to me that a plane could breach the box so easily yet something like 40 floors of the south tower, leaning at an estimated 23deg, could be contained by the box. especially when the 40-floor mass was being resisted on its other side by a vastly stronger 'inner box' of core columns. if anything, it would seem to me that once the 40-floor mass' center of gravity had swung wide of the core columns there would be no turning back.

this video seems to show that the top of the tower fails to be contained by the outer box... and then it looks like the whole shebang starts turning to dust in a more convincing manner than the spire:

http://www.youtube.com/v/QY3qYr3dpdU&fs=1

another major piece of evidence for scalar weapon adherants is that the towers came down faster than is freefall speed at sea level:

http://www.911blimp.net/prf_FreeFallPhysics.shtml (http://www.911blimp.net/prf_FreeFallPhysics.shtml)





Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: nobody on May 07, 2012, 07:34:18 AM
Ben and Peter,  just wanted to thank you both for this fascinating discussion, and Ben for the link to JWood.  What little computer time I had over the weekend was well filled with this (Jeff too).  Couldn't this be made into a blog?  The moonshine is no doubt essential to our survival but this seems pretty important too.  Doesn't anyone else think so? 
Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: reanteben on May 07, 2012, 02:50:59 PM
pleasure, nobody.  :)

Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Surly1 on May 13, 2012, 08:21:44 AM
Here is your one stop shop for 9-11 conspiracy ideas, misstatements, etc., assembled by Dick McManus. An afternoon's worth of entertainment and engagement:


Listen to physics professor Steven Jones talks about microscopic chips of nano-thermate and iron rich spheres.

Four random samples of World Trade Center dust collected by four people who will testify under oath about how,  when and where they collected the samples.   Nano-thermate and iron spheres were found in the dust. 

http://socioecohistory.wordpress.com/2011/09/02/physicist-steven-jones-nanothermite-in-911-wtc-dust-samples-%E2%80%93-scientific-analysis-controlled-demolition/ (http://socioecohistory.wordpress.com/2011/09/02/physicist-steven-jones-nanothermite-in-911-wtc-dust-samples-%E2%80%93-scientific-analysis-controlled-demolition/)

Video taped statements by a woman to had friends who knew Dr. Steven Jones.   This woman collected on sample of the dust.

Evidence of Nano Thermite Explosives on 9/11 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00soZ7rQw3U#)

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) found1,3-Diphenylpropane in the WTC dust in great abundance. Its presence evidently puzzled EPA scientists, who had never seen it before. As it turns out, 1,3-Diphenylpropane is the signature chemical residue for an especially explosive sol-gel form of nano-thermite, which can be applied to a steel surface like spray paint.

http://telespy.blogspot.com/2008/08/nist-releases-wtc-7-report-finally.html (http://telespy.blogspot.com/2008/08/nist-releases-wtc-7-report-finally.html)

 

Analysis of a piece of steel from WTC building seven had the eutectic formations on the steel.  This piece of steel also had holes in it, like Swiss cheese and this steel beam had been reduced to half an inch from it original one inch thickness.   FEMA noted that this piece of steel with its server corrosion and erosion (meaning disappearance of half the steel from the beam) was a very unusual event.    A eutectic means an alloy (a mixture) of steel, but this alloy has a lower melting point us lower that structural steel.   You  can think of these eutectic formation as ice sickles made from liquid steel that froze (cooled).  When eutectic formations were analyzed sulfur molecules were found to have mixed with the melted steel and froze on cooling into a new alloy (also known as an eutectic formation). 

Nano-thermate is a compound that when ignited produces massive amounts of heat and sulfur is a byproduct of this chemical reaction.

http://911expertsspeakout.org/9-11-evidence/ (http://911expertsspeakout.org/9-11-evidence/)

Witnesses who were in the basement of the Twin Towers talk about explosions inside the basement.

http://hidhist.wordpress.com/terror/911/the-twin-towers/new-eyewitness-to-wtc-basement-level-explosions/ (http://hidhist.wordpress.com/terror/911/the-twin-towers/new-eyewitness-to-wtc-basement-level-explosions/)

 

WTC janitor pulls burn victim to safety after basement explosion rocks  north tower seconds before jetliner hit top floors.

William Rodriguez, 44, who worked at the WTC for 20 years, usually arriving to work at 8:00am, the morning of 9/11 he reported 30 minutes late. If he'd arrived on time, it would have put
him at the top floors just about the same time the jetliner hit the north tower.

But since he was late, Rodriguez found himself checking into work in an office on sub-level 1 when the north tower was hit. However, the sound and concussion of a massive explosion in the sub-levels right below his feet changed that.

"When I heard the sound of the explosion, the floor beneath my feet vibrated, the walls started cracking and it everything started shaking," said Rodriguez, who was huddled together with at least 14
other people in the office.

Rodriguez said Anthony Saltamachia, supervisor for the American Maintenance Co., was one of the people in the room who stands ready to verify his story.

"Seconds after the first massive explosion below in the basement still rattled the floor, I hear another explosion from way above," said Rodriguez. "Although I was unaware at the time, this was the airplane
hitting the tower, it occurred moments after the first explosion."

But before Rodriguez had time to think, co-worker Felipe David stormed into the basement office with severe burns on his face and arms, screaming for help and yelling "explosion! explosion! explosion!"

David had been in front of a nearby freight elevator on sub-level 1 about 400 feet from the office when fire burst out of the elevator shaft, causing his injuries.

"He was burned terribly," said Rodriguez. "The skin was hanging off his hands and arms. His injuries couldn't have come from the airplane above, but only from a massive explosion below. I don't care what the government says, what scientists say. I saw a man burned terribly from a fire that was caused from an explosion below.

"I know there were explosives placed below the trade center. I helped a man to safety who is living proof…""I have tried to tell my story to everybody, but nobody wants to listen. "


After Rodriguez escorted David to safety outside the WTC, he returned  to lead the others in the basement to safety as well. While there, he  also helped two other men trapped and drowning in the basement elevator shaft, another result he says of the explosives placed below.

Rodriguez said,  "I met with the 9/11 Commission behind closed doors and they essentially discounted everything I said regarding the use of explosives to bring down(below) the north tower. "And I contacted NIST previously four times without a response.


http://www.vocaboly.com/forums/ftopic6923.html (http://www.vocaboly.com/forums/ftopic6923.html)


Mike Pecoraro, an engineer who is part of the crew that services the WTC complex, is at work in the mechanical shop in the second subbasement of the north WTC tower when it is hit. When the room he is in starts filling with white smoke and he can smell kerosene (jet fuel), he heads up stairs with a co-worker towards a small machine shop on the C level. Yet, he says, "There was nothing there but rubble. We're talking about a 50 ton hydraulic press—gone!" He then heads for the parking garage, yet finds that "there were no walls, there was rubble on the floor, and you can't see anything." He ascends to the B level where he sees a 300-pound steel and concrete fire door, which is lying on the floor, wrinkled up "like a piece of aluminum foil." When Pecoraro makes it into the main lobby, he sees massive damage: "The whole lobby was soot and black, elevator doors were missing. The marble was missing off some of the walls. 20-foot section of marble, 20 by 10 foot sections of marble, gone from the walls.… Broken glass everywhere, the revolving doors were all broken.

-- ---------------------------

 

Firefighter's eyewitness accounts of liquid steel and explosions and a steel beam six inches thick bent without cracks. A fire chief stated eight weeks after 9/11 the steel was still at about 1,500 degree F., red hot and fire fighter had to spray fire holes on the wreckages to cool the steel.   

The melting point of typical structural steel is ~1510ºC (2750ºF).

Photo of a 5' X 5'X 2' rock composed of mostly steel with other wreckage imbedded in it.   The only way this sold chuck of steel could have been made is from liquid steel that formed a pool and when it cooled, frozen into this massive bolder.

9/11 Incontrovertible Proof the Government is Lying (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YaFGSPErKU#ws)

 
World Trade Center building six?

At 10:05 am the south tower collapsed. The official story was that WTC6 dust cloud was from the collapse.

http://www.911studies.com/911photostudies119.htm (http://www.911studies.com/911photostudies119.htm)

here is a photo of the south tower collapsing, and you can see the darken sides of building six in the left side of this photo. The darken side of WTC 6 had to be due to fire or an explosion.

http://www.911studies.com/911photostudies120.htm (http://www.911studies.com/911photostudies120.htm)

Hole in WTC6 has no debris pile in it, Most likely an explosion blew all the wreckage to dust.

http://www.911studies.com/911photostudies123.htm (http://www.911studies.com/911photostudies123.htm)

http://www.911studies.com/911photostudies121.htm (http://www.911studies.com/911photostudies121.htm)

 

The easiest case to prove is the way WTC building 7 collapsed.

NIST was forced to change their theory as to why this building collapsed, that is the pancake theory. They could not explain this, and they did not give any other theory as to what happened, yet it is there job to understand why this happened so that it does not happen again.

For the first 2.5 seconds after the roof of WTC building 7 fell down at free fall speed. That is roof of the building fell at the same speed as if you dropped a baseball off the top a buildings and if fell thru thin air. According to the laws of physics, all objects fall due to the force of gravity and accelerate faster and faster until they hit the ground. It does not matter if the object is a baseball or a steel ball weighing ten times as much.

If fires weaken steel beams, in various sections of the building to cause the collapse, this can not account for the nearly symmetrical collapse straight down. And the total time it took for the whole building to fall, was just slightly slower than freely falling thru thin air.

 

WTC 7 Sound Evidence for Explosions

WTC 7 Sound Evidence for Explosions - DavidChandler911 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0EyqImTdks#)

 

9/11/2001: After the initial blast [Flight 11 hitting WTC 1], Housing Authority worker Barry Jennings, 46, reported to a command center on the 23rd floor of 7 World Trade Center. He was with Michael Hess, the city's corporation counsel, when they felt and heard another explosion. First calling for help, they scrambled downstairs to the lobby, or what was left of it. "I looked around, the lobby was gone. It looked like hell," Jennings said. [Traverse City Record Eagle 9/11/2001]

June 23, 2008   On the morning of 9/11, Barry Jennings, 52, was called to go to the Center after something hit the north WTC1.  He was the Deputy Director of the Emergency Services Department (Center) for New York, within World Trade Center building 7 (WTC7).  He had worked for 33 years for the Office of Emergency Management during activations of the Center.   The mission of the Center was to coordinate the actions during an emergency for several agencies.

Jennings and Michael Hess went up to the Center which was on the 23 floor of the WTC7 Then they got to Center, they found it had been abandoned.  They that the workers there had left in a hurry, leaving, hot coffee cups still steaming and half eaten sandwiches.  He made a phone calls and they was told to get out of the building.

 Michael Hess will not return phone calls or agree to interviews from the 9/11 truth reporters.  Mr. Hess, one of Rudy Giuliani's highest ranking appointed officials, New York city's corporation counsel, Hess is a Yale and Harvard graduate, a lawyer who has represented the United States in numerous major cases).  He is a founding Partner and Senior Managing Director of Giuliani Partners LLC.  http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_amy_de_m_070621_barry_jennings_3a_wtc_.htm (http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_amy_de_m_070621_barry_jennings_3a_wtc_.htm)

 

On their way out of WTC7, an explosion occurred under the stairway they were on. 

Jennings says he was on at the six floor landing and he was left hanging on to something after the stairway fell away.  He climbed up and then walked back up to the eight floor.

 They were trapped for some two hours, inside WTC7 and while both building collapsed.  All that time, he was hearing explosions going off.  When the firemen finally took them down to the lobby in building 7, the lobby appeared as if an explosion had occurred there and so badly damaged that he didn't recognized where he was.

Jennings stated, …" I know what I heard, I heard explosions," the lobby was so .

Here is web address of a video tape made of an interview of Jennings from a year ago (about June 2007).

World Exclusive: WTC7 Survivor Barry Jennings Account!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8LivSW9zLg#ws)

Jennings talked to the 9/11 commission, but his witness testimony was not included in their report?

NIST asserted that there were no reports of explosions. In his statement Richard Gage identified numerous witnesses who heard explosions before WTC-7 collapsed.

There were 15 US military exercises ongoing on Sept. 11, 2001.

On June 1, 2001, a document was issued changing the earlier DOD procedures for dealing with aircraft piracy (hijacking) or request for destruction of derelict airborne objects. This change now required Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld have the responsible for issuing intercept orders and stripped the authority from the Deputy Director for Operations (DDO), at the National Military Command Center (NMCC). 

 

NORAD (Northeast Air Defense Sector of the US (NEADS):  exercise scenario

Sept. 6, 2001:  Tokyo to Anchorage flight hijacked by "Mum Hykro" to Vancouver, BC and San Francisco   

Sept. 6, 2001:  Seoul to Anchorage flight hijacked by "Lin Po" to Seattle

Sept. 9. 2001: UK to NYC flight hijacked, blown up

Sept. 10, 2001:  ILyushin IL-62, from Cuba hijacked by asylum seekers,lands at Dobbins AFB in Georgia.   http://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?p=1060805313 (http://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?p=1060805313)

 

Mike Ruppert says, he has an on-the-record statement from someone in NORAD that on the day of 9/11 The Joint Chiefs of Staff (Richard B. Myers) and NORAD were conducting a joint, live-fly, hijack Field Training Exercise (FTX) which involved at least one (and almost certainly many more) aircraft under US control that was posing as a hijacked airliner".
Mike Ruppert – June 5, 2004, editor of FTW www.fromthewilderness.com (http://www.fromthewilderness.com)

Source: Crossing the Rubicon by Michael C. Ruppert, 2004)

There was also a "live-fly" Air Force exercise Vigilant Warrior that was being run by the Joint Chiefs of Staff (Richard B. Myers) and NORAD.   This war game involved at least one real commercial aircraft being flown to simulate exactly the kind of airliner hijack emergency that actually happened on 9/11, commercial jets used like missiles and flying them into building.  Major Don Arias of NORAD confirmed this information.   http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/transcripts/159 (http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/transcripts/159)



 

Ken Merchant in fact told the 9/11 Commission that Apollo Guardian had been "running on September 11, 2001."    HE is NORAD's joint exercise design manager, the National Military Command Center (NMCC) at the Pentagon.   Ken Merchant called Vigilant Guardian a "full-blown nuclear war" exercise. According to the Denver Post, it would involve "ever-escalating scenarios, from strained diplomacy to the outbreak of conventional warfare that headed inexorably toward nuclear conflict."

William Arkin wrote in 1997 that Global Guardian was "merely one of many practice Armageddons the military continues to stage." He then named other "practice Armageddon" exercises. For example, the "Air Combat Command, which flies B-1, B-2, and B-52 bombers," conducted an exercise called "Crown Vigilance," and the U.S. Space Command, "which operates land-based missiles," ran an exercise called "Apollo Guardian."

http://www.infowars.com/on-911-the-u-s-military-was-preparing-for-a-simulated-nuclear-war/ (http://www.infowars.com/on-911-the-u-s-military-was-preparing-for-a-simulated-nuclear-war/)

 

 

 

7 July 2005 London bombings Why is it that the London bombs go off just as the Congress is debating extending the Patriot Act? The thing about intelligence analysis, is that it is looking for patterns that defy the common sense rule or statistical probablity that the event(s) were not due to chance.

And a coincidence, another astronomical event occurred when the British secret service, with a company of 1000+ officers, were conducting a terror drill based on a scenario in which the exact same targets, would be attacked at the exact same stations, at the exact same time, you are absolutely oblivious to reality. That is an astronomical coincidence.

John Loftus, a terrorism expert and a former prosecutor for the US Justice Department, has revealed that the so-called mastermind of the July 7th bombings, Haroon Rashid Aswat, is actually a British intelligence asset. Loftus revealed that the so-called Al-Muhajiroun group, based in London had formed during the Kosovo crisis, when fundamentalist Muslim leaders were recruited by MI6 to fight in Kosovo, as he explains, "Believe it or not, British intelligence actually hired some Al-Qaeda guys to help the Muslim rights in Albania and in Kosovo.

http://www.zeusinfoservice.com/Articles/NationalPlanningScenarios2. (http://www.zeusinfoservice.com/Articles/NationalPlanningScenarios2.)

 

The anthrax attacks occurred on September 18, 2001 and just seven days after 9/11.

And there was a super militarized anthrax attack soon after 911 that could only be made at a US government bio-lab. 

On Jan 24, 2002, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle claims that on this day Cheney calls him and urges that no 911 inquiry be made. He is repeatedly pressured thereafter. (Newsweek, 2/4/02).     The Bush administration tried to stall the 911 commission investigation for one year and later starved the commission of funds and refused to share much information with the Commission. 

 

 

--------------------------------------

 

Radar data that was released by the NTSB from flights AA 11 and UA175 ,Boeing 767-200 jets that hit the Twin Towers is false. NTSB radar data show that flight AA 11 flew into the WTC at 430 knots (495 mph) and flight UA 175 at 510 knots (587 mph ) both at very low altitude where air is very dense.

Boeing Aircraft Corporation states the maximum speed of a 767-200 at low altitudes (say 1,000 feet above sea level is 360 knots (414 mph).Why do they state this?It is because they have tested the design of 767s and at test speeds of around 500 plus mph, the wings would be torn off. Furthermore, the 767 jet engines are not powerful enough to the airplane going 495 or 587 mph.

Therefore, we know radar data of the speed of AA 11 and UA 175 given by NTSB is false.

People just do not understand how much training and experience it takes to fly a 767 or 757. Experienced 767 and 757 pilots stated that they could not hit the Twin Towers with the 9 mph cross wind blowing that day or the Pentagon and at these NTSB claimed speeds. Some also tried to do this in a flight simulation and could not do it. Therefore, it was humanly impossible to fly these jets and hit those buildings.

For more detail see

9/11: World Trade Center Attack (http://vimeo.com/6679633)

and note below the evidence of faked video of the radar pictures

--------------------------------------

The FBI and later the 9/11 Commission claimed that not one of the four "black boxes" from Flights 11 and 175 was ever found in the World Trade Center rubble. Whereas the government line has been that all four boxes were destroyed. (ABC 9/17/01).

Two men who worked extensively in the WTC wreckage reported that they'd helped federal agents locate the black boxes —and that the agents immediately carted them off, never to be seen or heard since (Philadelphia Daily 10/28/04).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Pentagon

Thirteen eye witnesses stated that on 9/11 that they say a commercial jet fly by a gas station near the Pentagon. Everyone one of them described the direction of the planes flight path toward the Pentagon, however, they described the jet as having flown on the wrong side of the gas station. This made it impossible for it to hit the Pentagon where the damage occurred. All 13 were not in a place to actually see whether or not this jet hit the Pentagon. a must see video of these witnesses telling their story   http://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com/nsa.html (http://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com/nsa.html)

 

And   CitizenInvestigationTeam.com

      Kate Snow, a CNN correspondent, was standing two blocks from the Capitol when she saw an airplane. Snow mentioned it on-air, adding that a security guard told her it was responsible for the decision to evacuate the seat of government.   In his book Against All Enemies, Richard A. Clark mentions that the decision to evacuate the White House was made after a warning from the Secret Service about the approach of an unidentified aircraft. 

 

During the evacuation of the White House on 9/11 Linda Brookhart captured a photo of the mystery plane in the air above her. She took this photograph as she was standing near the Old Executive Office Building (located immediately next to the White House).  Linda explained that after she walked outside she was standing in the street talking with a security guard when she just happened to look up and see the plane. She then snapped the excellent photo with her Pentax.

 

 If you go to the link http://www.rense.com/general76/missing.htm (http://www.rense.com/general76/missing.htm)  and see her photo.  It is a photo of a four engine Jet, possibly a Boeing 747, not a 757 which has only two engines.

We know that the commission had access to the NTSB flight path study because the footnotes of the 9/11 Commission Report cite this document. So why weren't we not told what jet flew over the White House at about 9:45 am, the time people were rapidly evacuating from the White House?[CNN, 9/11/2001; CNN, 9/12/2001]

 

The pentagon has dismissed the news reports and claims that it knows nothing about a large plane circling over Washington on 9/11.

9:43 a.m.: American Airlines Flight 77 crashes into the Pentagon, sending up a huge plume of smoke. Evacuation begins immediately.

 

 

During the 9/11 war game, Global Guardian, US defense readiness condition from Defcon 5, to DEFCON 3, the highest alert level for 28 years.

Also as part of Global Guardian, three E-4B National Airborne Operations Center planes that were based at Offutt Air Force Base were airborne on September 11. The E-4B, nicknamed the "Doomsday" plane during the Cold War, is a militarized version of a Boeing 747-200. It is equipped with advanced communications equipment, and in times of national emergency can act as an alternative command post from which top government officials can direct forces, execute war orders, and coordinate actions by civil authorities. Even after Global Guardian was terminated, the three E-4Bs remained in the air.

For example, when Lieutenant General Thomas Keck, the commander of the 8th Air Force at Barksdale Air Force Base, who had been monitoring the Global Guardian exercise, was told a plane had crashed into the World Trade Center, he initially thought this was a simulated scenario.

 

------------

Dr. Sherman lived 12 miles downwind from the Pentagon. She worked for the Radiation and Public Health Project, and on September 11, 2001, she turned on the Geiger counter that she uses in the work and it showed an extremely high reading more than eight to ten times higher than normal background radiation. Dr. Sherman called her co-worker Dr. Leuren Moret, and he advised her to "Get out of town, and don't come back until it has rained three times." They took photographs of the readings on the Geiger counter as proof to back up their story.

They also called the EPA, HAZMAT, and FBI and told them to "Get all those emergency response workers suited up. They need to be protected." On September 13, 2001, EPA called back concurred that there was radiation at the Pentagon. "Yup, the Pentagon crash rubble was radioactive, and we believe its depleted uranium…" FACT

 

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dennis Cimino got a copy of the video of the radar pictures displayed on the radar screen of the air traffic controllers on 9/11 thru a FOIA request. This video tape is called RADES 84 radar data. On analyzing this video, Cimino learned that the digital staggering of radar sweeps is the result of playback of recorded digital video recording. When Cimino plotted the radar sweep times, he saw a 24.7 second delay in the Northeast US Air Defense Sector's, (NEADs) feed. As well he saw digital staggering. From this it can be proved that someone recorded the data on the flight data recorder, two years earlier. Radar is never delayed 24.7 seconds before 911.

Cimino states that it is clear that the FAA and NTSB providing altered data (re-mastered via digital recording), hence, not reliably verifiable records of the air picture in the NEADs sector that day at all. Deeper analysis of the radar sweep interval timing data requires much harder work to do but usually proves the stuff is fake.

Cimino found that someone delayed the radar picture sent to NEADS air defense operators by almost 24.7 seconds for the recorded prior exercise video to be injected into the radar pipeline, mixed with REAL targets, as well as some targets removed to prevent possible interception.

The digital stagger in the radar sweep times in the NEADS sector proves that the data wasn't just recorded digitally once, using SPH-2 RAVIR type radar recording technology, but that it was also replayed and then that data recorded yet again.

Cimino discovered someone replayed recorded video from prior exercises to legitimize the radar tracks for airliners that weren't even involved that day at all.

Cimino also learned that had real interceptors been sent to those locations the radar said targets existed, that NO INTERCEPTS WOULD HAVE OCCURRED because NO AIRCRAFT WERE IN THOSE PLACES, as the entire NEADS radar picture was not REAL TIME RADAR STRICTLY!!!

The NEADS radar was injected not with random targets but recorded video. Recorded from prior exercises. interestingly all claims by the people that this radar data wasn't delayed by the nearly 24.7 seconds for the obvious reason, is an attempt to cover up the fact that the NORAD people used recorded radar for NEADS from a year prior, recorded in the NEADS radar system.

Cimino did extensive analysis of that data and saw the sweep time staggering that is a product of aliasing due to digital processing and he says it gets worse when it's recorded, played back, and recorded yet again. All of the radar sweep intervals in the NEADS air defense sector on 9/11 took on aliasing versus analog timing, meaning not just recorded once, but recorded more than once, digitally.

Radar antenna rotation rates are ANALOG. When plotted on a statistical plot, they have a nice sinusoidal bell curvature. When recorded and replayed and re-recorded, the nice bell curve becomes a nice STAIR STEP issue. And the absolute aircraft positions from RADES 84 and NEADS are slewed in time by nearly 24.7 full seconds in absolute position based on target speeds and positions per their radar data blocks.

There was extensive evidence of tampering.

Dennis Camino had proven the radar fakery and radar data was not 'live' stuff. He knew that extensive false targets made it impossible for the F-16s to find their (Air Force refueling) tankers that day because the simulated radar was kept running well beyond when all aircraft had crashed. On Sept 11th., the exercise video (aka radar injection) was allowed to continue to be piped to NEADS air defense radar screen watcher (operators) for an additional half hour before it ceased. In other words, somehow the electric cables that brought in the signals from the radar antenna was hacked and fake radar blips injected.

Dennis Camino has worked on Air Traffic Control (ATC) radar equipment and knows exactly what the capabilities are and he was do the certification on them. He is also a pilot who's very familiar with radar systems, and radar data recording devices from 1974 onwards. http://911scholars.ning.com/forum/topics/seeking-researchers-for-9-11-radar-study?commentId=3488444%3AComment%3A38598 (http://911scholars.ning.com/forum/topics/seeking-researchers-for-9-11-radar-study?commentId=3488444%3AComment%3A38598)

 

The data released by the N.T.S.B. from UA 77 's Flight Data Recorder
(FDR) was faked.

It shows the aircraft making a 6 G. descending, 360 degree turn and
then accelerating 150 knots faster than a 757 could ever possibly fly
at that altitude. Also according to the FDR, the yoke and rudder were
not pushed during this maneuver. This is impossible.

The air is too dense at the altitude such that the 757 hit between the
first and second floors of the Pentagon. The FDR showed that the jet
was flying at 465 knots, but the jet's engines could not push the
aircraft that fast in this denser air. At higher altitudes commercial
jets can fly much faster. The flight data recorder also shows jet
flying level. It is impossible to fly a 757 in level flight at over
350 knots without the nose going upward. The pilot would lose control
of the aircraft. Maybe if the plane was doing a full nose-down dive
toward the ground, over 350 knots could be achieved, but the wings
would likely break off before the jet hit the ground.

The FDR also show that when UA 77 descended from higher altitude down
below 18,000 feet and the alleged hijacker adjusted the altimeter for
the exact pressure for the Washington DC airports. This is
impossible because they did not use the radio to contract the airport
to get the correct air pressure. The alleged hijackers could not have
so precisely guessed the correct altimeter setting as was recording on
the FDR.

When the aircraft was allegedly hijacked, the airplane was flying on
auto-pilot. The slightest pressure by the pilots on the yoke or
rudder petals would have instantly disengage the auto-pilot, if we are
to believe the hijackers used force to rip control of the jet away
from the pilots. The FDR shows no indication of a struggle and only
shows the auto-pilot remained on the whole time the terrorist were
taking control of the airplane, turned off the transponders and failed
to reply to the air traffic controller - aka lost radio contact with
the jet.

The initial claim by the government as to why the FDR memory stopped
recording too high (380 feet above the ground), is that the recorder
failed six seconds before impact. This stopping of recording of data
is BS. The FDR is designed to keep recording at the very least, 500
milliseconds after building impact, partly due to the fact that the
FDR is located on the Boeing 757 aircraft in the tail of the plane.
Also 380 feet is too high to have hit the light poles on the approach
to the Pentagon.
More that does not add up about United Airlines flight 77.

The two, nearly 7 ton, RB-211, Rolls Royce engines on this plane were
an every so solidly predictable 48 feet apart, yet not holes in the
Pentagon outer wall were seen.

Post cleanup of the Pentagon / Department of Defense poured as much as
24 inches of gravel and aggregate in the approach area where the blow-
back from the impact with that wall was known to contain Depleted
Uranium contamination. How the D.U. got there is a big mystery.
A `spook' U.S. Navy C-130 Hercules flew over the Pentagon and was seen
by witnesses directly over head. Later this pilot stated he never
got within 4 nautical miles. Why did he lie?

You don't just jump into a C-130 and fire it up in a minute and
launch. Just the pre-flight would have taken several minutes to
perform. In other words, it had it's orders long before it launched
that day. This was a specially equipped `spook' bird, an intelligence
asset bird, and like the orbiting E-4B Air Force flying command post,
which was in the sky that morning as a part of an Air Force war game/
exercise, Amalgam VIRGO and other Air Force exercises before the jets
started crashing into buildings on 9/11.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/03/13/911-the-official-account-of-t... (http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/03/13/911-the-official-account-of-t...)

 

Dennis Cimino and Jim Fetzer have pointed out the reasons they prove someone faked the Flight Data Recorder data they were given via a FOIA request. FACT.



The Flight Data Recording released via a FOIA requires to Dennis Cimino had "two data fields being zeroed out. without those, there can... never be any linkage of the FDR to an 'N' number (the serial number of the jet airplane) in the FAA registry. not because the 'N' number is in the AC ID field, but the AC ID FIELD number is directly traceable to an N-Number in the FAA registry, and the FLEET ID shows which carrier it went to should be present and link the data to a specific aircraft and fleet." FACT

The software used by the manufacturer of the Flight Data Recorder (made by L3 Communications), has an alleged "bug". A "bug" is an error in the programming of the software and could cause the whole program to crash the operation of the FDR. The NTSB and L3 have been contacted, along with an Aviation Safety Report being filed with NASA. There hasn't been any reply confirming such a "bug". FACT

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/Dennis-Cimino-AA77-FDR.html (http://pilotsfor911truth.org/Dennis-Cimino-AA77-FDR.html)

 

Flight 93:  Shanksvill PA crash

The FBI had interviewed the US Solicitor General Theodore (Ted) Olson. A report of that interview indicates that Olson told the FBI agents that his wife, Barbara Olson, had called him twice from Flight 77.

Olson falsely stated he was in his Justice Department office watching World Trade Center on the TV news when his wife calls.

He falsely says, "She told me that she had been herded to the back of the plane. She mentioned that they had used knives and box cutters to hijack the plane. She mentioned that the pilot had announced that the plane had been hijacked." [CNN, 9/14/01 (C)] He claims that he tells her that two planes have hit the WTC. [Telegraph, 3/5/02] He said "She feels nobody is taking charge." [CNN, 9/12/01] He didn't know if she was near the pilots, but at one point she asks, "What shall I tell the pilot? What can I tell the pilot to do?" [CNN, 9/14/01 (C)] Then she gets cut off without warning. [Newsweek, 9/29/01] The call is said to have lasted about a minute. [Washington Post, 9/12/01 (B)] By some accounts, his warning of that planes have hit the WTC comes later in a second phone call. [Washington Post, 9/21/01] In one account, Barbara Olson calls from inside a bathroom. [Evening Standard, 9/12/01] In another account, she is near a pilot, and in yet another she is near two pilots. [Boston Globe, 11/23/01]

The FBI in 2006 presented, as evidence in the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui trial that ruled out this
possibility Barbara Olsen making any phone calls to her husband. In the FBI report on American Airlines flight 77, it listed one attempted call from Barbara Olson, which was "unconnected" and hence lasted "0 seconds."

FBI report, the only two cell phone calls made from all four flights. According to this report, there were only two cell phone calls from United 93, and they were made at 9:58, shortly before the plane crashed, when it was down to 5,000 feet. This was an astounding discovery and implication that Ted lied. FACT

It is a crime to lie to the FBI agents. Although this should have produced front-page headlines, it has thus far not been reported by any mainstream publication. http://rinf (http://rinf). com/alt-news/ tag/false- flag

 

Debit field was eight miles long.

 

FACT

Dr. David Ray Griffin, which lists over 100 lies included in the official 9/11 Commission report. This article is an excellent summary/companion to Dr. Griffin's newest book, The 9/11Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions.

The 9/11 Commission report failed to mention that there
were already two fighter jets that were in the sky or on the runway
stationed at Pomona AFB near Atlantic City, and they were not notified
of the emergency. They were close enough to intercept UA 175 only
eight minutes away. These jets had bullets but were sent back to
their hangers "for better armament" (most likely air to air missiles).  By the time they got the missiles it was too late. * see source note below.

21. The lie that Flight 77 flew almost 40 minutes through American airspace towards Washington without being detected by the military's radar.




24. The omission of Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta's testimony, given to the Commission itself, that Vice-President Cheney and others in the underground shelter were aware by 9:26 that an aircraft was approaching the Pentagon.

8:45 a.m. (all times are EDT): A hijacked passenger jet, American Airlines Flight 11 out of Boston, Massachusetts, crashes into the north tower of the World Trade Center, tearing a gaping hole in the building and setting it afire.

9:03 a.m.: A second hijacked airliner, United Airlines Flight 175 from Boston, crashes into the south tower of the World Trade Center and explodes. Both buildings are burning.

a. The omission of multiple testimonies, including that of Norman Mineta to the Commission itself, that Cheney was in the PEOC before 9:20.


b. The lie that Cheney did not reach the underground shelter (the PEOC) [Presidential Emergency Operations Center] until 9:58

 

According to the 9/11 Commission, several air traffic controllers at Washington Dulles International Airport at 9:32 a.m., notice a fast-moving target, which was assumed to be American Airlines Flight 77, heading eastbound on their radar screens. [9/11 COMMISSION, 7/24/2004, PP. 25; 9/11 COMMISSION, 8/26/2004, PP. 33

Air traffic controller Danielle O'Brien reported afterwards: "I noticed the aircraft. It was an unidentified plane to the southwest of Dulles, moving at a very high rate of speed" …( Another air traffic controller, Tom Howell said) .." `Yes. Oh, my gosh, yes! Look how fast he is.'" According to O'Brien, the aircraft is between 12 and 14 miles away when she notices it. It is heading for what is known as Prohibited Area 56 (P-56), which is the airspace over and near the White House, at a speed of about 500 miles per hour. [ABC, 10/24/2001; ABC NEWS, 10/24/2001; DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, 8/4/2005]

Due to the aircraft's high speed and the way it is being flown, Dulles Airport controllers mistake the alleged AA 77 for a military fighter jet (see (9:25 a.m.-9:37 a.m.) [WASHINGTON POST, 9/12/2001; ABC NEWS, 10/24/2001; MSNBC, 9/11/2002]

At 9:30 a.m. that morning a member of staff on the NEADS operations floor complained about simulated material that was appearing on the NEADS radar screens. He said: "You know what, let's get rid of this goddamn sim. Turn your sim switches off. Let's get rid of that crap." Four minutes later (9:34 a.m.), Technical Sergeant Jeffrey Richmond gave an instruction to the NEADS surveillance technicians, "All surveillance, turn off your sim switches." (A "sim switch" presumably allows a technician to either display or turn off any simulated material on their radar screen.) FACT

 


On 9/11 Cheney ordered the stand down of the air defense missiles
around the Pentagon and the Washington DC area

Secret Service's Technical Services Division (TSD) operates the Secret
Service's Tigerwall air surveillance system. The TSD timeline states
that at 9:18 am "SAIC (Secret Service Special Agent in Charge) Carl
Truscott learned that an aircraft had been identified en-route to the
Washington area." Therefore, we have officially prepared documentation
that indicates Truscott was aware of a hijacked plane heading for
Washington at least 18 minutes before the official account says the
vice president was moved from his office.

The authoritative command system appeared to be below ground in the
PEOC (Presidential Emergency Operations Center) where Dick Cheney was
leading the activities. The TSD document released by FOIA shows that
when Assistant Division Chief Spriggs arrived in the PEOC, at 9:30 am,
Cheney and Rice were already there along with ten other "Presidential
and Vice Presidential staff." Carl Truscott was the lead Secret
Service agent in the PEOC, the one who was in coordination with
Garabito, and the one who was most closely coordinating with Dick
Cheney.

These TSD documents confirm that the Secret Service knew that two
hijacked planes were headed toward Washington during the time that
Cheney and SAIC Truscott were in the PEOC, and well before Flight 77
was reported to have crashed into the Pentagon.

Author Lynn Spencer, who NORAD Commander General Ralph Eberhart says
"tells it all and tells it well," wrote that "the Secret Service also
has certain authority over the military and, in this case, the DC
Guard." That is, the Secret Service had the authority to order the
scrambling of interceptor jets on 9/11. And of course, with the
president indisposed for a brief period, the vice president was the
commander in chief of the military.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/03/secret-service-failures-on-911... (http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/03/secret-service-failures-on-911...)

The Secret Service, which has been using an air surveillance system
called Tigerwall for some time after September 2000, and was tracking
both American 77 and United 93 as they approach Washington and assumes
the White House is a target. And according to Secret Service agent
Barbara Riggs, the agency is "able to receive real time information
about other hijacked aircraft," through "monitoring radar and
activating an open line with the FAA." [US DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY,
9/2000, PP. 28 ; PCCW NEWSLETTER, 3/2006; STAR-GAZETTE (ELMIRA),
6/5/2006]

Riggs will later say, "The Secret Service prepared to defend the
facility. [New York Times, 9/12/2001; MSNBC, 9/22/2001; Daily
Telegraph, 12/16/2001; Washington Post, 1/27/2002; Associated Press,
8/19/2002; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004; PCCW Newsletter, 3/2006]

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp?item=a938clarkeorders (http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp?item=a938clarkeorders)

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=102061.20;wap2 (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=102061.20;wap2)

 

---------------

The jet that hit the Pentagon, United Airlines flight 77 was able to
penetrate that highly protected airspace without the proper MODE 4A
military I.F.F. response, (indentify friendly or foe – enemy aircraft)
and no communications with air traffic control of any kind, no
clearance issued of any kind, and yet UA 77 flew a nice leisurely 330
degree turn after passing right past the White House, the more
desirable high value target.

The Identification Friend or Foe system uses a special MODE 4A feature
that only military aircraft use, and requires special encryption.
Additionally, a mission specific MODEX aka SEDSCAF number for each
plane is assigned and if it must meet the PLAN OF THE DAY for the
area. The proper MODEX / SEDSCAF NUMBER is what enables an aircraft
then to penetrate prohibited or military restricted airspace such as
that which surrounds both the White House and the Pentagon, as well as
a number of military installations around the globe.
Without this IFF any aircraft would be shot down. No "if"s, no "and"s
and no "but"s!!!!

The Washington, D.C. area has Raytheon "Basic Point Defense" missile
battery armament embedded on several building rooftops, using Sea
Sparrow air defense missiles.

In any case, there was plenty of warning that an unknown and presumed
hostile target was inbound to the Washington, D.C. area from the area
around West Virginia to the east, and more than sufficient time
existed to scramble fighters and or light off the Basic Point Missile
Defense or BPDMS radar systems. There anti-aircraft missile defenses
have been installed in rooftops in the Washington, D.C. area since the
mid 1980's. In all likelihood, there also is a version of the PAC-3
`Patriot' Missile system protecting Washington DC and the White House,
which UA 77 went breezing right past, and Secret Service agents on the
roof with shoulder fired STINGER MISSILES.

Sources: Dennis Cimino, A.A., EE; 35-years EMI/EMC testing, field
engineering; FDR testing and certifications specialist; Navy Combat
Systems Specialist; 2,000 hours, Pilot in Command, Commercial
Instrument Single and Multi-Engine Land Pilot, Eastern Airlines
727-200, Second Officer
Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer and founder of Scholars for
9/11 Truth, is McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of
Minnesota Duluth.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/03/13/911-the-official-account-of-t... (http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/03/13/911-the-official-account-of-t...)


26. The lie that the military was not notified by the FAA about Flight 93's hijacking until after it crashed .

27. The lie that Vice President Cheney did not give the shoot-down authorization until after 10:10 (several minutes after Flight 93 had crashed) and that this authorization was not transmitted to the US military until 10:31.

 

Witnesses lied to the 9/11 Commission:

Gen. Richard Myers lied about NORAD radars as being completely inadequate and therefore could not track the aircraft heading for the White House and Pentagon. He said "we did not have situational awareness inward because we did not have radar coverage."

This was a lie. This is because radars cover a 360 degree circle.
They are not just pointed easterly at the Atlantic Ocean looking for
possible incoming Russian jet attacking the US.

 The government also stated that the radar track for this aircraft was lost over a
"radar hole" that exists in the radar coverage map over W. VA., and
that as they neither had radio contact with the crew, nor a valid
Radar Beacon or IFF code sqwawk coming from the aircraft's
transponders when the track was lost going west.

This was a lie because when and where the government claims the radar
track was lost, American Airlines flight 77 was flying virtually directly over an
altitude finding military radar system known as FPS-117 that was on
top of a ridge. This radar has a nominal range of 200 miles. This
radar station was in operation on Sept. 11, 2001, and was not called
out in any documentary evidence as being out of commission or off-line
that morning, yet the government asserts that a "radar hole" existed
in it's tracking or service volume area that morning.

*2 (Source: Mounting Evidence: Why We Need a New Investigation into
9/11, by Paul W. Rea, PhD pp. 260 to 270).

 

 

Richard Clark, the Chief Counter-Terror Advisor to the White House (NSC) 1998-2002) says the following information did not come up in the 9/11 Commission investigation.

Richard Clark states that daily he got automatically was sent all important CIA intelligence updates sent to his White House office computer. However, there was one piece of information he did not get and it was information about two known Al Qaeda terrorists Almhdhar Khalid and Alhazmi Nawaf who had been involved in previous terrorist attacks had entered the US after CIA who had been tracking them lost track of them. These two guys allegedly flew on UA 77 on 9/11. He states that only under orders of CIA Director George Tenet would these information have not been sent to Clarks computer for him to read every morning. Over 50 other people at CIA received this intelligence.

And on July 10, 2001 Tenet and accompanied by Cofer Black, head of CIA counter-terrorism and Rich Blee at an emergency NSC meeting. Still they did not tell Richard Clark, about the two known Al Qaeda guys had entered US via Los Angeles.

Clark thinks the CIA was trying to flip these two known terrorist (try to make them spy for the CIA against Al Qaeda) which the CIA is not legally authorized to do inside the US. Only the FBI can recruit human sources inside the US. The CIA can meet or run spies they have recruited outside the US.

They were befriended by Omar Al Bayoumi a Saudi, who Is likely a Saudi intelligence agent. He arranged housing for them and paid them money to live on and help them move to San Diego. On August 21, 2001 the FBI begins a search for these two Al Qaeda guys after the CIA tells them about these guys.

Also on Sept. 4, 2001 Bush's cabinet-level advisers has a meeting about the terrorism threat and the CIA still did not tell them or Richard Clark about the two Al Qaeda guys.

Tenet had a close relationship with the head of Saudi foreign intelligence, Prince Turki Al Faisal, 1977 – 2001.

CIA Threatens 9/11 Researchers After Discovery Of Cover Up Details (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1d-RGkYpXCg#ws)

 

At the following internet link you can view video tapes of the second 767 flying into the Twin Towers. The

http://www.911conspiracy.tv/2nd_hit.html (http://www.911conspiracy.tv/2nd_hit.html)

 

At least four of these video were analyzed by the below noted experts and the videos depict the 767 flying faster than the engines of a 767 call push this jet thru the air. That maximum speed is about 300 to 350 mph.

The aerodynamic limitations of the Boeing 767-200 aircraft are such that it would be unwise to exceed an indicated airspeed of 460 mph at any altitude. These airspeeds at sea level is well above the maximum operating speed of the Boeing 767-200 and therefore the pilots would run the risk of either total structural failure or localized structural failures, namely wing fairings breaking off, engine cowlings breaking off, control surfaces breaking off or becoming inoperative and handling difficulties. It appears from analysis of the video photos just prior to UA 175 crashing into the south tower, that someone has used video fakery.

There had to be more than one person or group responsible for the forgery and / or manipulation of video tapes of flight UA175 moving at Impossible Speeds.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology- 503 mph
British Royal Air Force- 575 mph
Federal Aviation Administration- 586 mph
National Institute of Standards and Tech.- 546 mph
Federal Emergency Management Agency- 590 mph

Why would people do this? Maybe it was to make it appear as if the force of the jets (the momentum) was far more than it really was. http://612ua.0catch.com/ (http://612ua.0catch.com/)

 

.   Immigration and Naturalization Service) granted visas to 15 of the 19 hijackers.  Their applications were incomplete and incorrect. They were all young, single, unemployed males, with no apparent means of support -- the kind considered classic overstay candidates. State Department official Michael Springmann worked spent two years as chief of the visa section at the U.S. Consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.  When he protested, his superiors repeatedly ordered him to issue visas to unqualified Arabs applicants who also matched the prolife of terrorist.

The State Department did not run the Consulate in Jeddah. The CIA did.

    The hijackers entered the US using the Visa Express program, a program that was begun in May 2001 and ended in July 2002.  The program allows any Saudi to obtain a US visa through a travel agent instead of appearing at a consulate in person.  Five hijackers use this program to enter the US within the next month! (al-Mihdhar, Alomari, Al-Hazmi, al-Ghamdi, and Banihammad.  In May 2002, Abdullah Norman, a US employee of the consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, says he took money and gifts to provide fake visas to foreigners. He pleads guilty.   Some flight schools issue paperwork that allows students to obtain visas at US embassies or consulates.

     The alleged 9/11 Muslim extremists/hijackers were seen using cocaine, hiring prostitutes, drinking alcohol, etc.,  as if they repeatedly went out of their way to draw attention to themselves as crazed, potential terrorists, as if to build a "legend" back-story.  Additionally many FBI agents attempting to investigate these alleged hijackers were repeatedly and consistently blocked and ordered not to investigate these guys, despite forceful protestations.

     Six of these alleged Al Qaeda terrorists received training at US military bases.  Pensacola Naval Air Station in Pensacola, Florida, Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, Texas,  Air War College, Maxwell-Gunter Air Force Base in Montgomery, Alabama, the Defense Language Institute school at Monterey, CA, and USAF School of Aerospace Medicine at Brooks Air Force Base in San Antonio, Texas.

http://infowars.net/articles/february2007/250207Hijackers.htm (http://infowars.net/articles/february2007/250207Hijackers.htm)

http://www.prisonplanet.com/alleged_hijackers_may_trained_us_bases.html (http://www.prisonplanet.com/alleged_hijackers_may_trained_us_bases.html)

http://www.wanttoknow.info/050407hijackersmilitarytraining911 (http://www.wanttoknow.info/050407hijackersmilitarytraining911)

 

    A series of major media articles state that several of the 9/11 hijackers may have had training in US military bases. All of the alleged hijackers, save one, were Saudi-Arabian citizens.

 

    Ahmad Alnami, Ahmed Alghamdi, and Saeed Alghamdi even listed the Naval Air Station in Pensacola, Florida as their permanent address on their driver's licenses.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2001/pensacolanewsjournal091701.html. (http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2001/pensacolanewsjournal091701.html.)

 

    Hamza Alghamdi is also connected to the Pensacola base. http://www.wanttoknow.info/010916post (http://www.wanttoknow.info/010916post)

 

    Saeed Alghamdi attended the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, California. Abdulaziz Alomari attended Brooks Air Force Base Aerospace Medical School. http://www.pressconnects.com/archive/attack/stories/091701N1.html (http://www.pressconnects.com/archive/attack/stories/091701N1.html)

 

     Mohamed Atta graduated from the US International Officers School at Maxwell Air Force Base. Abdulaziz Alomari graduated from the Aerospace Medical School at Brooks Air Force Base. The media drops the story after the Air Force makes a statement, saying that while the names are similar, "we are probably not talking about the same people."

 

The US military provides no detailed information to refute the claims in these articles.

http://www.wanttoknow.info/010915nytimes, (http://www.wanttoknow.info/010915nytimes,) http://www.wanttoknow.info/010915newsweek (http://www.wanttoknow.info/010915newsweek)

http://www.wanttoknow.info/010916post (http://www.wanttoknow.info/010916post)

http://www.wanttoknow.info/010915newsweek, (http://www.wanttoknow.info/010915newsweek,) http://www.wanttoknow.info/010916post, (http://www.wanttoknow.info/010916post,) http://www.wanttoknow.info/010915nytimes, (http://www.wanttoknow.info/010915nytimes,) http://www.wanttoknow.info/9-11timeline60pg (http://www.wanttoknow.info/9-11timeline60pg)" \l "hijackersmilitary 

 
Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: RE on May 13, 2012, 03:55:03 PM
Hey Ben, what's with the repetitive posts?  Can you go in and delete a few of those please?

RE
Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: reanteben on May 13, 2012, 04:37:23 PM
Hey Ben, what's with the repetitive posts?  Can you go in and delete a few of those please?

RE

dunno, mate! wasn't me. maybe it was the ghost of judy wood's assistant reacting to surly's nanothermite-only 9/11 pasting.  ;D i deleted them. thought about deleting peter's civ repeats, too, but i'll leave it you. maybe The Slog brought some baddies with him.
Title: Re: Need some help here...
Post by: RE on May 13, 2012, 05:35:29 PM
Must be a software glitch of some kind.  I wonder if its related to the skyrocketing Page Hts numbers we are getting?  Last time I checked today we showed 11K Page Hits. :jawdrop:

RE
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: el Gallinazo on June 09, 2012, 05:09:25 PM
I have listened to over six hours of Prof. Judy Wood interviews, and she has me pretty well convinced that the definitive weapon that destroyed the three towers was a directed energy beam that "dustified" it.  Her approach is to assume nothing - just look at the crime scene as it is and without any preconceptions.  There are two problems with the nano-thermite theory.  One is that it doesn't explain all the evidence by a long shot.  (I am lazy - listen to Wood yourself), and the other is that it is really hard to analyse for unreacted nano-thermite, as in the end it is just tiny particles of iron oxide and aluminum - not the most exotic of materials.  Since the beam structure of the building was 98+% iron and the skin was glass and aluminum, Wood's dustification would leave these nano particle in great abundance in the dust residue.  Nano particles of steel would oxidize in seconds from the air at ambient temperature.  Wood also intensively researched the purported beams being sent off to NJ and then China for melting ASAP and discovered that it was an "urban myth" with no paper trail at all.  Photos taken of the site the  day of the false flag event did not show these beams.  Her book is just full of photos - worth a 1000 kg of MSM bullshit.  So where did the huge beams go?  They could be cut by nano-thermite, but not destroyed.  I understand that Judy Wood's book just blows you away beyond any doubt, and I would be willing to shell out the $40 if I had a reliable way to send it to Mexico.

I am not saying that nano-thermite was not used.  I am saying that if it were used, it would have been as a secondary diversion.  It is what I call the salamander approach, where if a predator catches it, the tail breaks off and flaps enticingly, while the animal makes a getaway to grow its tail back at a later date.  The nano-thermite, if it were used, was a diversion to obscure the state of weaponization that the Illuminati has with Tesla technology if their idiotic kerosene fire scenario couldn't hold the muppets in thrall.  They really do not want the status of their Tesla weaponization divulged yet to the muppet class.

But in the end the nano-thermite / scalar weapon debate is just whether Colonel Illuminati killed 3000 Miss Piggies in the Tower with the candlestick or the lead pipe.

Title: ADD 9-11 conspiracy
Post by: Surly1 on June 14, 2012, 12:53:45 PM
Expert Panel Reports False Accounts of U.S. Political and Military Leaders on 9/11
http://www.informat ionclearinghouse .info/article315 69.htm (http://www.informat ionclearinghouse .info/article315 69.htm)


Massive National War Games on September 11th Raise Further Questions

No surprises here. Just mysteries... slowly unraveling.

By PR Newswire

June 13, 2012 "Information Clearing House" --

New evidence shows that the September 11th activities of former President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld were falsely reported by official sources.

The 20-member 9/11 Consensus Panel analyzed evidence from press reports, FOIA requests, and archived 9/11 Commission file documents to produce eight new studies, released today.

The international Panel also discovered that four massive aerial practice exercises traditionally held in October were in full operation on 9/11. The largest, Global Guardian, held annually by NORAD and the US Strategic and Space Commands, had originally been scheduled for October 22-31 but was moved, along with Vigilant Guardian, to early September.

Although senior officials claimed no one could have predicted using hijacked planes as weapons, the military had been practicing similar exercises on 9/11 itself -- and for years before it.

The Panel, discovering widespread reports of confusion and delays in the defense response, looked into who was overseeing the air defenses after the second Tower was hit at 9:03 AM.

Official sources claimed neither Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Joint Chiefs of Staff Acting Chairman General Richard Myers (filling in for General Hugh Shelton), nor war-room chief General Montague Winfield were available to take command until well after the Pentagon was struck about 9:37.

Yet emerging documents and memoirs show that top leaders were engaged earlier -- and later discussed a shootdown of the “let's roll” Flight 93 before debris was scattered widely around its alleged Shanksville, Pennsylvania crash site.

Most intriguing is the mystery of who was running the Pentagon's war-room during the critical early hours.

These findings follow hard on the Kuala Lumpur Tribunal's May 15th verdict that Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld were guilty of torture and war crimes.

The Consensus Panel has completed 25 educational studies (using a medical consensus model) offering the "best evidence" regarding specific official claims about 9/11.

Its goal is to “provide a ready source of evidence-based research to any investigation that may be undertaken by the public, the media, academia, or any other investigative body or institution.”

Website: www.consensus911 (http://www.consensus911). org

“September 11, 2001 seems destined to be the watershed event of our lives and the greatest test for our democracy in our lifetimes. The evidence of government complicity in the lead-up to the events, the failure to respond during the event, and the astounding lack of any meaningful investigation afterwards, as well as the ignoring of evidence turned up by others that renders the official explanation impossible, may signal the end of the American experiment. It has been used to justify all manner of measures to legalize repression at home and as a pretext for behaving as an aggressive empire abroad. Until we demand an independent, honest, and thorough investigation and accountability for those whose action and inaction led to those events and the cover-up, our republic and our Constitution remain in the gravest danger.”

Lt. Col. Shelton F. Lankford, US Marine Corps (ret.)

This this article was first published at PR Newswire

SOURCE The 9/11 Consensus Panel
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: agelbert on August 03, 2012, 02:22:14 PM
Quote
FBI agent flees USA screaming, 'Beware the next false flag attack -- they're all insane!'

But that is only part of the story. There's an explosives expert retired FBI agent named Donald Sachtleben. This guy was involved in investigating every false flag event we have suffered for 20 years!
Quote
Donald Sachtleben left the bureau in 2008 after a 25-year career as an explosives specialist and bomb scene investigator. Special Agent Sachtleben had worked on a number of high-profile cases including the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, the terrorist attack on the USS Cole in 2000, and the crash of Flight 93 in central Pennsylvania on September 11, 2001. He also led the team that processed unabomber Ted Kacznski's Lincoln, Montana cabin where the schizophrenic manufactured his package bombs.
Gee, the only other "investigations" this guy needs for a complete cloak and dagger resume are TWA 800, John John's and Senator Wellstone's magical melted engine block caused plane crashes.

The connection between the two agents is that when the first one went on the lam, the FBI set up Sachtleben with the same kind of bogus charges they used on former UN weapons inspector William Scott Ritter, Jr. who warned about the lies being told to the American people in the run-up to the Iraq War only to find himself sent to prison on trumped up charges involving a minor girl.

Sachtleben knows where ALL the bodies are buried. If this guy ever sings, half of D.C. and most of AIPAC's Rolodex will be strung up.
What Really Happened To FBI Special Agent Stephen Ivens ?!? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQXlKvlmIM0#ws)

http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=52190 (http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=52190)
Title: twin towers and symbolism
Post by: Chloe on August 26, 2012, 04:09:27 PM
The collapse of the twin towers is so similar to the tarot card, the Tower.  This card means the absolute and sudden destruction of everything you thought was safe - including and especially your defences.  Leading to a new structure altogether.    The card after the Tower is the Star.  Which corresponds to - go on, guess which star sign?  Yep; Aquarius.  Couldn't be a connection, by any chance?  The symbolism of the destruction of the old, leading to the attempted NWO, in the Age of Aquarius.  Heralding the collapse of the old financial system, too? 

Also: the symbolism of the twin towers.  Twin pillars.  Very ancient mystery school; Masonic.  Why didn't the terrorists target something like the nuclear power plant?  Why only these few attacks?  On something that just happens to be as symbolic as two 'pillars'?

And the date - 9/11.  There's the numerology of 9 and 11, and the US emergency number, but that date also falls in the sign of Virgo.  Knight and Butler point out, in Before the Pyramids, that September is the sign of Virgo, the Virgin.  The harvest.  The sacrifice of the god of the corn.  (Hence some pictures of the Madonna with a sometimes very adult looking 'baby'.)


Finally:  God bless and comfort those people still dealing with the pain of the destruction from 9/11.





 

Title: Re: twin towers and symbolism
Post by: Chloe on August 28, 2012, 11:55:14 AM
PS:  Also, if the towers represented the twin pillars in Masonry, which in turn may represent 'good' and 'evil' - the destruction of them could also mean a destruction of the 'old' ideas of good and evil?  This rubbishing of the two 'old' ideas can certainly seen in a lot of the New Age ...
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy video
Post by: Surly1 on September 11, 2012, 08:28:08 AM
Pretty doggone good. Give it five minutes.

http://www.youtube.com/v/MmbPh3u7_q0?rel=0
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: agelbert on September 11, 2012, 08:48:51 PM
Surly1,
This being 9/11, I've decided to let the Diners in on some knowledge I have as a former air traffic controller that convinced me it was an inside job within a day or so of the event. The tip-off for me was the Pentagon.

I aired this knowledge on the Huffington Post years later (I think it was in 2005) when she finally couldn't censor comments on it because an article was written on the subject by some movie star or writer (AFTER Arianna had denied Jesse Ventura the freedom to write on 9/11 at hufpo). An army of Hasbara assholes were out in force (you could tell they were A. not Americans by their writing and B. They had all these cartoon character avatars). I took one of them apart piece by piece and he ended up asking me where I lived.  :evil4:   :evil7:

I got a little more aggressive in my comments and, of course, they were censored.

So what do I know? Washington D.C. is wall to wall radar AND is a prohibited area. That means you fly in and out of Reagan International on a VERY specific route along the Potomac (River route). The "excuse" that the Tracon (tower radar approach control) was  "out of communication" with the "outside world" was the most outlandish piece of bullshit I have ever heard. Remember, THAT was the reason given for them not communicating with the Air Force to scramble jets (in this case jets were ALREADY in the air being sent to the wrong areas). 

Potomac Tracon (terminal radar approach control) controls the approach of all aircraft coming into Reagan International and several other area major airports. Potomac Tracon is 33 miles west southwest of Reagan and the Pentagon. There is no way in God's good Earth that ANY lack of communications occurred between them and Reagan Tower. There are about SIX levels of redundancy in communications from several transmitters on dedicated frequencies, back up transmitters and receivers on each frequency to fiber optic land lines that provide voice and remote radar data from the overlaying artcc (enroute radar traffic control center 10,000 feet and above) to satellite feed backups for everything. There are multiple lines to various Air Force Bases around with INDEPENDENT systems for a fail safe operation in case of nuclear missile attack.

Washington Center was tracking the aircraft headed for the DC area. The false generated targets from NORAD exercises is total bullshit because NORAD doesn't work airplanes! Air traffic controllers work airplanes! And we know damned good and well what a computer generated false target looks like. I trained people and ran the target generator scenarios myself as a training department instructor during the late 70s. Now they've got LCD displays and then we had CRT (cathode ray tube) round scopes but the radar and computer operation to translate a primary (no transponder to give altitude data) target to a data bock with speed and direction has not changed. I could NOT, as an instructor generating targets to make my students sweat, generate those targets onto an active display. All training targets have a "T" on the data block anyway. NO ONE in atc was confused due to "exercises".


Back to 9/11, the twin towers had been hit and every atc facility and their mothers knew that aircraft had hit (at the management level within minutes - less than 15). At the controller level, you can be sure the people in Washington Center were told by controllers from Boston center and New York center that some hijackings were in progress BEFORE the planes hit the towers. Next you have this primary target (no transponder to give altitude data - just some moving object that provides a radar return above 50 mph) headed towards the DC prohibited area. Immediately Washington Center tells Potomac Tracon who, in turn, tells Reagan Tower. This must be done because no altitude info is available so you don't know who's airspace this NORDO (NO RADIO) potential hijack is going to violate in the capital.

But here's the kicker. We HAD TO routinely save two weeks of radar tracking data with a 100% accurate record of air traffic movements in case a loss of separation standards had occurred (known in atc parlance as a "deal" that you could get disciplined and possibly fired for). Controllers don't report "deals" unless they can't avoid it unless it was a near mid-air collision, the pilots saw each other and are screaming bloody murder. Again, the guy/gal on position normally is not being monitored by a sup so they cross their fingers. The pilots land and call the facility or wait a few days to do it. Sometimes they don't bother. If they do, your  sup tells the training department to pull the voice tapes (also saved for two weeks) and the radar data to see if you went below minimum separation standards. You, the controller, are required to write up a statement summarizing the events. The controller knows his goose is cooked here so he doesn't dare lie.

When the "aircraft" that hit the pentagon performed it's impossible maneuver of a descending 360 degree spiraling turn at around 500 mph the tower radar recorded the track and the speed, Potomac Tracon recorded the track and the  speed and Washington center recorded the track and the speed. The paltry visuals the Pentagon released of a MISSLE striking the pentagon was blatantly obvious to me. I'm very experienced in seeing planes fly near buildings; they move MUCH slower than that. It was a missile. All they had to to in ATC was look at those radar tracking tapes. A missile has 1,000 mph or greater velocity. The thing that hit the Pentagon was moving a lot faster than 500 mph. It's on the radar data. If the data from THREE INDEPENDENT ATC FACILITIES was destroyed, that is undeniable proof that Donald Rumsfeld and Cheney ran an inside job, PERIOD. Guess what? When I mentioned the radar data on hufpo the Hasbara dude asked where I lived.

But there is more. A B767 is, as you know, is an airplane. Airplanes have a limitation in flight. The turning radius is a function of the bank angle and speed. That means that the faster you go, the steeper you need to bank the airplane in order to keep your turn radius, as in a 500 mph jet, from being several miles in radius (if you are turning 360 degrees as was the case on 9/11). Missles are not airplanes and don't have this problem because they use vectored thrust, not bank angle, to control turning radius.  The 360 degree banked turn the alleged B767 executed in a descending spiral to smack the Pentagon was NOT possible for a B767 at that speed due to the stresses the required bank angle would have on the aircraft (look ma, no wings!).
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/tr/5/54/Bank_angle.JPG)
Aircraft in a 30 degree banked angle turn

(http://overtheairwaves.com/vol4-013.jpg)

In any aircraft from a piper cub to a B747, when you exceed 60 degrees of banked turn, you are oulling 2 Gs plus on the entire aircraft structure. Above 60 degrees, the Gs increase exponentially. Aerobatic aircraft require plus or minus 6 G strength for FAA certification. Commercial jet liners lose their wings (B767 max allowed plus 2.5 Gs and minus 1.0 G to avoid structural damage) trying to keep a 70 or 80 degree bank angle at 500 mph in a descending spiral needed to cover the track the government says was traversed  to smack the Pentagon. Only a missile or a fighter aircraft with a missile ready to fire could do that.

As a matter of fact you COULD beef up the wings of a B767  DRONE to do this maneuver (the only possible scenario in the second twin tower strike due to speed and turn rate). However, at the Pentagon, the hole was too small. It was a missile.

Pilots For 9/11 Truth Presents "9/11 INTERCEPTED" - (Full Film) MUST WATCH! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KhdppHwUJ9k#)
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: RE on September 12, 2012, 12:42:34 AM
Man I JUST Caught this one in time!  I think I can get it up before the clock rolls over for 9-11 on the Blog!

AB, you should have sent me a PM on this one!  Homegrown Diner Blogger 9-11 on the Anniversary is IMPORTANT!

RE
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: RE on September 12, 2012, 12:53:24 AM
Man I JUST Caught this one in time!  I think I can get it up before the clock rolls over for 9-11 on the Blog!

AB, you should have sent me a PM on this one!  Homegrown Diner Blogger 9-11 on the Anniversary is IMPORTANT!

RE

YES!  Just made it!  Important because the Permalink is auto generated and it should have 9-11 in it.

Now I can edit it up to look better, but the permalink is in place.  PHEW!

RE
Title: A Diner’s Eye View of 9-11
Post by: RE on September 12, 2012, 01:23:35 AM
A Diner’s Eye View of 9-11 (http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/blog/2012/09/11/a-diners-eye-view-of-9-11/) by Diner Agelbert now UP on the Diner Blog!

It is a Feature Article, and also the Pilot's Video incorporated into the article is the Diner Feature Video right now.

RE
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: agelbert on September 12, 2012, 01:54:01 AM
RE,
About the 9/11 post, I was just reading the Surly1 post and decided to reply as an extemporaneous thing. I had no plans to do so. I went round and round with my brother controllers (all retired) after 9/11 and they shoved their heads straight into the sand as quickly as possible but they KNEW! Like you say, EVERYBODY KNOWS. Well, they knew and just didn't want to talk about it. I told you before one of them was CIA from Vietnam (flew for Air America). That shithead posted a big flashy photo display of how "they"(ay-rabs) attacked America. It was very professionally done. Said a "friend of his" prepared it. Uh uh...  This same guy that appeared to be "mourning" was inordinately bubbly and said in an e-mail how he probably had run into Mohammad Atta at the flight school near Fort Myers, Florida he frequented. The flight school is at an airport that was one of the ones the CIA used during the IRAN-Contra caper run by Oliver North to fly drugs into the USA and weapons out to the contras. Chucky ended up giving me the finger because I asked him too many pointed questions.  :icon_mrgreen:

Chucky was famous for using FAA telephone lines to run query software at night (while he was home) to check every bulletin board and CompuServe fax outlet looking for freebee programs to download on the tax payer dime. The weasel would then claim they were "his" software! Him and his stupid TRS-80 Radio Shack piece of crapola. :laughing6:

The day after he transferred out we reformatted the hard drive to kill all his spy shit on the IBM PC with windows 3 (I believe). What a slippery thief that guy was. But I digress. 9/11 has a very sick inertia because a very large group of otherwise decent people just doing their job are forced to keep queit about a huge crime. Later on, if they decide they want to talk, they fear doing so because they will have to admit that they kept quite about it for several years. The top dogs know this and know they can DO IT AGAIN because everyone that remained mum the first time is now an accessory.  Mafia tactics by our fascist gooberment. :(
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Surly1 on September 12, 2012, 08:53:32 AM
  :icon_mrgreen:
9/11 has a very sick inertia because a very large group of otherwise decent people just doing their job are forced to keep quiet about a huge crime. Later on, if they decide they want to talk, they fear doing so because they will have to admit that they kept quite about it for several years. The top dogs know this and know they can DO IT AGAIN because everyone that remained mum the first time is now an accessory.  Mafia tactics by our fascist gooberment. :(

Great, great post, AG. Am going to post it on the DD FB site.

The "sick inertia" could also be referred to as "normalcy bias." The "big lie" has been repeated over and over and over again to the point where, if you even question to Official Liturgy, people start making finger circles against their temples. You post is a dispassionate, unarguable view from someone who has earned the right to have formed an opinion.

And your additional point here about the complicity of the silent speaks volumes as well. I had never even considered that before.

Sheeple all.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Surly1 on September 12, 2012, 09:00:03 AM
(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/551749_10151006443592967_1613718833_n.jpg)

Jet fuel did this, right?

Anyone out there still believe that this is the result of jet fuel?

9/11: A Conspiracy Theory - Everything you ever wanted to know about the 9/11 in under 5 min
Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About The 9/11 Conspiracy Theory In Under 5 Minutes (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_IZaUuK_d0#ws)

http://www.youtube.com/v/A_IZaUuK_d0?rel=0
Title: Re: Your 9-11 dustification thread
Post by: reanteben on September 12, 2012, 11:02:54 AM
anyone out there still believe that that is the result of controlled demo, LOL? surly, that is DUSTIFICATION. you won't find it in the OED.  ;D

fantastic pair of comments, agelbert. I sent them to my retired CIA dad.

I have to say i've been underwhelmed by the response at DD (glassy-eyed silence, mostly) to  judy wood's scalar 9/11. other than el gallinazo and me, and nobody (i  do believe) and peter (on the fence), the dustification theory has been greeted with a deathly silence.

the woodian theory is even inclusive of special-order drones (for navigating and penetrating the towers) and nanothermite. the woodian theory demands to know Where Did The Towers Go?

RE won't touch ZPE with a ten-foot pole (blocked what-chakra slash peak oil bias  :P), but, agelbert, I don't believe you were around for the (just renamed by me) dustification thread, which, because of the links in it, is a useful gateway to the Truth about 9/11:

http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php?topic=277.0 (http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php?topic=277.0)

Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Surly1 on September 12, 2012, 02:25:10 PM
Perhaps some of the glassey-eyed-ness regarding Dr. Wood's theories is that these posts tend to disappear down the memory hole once they drop off the "top 100" recent posts, which is generally how I use the Forum.

Also, I have no idea to what the prevailing temperature is regarding 9-11, although as I re-read the thread that you posted (thanks, BTW, for rescuing it from the Memory Hole), I suspect most would agree with Peter. I could be wrong, but I think it a safe bet to imagine most of the Diners here being are highly skeptical of the goobermint-MSM prevailing narrative and the manipulative ways of Bernays' heirs...

It could be that we are preaching to the choir. It may be that scalar weaponry is so exotic that no one knows enough to venture an opinion.

On one thing we can probably agree: that 9-11 was indeed PNAC's coveted "New Pearl Harbor," which led to total war on the Bill of Rights and the common people of the FSA. Would that the Fourth Amendment had as well-rganized and well-funded a defense lobby as the Second.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: WHD on September 12, 2012, 04:17:26 PM
Agelbert,

That was one to be proud of. There is a man standing up for the truth. Thank you for that. And the following comments. It speaks too, to how easily manipulated Americans are, and how rotten America is, that this could be secret for so long.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: agelbert on September 12, 2012, 04:47:43 PM
Reanteben,
The issue of all the details as to how the buildings were brought down is certainly worth study. Architects and Engineers for 911 are doing just that.

(http://www.thenational.ae/deployedfiles/Assets/Richmedia/Image/SaxoPress/AD2011090927193-1-Architects%20&%20En.jpg)

However, I agree with Surly1 on this:
Quote
On one thing we can probably agree: that 9-11 was indeed PNAC's coveted "New Pearl Harbor," which led to total war on the Bill of Rights and the common people of the FSA. Would that the Fourth Amendment had as well-organized and well-funded a defense lobby as the Second.

Since your father was CIA, have you asked him what he thinks?
Was your father in field operations or based at Langley doing analysis?
The CIA is highly compartmentalized and operates on the "Need to know" principle so, unless your father was in a foreign country doing field work for the Directorate of Operations, he would not be any more knowledgeable about 9/11 than the average citizen. Then again, if he knew something that compromised the "company" (inside parlance for the CIA), he would never tell you. That's just the way they operate. Read "Neck Deep" by Robert Parry for some CIA modus operandi background. :(

While we are on the subject of 911, I'd like to mention a deliberate distraction that was put out there when people began questioning the wacky conspiracy theory the gooberment and media were shoving down our throats (19 punks with single engine Cessna flying skills did the whole caper).

A team of propagandists put out the bullshit that there were NO aircraft hitting the buildings. They claimed what we saw were holograms. They ran a credible scam but, like a magician, they made people look in the wrong place so as to confuse the issue. When someone wants you to "look" with just your eyes, you get fooled as long as you don't "look" with any other senses. It was really quite clever. People had figured out that the planes DID NOT bring down those towers.

So-o-o-o the propagandists, in an attempt to discredit the people alleging that the twin towers were destroyed by explosives, not airplanes, made the ridiculous argument that there were NO AIRPLANES!

(http://www.serendipity.li/wot/911_plane_03.jpg)
Reapeat after me: That's a hologram, not an airplane, you are getting very sleepy. When you awake you will remember that Slavery is Freedom


Of course there was an army of naysayers on the internet saying how the Arab baddies were out to get us and doubting the gooberment was treason or "unpatriotic". The line about "we must trust the government because Bush and Cheney know things we don't" by people like Pat Boone was echoed throughout the internet as well. The propagandists were working the "problem" of people out there using critical thinking skills from several directions.

When I read the hologram hypothesis, I thought about it. I fell in to the trap because I watched those buildings come down like they were riding a down elevator. It was obvious the aircraft didn't do that because the top parts would have fallen asymmetrically rather than in their footprint. As a matter of fact, the first building DID lurch a little (about 15 feet) to one side before it came down minutes later. I believe the boyz running the charges from building seven said we better bring this sucker down NOW before the top 20 something floors or so lurch off to the side and take out some buildings we don't want taken out.

Back to the hologram hypothesis. I saw the accidental 911 documentary from the French Camera team that had been working with some Fire Department nearby. They heard the noise and filmed the first impact. Then it hit me. The NOISE. Sound waves from a moving jet aircraft produce a Doppler effect. It is impossible for a hologram to generate a Doppler effect ALL OVER NEW YORK CITY. Sure, you can do it in a movie theater but that was not a movie theater. Just as you hear the sound pitch of an approaching object climb, so you hear it descend as the Doppler effect spaces the sound waves farther and farther apart. You can clearly here the sound of the engines of a jet moving AWAY from the camera's position as it approaches the building.

The hologram hypothesis is disinformation and FURTHER PROOF that the oil oligarchy that runs the USA will spend money, a lot of money, to pull the wool over people's eyes.

Reanteben, it has been 11 years. There is only one thing you or anyone else needs to ask about 9/11.


CUI BONO?

I agree with Surly1 as to who benefited.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: g on September 12, 2012, 05:11:28 PM
Agelbert, your posting has certainly had me thinking about all of this since reading it, and
I was wondering if you had any ideas about that first attack, that appeared to botched, by the cleric from New York. I was wondering if there is something there that everyone is overlooking. Two terrorist attacks on the same target always struck me as very odd.   GO
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: agelbert on September 12, 2012, 07:47:04 PM
WHD,
You are very welcome. by the way, I made a comment on your last article that has been bumped because of all the posts made since then. Thanks for your great work.  :emthup:
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: agelbert on September 13, 2012, 12:45:05 AM
Impossible G forces for B767
Impossible G forces for B767
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: g on September 13, 2012, 01:00:38 AM
" Quote Agelbert"This is the lady that convinced me that there NEVER was an Arab terrorist threat on US territory (outside the US, on Arab soil, there definitely was/is and she made the statement that US aggression would spur it.). Her name is Susan Lindauer. She was a CIA asset. That means she was a go-between".

Thanks again Agelbert, spell binding material, ashamed at myself for never hearing of this women until your posting tonight. Just finished the videos and was struck by here wonderful personality after what she has been put through. Her summation of the entire situation and who was responsible in two words, "Halliburton and Greed", hardly sound like the words from a crazy woman. I am currently reading all the links about her on Wiki, an honor graduate of Smith college and the London School of Economics that is supposed to be daft, what a friggin joke.

This Dr Fuisz is the key to it all and her second cousin Andrew Card sure manages to distance himself from it all while receiving all the correspondence. 

How I wish we had a real press and real journalists to do some top notch investigating of this type of material. It has all been dismissed by most familiar with it as the rantings of another loony tune. How sad! Thanks again AG
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: reanteben on September 13, 2012, 10:42:19 AM
surly said:

Quote
It may be that scalar weaponry is so exotic that no one knows enough to venture an opinion.

no doubt. but the beauty of the woodian approach is that it is evidence-based. the physical evidence eliminates, beyond a shadow of a doubt, the possibility of it having gone down the way the architects and engineers would have it. so the key to this onion is not to get caught up in the exotic -- wood herself doesn't even speculate on the method beyond what the evidence indicates (hutchison effect, other physical anomalies [bizarre car damage, etc]) -- but to focus on the evidence so that the leninist 'control both sides' tactic is exposed (as with the grassy knoll).

here's another quote (good to have you back, karpatok):
Quote
Karellen paused, and the silence grew even deeper.

"There has been some complaint, among the younger and more romantic elements of your population, because outer space has been closed to you. We had a purpose in doing this: we do not impose bans for the pleasure of it. But have you ever stopped to consider -- if you will excuse a slightly unflattering analogy -- what a man from your Stone Age would have felt, if he suddenly found himself in a modern city?"

"Surely," protested the Herald Tribune, "there is a fundamental difference. We are accustomed to Science. On your world there are doubtless many things which we might not understand -- but they wouldn't seem magic to us."

"Are you quite sure of that?" said Karellen, so softly that it was hard to hear his words. "Only a hundred years lies between the age of electricity and the age of steam, but what would a Victorian engineer have made of a television set or an electronic computer. And how long would he have lived if he started to investigate their workings? The gulf between two technologies can easily become so great that it is -- lethal."

From Childhood's End by Arthur C. Clarke (1953)  ❞



Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: agelbert on September 13, 2012, 02:02:10 PM
Golden Oxen,
You are always welcome.

Reanteben,
Maxwell perfected the wave function equations. He did not understand or predict quantum entanglement, the connotations of the double slit experiment (reality is a multiverse) or the many uses the knowledge of matter routinely entering and exiting this universe at the quantum level has on material science and weaponry. Vibratory weapons require high energy levels. The big, big problem with the scalar weapon hypothesis on the twin towers is the MOTIVE for bringing them down (using a new Pearl Harbor pretext to get more Middle East oil resources locked down). IF we had such weaponry with massive and unlimited energy at our disposal to power them, THEN we would have no need of foreign oil resources and no need to dustify the towers. Any crime requires three things:
1) Motive
2) Opportunity
3) Ability

With scalar weaponry there is no motive.

You said:
Quote
...a couple weeks ago and mentioned judy wood, who believes from the physical evidence that the towers were "dustified" -- disintegrated, in other words -- by a scalar weapon. the most obvious clues being the manner in which the towers came apart, and the lack of a rubble pile that should have been some 15 stories high. she has three interviews spanning eight hours at Veritas. there are many other bizarre facts surrounding 9/11 that she covers exhaustively at her website:

http://www.drjudywood.com/ (http://www.drjudywood.com/)

also, unlike bill morgan, above, she does not believe that aluminum planes could penetrate a concrete and steel building. she notes in particular that one of the wtc towers had an imprint of where the wing entered all the way out to the wingtip. at the tip the cutout from the wingtip penetration was just five inches tall. how could an aluminum wingtip penetrate such concrete and/or steel? it seems impossible in my mind. she does not speculate beyond that and therefore does not theorize on the film footage of the planes.


1. Visual information is not forensic evidence needed to confirm dustification. The proven nanothermite composition of some hastily gathered dust after the towers came down is all the physical evidence we have. WHY? Because EXACTLY the same corporation hired to clean up the debris after Oklahoma City is the one that carted EVERYTHING away as fast as possible. Now that is one hell of a coincidence, don't you think? After the crime of the century, no attempt is made by the gooberment to preserve the evidence (violating a slew of US laws by destroying evidence).
Quote
Peter Tully, president of Tully Construction of Flushing, New York, told AFP that he saw pools of "literally molten steel" at the World Trade Center. Tully was contracted on September 11 to remove the debris from the site.

Tully called Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition, Inc. (CDI) of Phoenix, Maryland, for consultation about removing the debris. CDI calls itself "the innovator and global leader in the controlled demolition and implosion of structures."

Loizeaux, who cleaned up the bombed Federal Building in Oklahoma City, arrived on the WTC site two days later and wrote the clean-up plan for the entire operation. 
http://911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html (http://911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html)


2. The rubble pile height is a strawman. The achitects and engineers for 911, unlike Dr. Judy Wood, have a wealth of data on the way structural matter piles up in a controlled demolition. In any event, a visual of a pile of dust and other debris is not physical evidence of scalar weaponry.

3. About the effects of aluminum on concrete and steel: An aircraft has a lot of soft parts but it has parts (landing gear, engines and wing spar and frame members) made of materials equal to (wing spar and framing) or much stronger (engine and landing gear) than anything used to construct a building. The archititects that designed the twin towers figured that into the building design strength. Add strength to inertia and you have some massive penetration power. Even without strength, such as is the case with aluminum, the Good Dr. Judy Wood is misunderstanding some real world data on aircraft design. An airplane's GREATEST STRENGTH is in the wing spar and structural components. The aluminum skin is there for aerodynamics but that wing is like a bridge that supports the aircraft at up to 2.5 Gs plus and 1 G minus. The wing has to routinely remain flexible (to a point) and hold 2.5 times the weight of the aircraft off and on. When the wing hits a building, the effect of the aluminum skin is negligible (depending on the strike angle). It's the structural members of titanium underneath that have punching power.

One more thing. High velocity can do amazing things with otherwise weak materials. Hurricane winds from Andrew never got to more than 160 mph. The aluminum structure of the aircraft was moving at 450 mph PLUS when it hit the WTC.

(http://www.hurricanescience.org/images/hss/1992_andrew_windevidence_noaa.jpg)
This is a weak piece of plywood striking a much stronger and denser tree trunk at a maximum of 150 mph

(http://www.ihc.fiu.edu/images/wind_damage.jpg)
Two by four penetrates a much denser palm tree trunk during a hurricane




Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: reanteben on September 13, 2012, 02:37:14 PM
Reanteben,
The issue of all the details as to how the buildings were brought down is certainly worth study. Architects and Engineers for 911 are doing just that.

(http://www.thenational.ae/deployedfiles/Assets/Richmedia/Image/SaxoPress/AD2011090927193-1-Architects%20&%20En.jpg)

However, I agree with Surly1 on this:
Quote
On one thing we can probably agree: that 9-11 was indeed PNAC's coveted "New Pearl Harbor," which led to total war on the Bill of Rights and the common people of the FSA. Would that the Fourth Amendment had as well-organized and well-funded a defense lobby as the Second.

Since your father was CIA, have you asked him what he thinks?
Was your father in field operations or based at Langley doing analysis?
The CIA is highly compartmentalized and operates on the "Need to know" principle so, unless your father was in a foreign country doing field work for the Directorate of Operations, he would not be any more knowledgeable about 9/11 than the average citizen. Then again, if he knew something that compromised the "company" (inside parlance for the CIA), he would never tell you. That's just the way they operate. Read "Neck Deep" by Robert Parry for some CIA modus operandi background. :(

While we are on the subject of 911, I'd like to mention a deliberate distraction that was put out there when people began questioning the wacky conspiracy theory the gooberment and media were shoving down our throats (19 punks with single engine Cessna flying skills did the whole caper).

A team of propagandists put out the bullshit that there were NO aircraft hitting the buildings. They claimed what we saw were holograms. They ran a credible scam but, like a magician, they made people look in the wrong place so as to confuse the issue. When someone wants you to "look" with just your eyes, you get fooled as long as you don't "look" with any other senses. It was really quite clever. People had figured out that the planes DID NOT bring down those towers.

So-o-o-o the propagandists, in an attempt to discredit the people alleging that the twin towers were destroyed by explosives, not airplanes, made the ridiculous argument that there were NO AIRPLANES!

(http://www.serendipity.li/wot/911_plane_03.jpg)
Reapeat after me: That's a hologram, not an airplane, you are getting very sleepy. When you awake you will remember that Slavery is Freedom


Of course there was an army of naysayers on the internet saying how the Arab baddies were out to get us and doubting the gooberment was treason or "unpatriotic". The line about "we must trust the government because Bush and Cheney know things we don't" by people like Pat Boone was echoed throughout the internet as well. The propagandists were working the "problem" of people out there using critical thinking skills from several directions.

When I read the hologram hypothesis, I thought about it. I fell in to the trap because I watched those buildings come down like they were riding a down elevator. It was obvious the aircraft didn't do that because the top parts would have fallen asymmetrically rather than in their footprint. As a matter of fact, the first building DID lurch a little (about 15 feet) to one side before it came down minutes later. I believe the boyz running the charges from building seven said we better bring this sucker down NOW before the top 20 something floors or so lurch off to the side and take out some buildings we don't want taken out.

Back to the hologram hypothesis. I saw the accidental 911 documentary from the French Camera team that had been working with some Fire Department nearby. They heard the noise and filmed the first impact. Then it hit me. The NOISE. Sound waves from a moving jet aircraft produce a Doppler effect. It is impossible for a hologram to generate a Doppler effect ALL OVER NEW YORK CITY. Sure, you can do it in a movie theater but that was not a movie theater. Just as you hear the sound pitch of an approaching object climb, so you hear it descend as the Doppler effect spaces the sound waves farther and farther apart. You can clearly here the sound of the engines of a jet moving AWAY from the camera's position as it approaches the building.

The hologram hypothesis is disinformation and FURTHER PROOF that the oil oligarchy that runs the USA will spend money, a lot of money, to pull the wool over people's eyes.

Reanteben, it has been 11 years. There is only one thing you or anyone else needs to ask about 9/11.

CUI BONO?

I agree with Surly1 as to who benefited.

thanks, agelbert.
in the dustification thread I posted a video of the top of tower 2 clearly falling outside of the outer walls

(before dustifying), which is contrary to what you stated. why don't you check it out (again?) and tell me what you see:






http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php?topic=277.msg1915#msg1915 (http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php?topic=277.msg1915#msg1915)

what do you think of my physical analysis in the thread, including the plane-into-building  dynamicI consider it CFS but i'd prefer to be stood corrected because i'd rather the Conduits fail than the permanent oligarchy parlay their shit into a hunger games control system (HGCS).

my conception of the hologram theory (which i'm open to) is inclusive of the doppler effect heard in the frenchy documentary (illuminati mockumentary?  check out this article by dirdy birdy's alter:  http://www.serendipity.li/wot/naudet/raphael.htm (http://www.serendipity.li/wot/naudet/raphael.htm)) because the a missile with 3D projectors would also create a doppler effect. so what was it, exactly, that caused you to dismiss it as disinfo? what makes the hologram theory disinfo, in order to discredit by association the architects and engineers, as you suggest, instead of the architects and engineers narrative being disinfo so as to discredit the hologram theory? it seems to me that steering people away from ZPE weaponry would be more important than steering them away from conventional weaponry, because it's not like 40pc or whatever of the domestic pop aren't already disbelieving the warren commission 2.0. know what i'm saying?
 furthermore, A&E serves to funnel the relatively independently minded academics into a false choice saturated with a polarized with group-think - a subpole of the Regulating Group-Mind.

judy wood was treated extremely poorly by steven jones and others at A&E when she approached them in 2005 (i think it was). soon after that her young assistant was murdered and she herself threatened. how cliche, it all probably sounds a bit too much but there it is; I really like her in her interviews, she's unpolished but full of integrity.

as for the cui bono business - we all know who benefits, all the time, from this infernal bitch called civilization. the salient point for me is that the motherfuckers have free energy.

as for my dad, he was stationed in northern CA at the time. I don't believe he knows about it but I can't know for sure. his work was hypercompartmentalized as his boss didn't even know what he was working on. as you can imagine his career choice and  his anmd my mom's continued lib-dem allegiance to it turns my stomach. we don't speak much these days.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: agelbert on September 13, 2012, 05:06:28 PM
Reanteben,
Thanks for the reply.
Civilization is a large subject area that many of us here have discussed in depth and agree has a lot of endemic destructive inertia for Homo sapiens and the biosphere. However, the battle of the empires for turf is what the wtc towers were all about. If we have free energy, dumping the towers was illogical. Predators may be murderers and thieves but they always act out of logical motives.

I watched the video. I have watched many videos of the towers fall. I have carefully observed the top 20 or so floors on one tower begin to fall  while the rest is NOT falling. I also observe that, just as in WTC 7, the center structure (in this case the antenna tower) falls into the buiding BEFORE the floors begin to collapse. This is TEXTBOOK demolition. A total vibratory attack would produce symmetrical disintegration (you CAN observe the effects of theoretical scalar weapon by placing an aircraft model in a wind tunnel and exceeding VNE -never exceed speed - the aircraft disintegrates from extreme vibrations). Do you agree that the pentagon attacks were linked? I do. The US government does too. Why didn't they "dustify" the Pentagon and WTC 7 too? While we are at it, why bother when you can create earthquakes in Baghdad (complete with dustified Saddam castles) or any place else and then race in like a "humanitarian rescue" operation and take over. That's the smoothest imperial takedown anyone would want! IF we had scalar weapons, we would DEFINITELY employ this quick and dirty strategy. Plausible deniability is important in power politics. If we could deny that we were attacking a country because we were "rescuing" it, we would do so. Hell, we tried with the "bringing Democracy" horseshit! In-your-face evil is bad politics (see blaming the Ai-rabs at one end and the scalar weapon Illuminati at the other - gotta cover all the bases, ya know!).
Darth Vader personalities don't sell worth a shit.

You can't flip the Architects and Engineers who are assuming NOTHING and blaming NOBODY for the destruction of the WTC buildings beyond "the planes couldn't do it" physics into some sort of groupthink phenomenon. Everything they have done is REJECT gooberment groupthink on the wacky "19 punks did it" bullshit story GROUPTHINKED onto we-the-people by the media propagandists. If there is an attempt to discredit the totally science based approach of the architects and engineers for 9/11, it is a gooberment funded disinformation campain, period.

I repeat, you cannot simulate the Doppler phenomenon. Claiming a hologram doppler generator effect is not science. RE, how about some help here? This is science.
(http://www.1stradardetectors.com/assets/images/products/TLP_Radar_Doppler.jpg)

How Dr. Judy Wood was treated by anyone out there is not at issue here. If she can present PHYSICAL evidence of scalar weaponry effects beyond the interpretation of the dust produced during the tower destruction, it will be looked at. Remember that she has a hypothesis. Very well, if you have a hypothesis, it means you set out to conclusively prove or disprove your hypothesis by a series of tests. An extreme pulverization of steel, concrete and other building structures would leave chemical traces WITHOUT nanothermite or any other explosive traces. The tiny particle size is not sufficient to prove the theory. She needs mass spectrometer analysis of the dust. Scientists don't give a fuck about egos. They only care about evidence proving or disproving a hypothesis. 

Don't confuse the architects and engineers, all serious professionals, with Prisonplanet host Alex Jones or any other talk show host out there; they are literally not on the same planet. Alex may be right in a lot of his Illuminati conspiracy views but that doesn't have beans to do with the scientific investigation of the WTC destruction. Putting them together does, however, lower the street cred of the Architects and Engineers for 9/11. Who do you think benefits from that besides the gooberment out to deep six the truth?

Why would you send a, from your point of view as stated recently, inaccurate view of the events  on 9/11 to someone you barely communicate with? My old man was an Army officer. After I left West Point, we didn't get along AT ALL. When one of my brothers (the one from the beach) tried to scam me into refinancing a property under inheritance (my mom's legacy), the old man calls me to get me to sign because of all the "help" he had given me and because he was my FATHER. I told him the only thing he had ever given ME was hepatitis that he carried from Korea. That was a bit of hyperbole because he always did put food on the table and provide a roof but I knew he was in on the refi scam that would have left me with the debt and my brother with the money. One time that same brother pulled a practical joke on him in a board game, the old man, not knowing who did it (neither my brother or myself were participating in the game), got up, went to his bedroom and returned and pulled a gun on me. He never apologized to me when my other brother quickly stepped in to claim he had done the prank. What I'm trying to tell you as that when someone loves war, killing and doesn't give shit about anything but power, their behavior ALWAYS defends power, not truth or logic. He didn't give a shit who died in 9/11. He thought Vietnam was a turkey shoot! If you think anyone working in the CIA is different from my old man, you are sadly mistaken.

Dr. judy Wood's view of the physics involving aircraft impacting a structure is unscientific. If she can't do the structural engineering math to compute  shear, compression and torsion stresses from high speed objects made of various materials impacting concrete and steel, she is NOT a scientist.

You would do better to dwell specifically on the stock price of Lockheed Martin, the growth of Mossad influence on our mushrooming security apparatus and the trillions of dollars thrown at OFFENSE weapons contractors than trying to generalize cui bono on our entire, admittedly, destructive human civilization. That too, is a distraction and a strawman. Only the guilty benefit from deflecting people from the truth.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: reanteben on September 13, 2012, 05:27:40 PM
Golden Oxen,
You are always welcome.

Reanteben,
Maxwell perfected the wave function equations. He did not understand or predict quantum entanglement, the connotations of the double slit experiment (reality is a multiverse) or the many uses the knowledge of matter routinely entering and exiting this universe at the quantum level has on material science and weaponry. Vibratory weapons require high energy levels. The big, big problem with the scalar weapon hypothesis on the twin towers is the MOTIVE for bringing them down (using a new Pearl Harbor pretext to get more Middle East oil resources locked down). IF we had such weaponry with massive and unlimited energy at our disposal to power them, THEN we would have no need of foreign oil resources and no need to dustify the towers. Any crime requires three things:
1) Motive
2) Opportunity
3) Ability

With scalar weaponry there is no motive.

You said:
Quote
...a couple weeks ago and mentioned judy wood, who believes from the physical evidence that the towers were "dustified" -- disintegrated, in other words -- by a scalar weapon. the most obvious clues being the manner in which the towers came apart, and the lack of a rubble pile that should have been some 15 stories high. she has three interviews spanning eight hours at Veritas. there are many other bizarre facts surrounding 9/11 that she covers exhaustively at her website:

http://www.drjudywood.com/ (http://www.drjudywood.com/)

also, unlike bill morgan, above, she does not believe that aluminum planes could penetrate a concrete and steel building. she notes in particular that one of the wtc towers had an imprint of where the wing entered all the way out to the wingtip. at the tip the cutout from the wingtip penetration was just five inches tall. how could an aluminum wingtip penetrate such concrete and/or steel? it seems impossible in my mind. she does not speculate beyond that and therefore does not theorize on the film footage of the planes.


1. Visual information is not forensic evidence needed to confirm dustification. The proven nanothermite composition of some hastily gathered dust after the towers came down is all the physical evidence we have. WHY? Because EXACTLY the same corporation hired to clean up the debris after Oklahoma City is the one that carted EVERYTHING away as fast as possible. Now that is one hell of a coincidence, don't you think? After the crime of the century, no attempt is made by the gooberment to preserve the evidence (violating a slew of US laws by destroying evidence).
Quote
Peter Tully, president of Tully Construction of Flushing, New York, told AFP that he saw pools of "literally molten steel" at the World Trade Center. Tully was contracted on September 11 to remove the debris from the site.

Tully called Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition, Inc. (CDI) of Phoenix, Maryland, for consultation about removing the debris. CDI calls itself "the innovator and global leader in the controlled demolition and implosion of structures."

Loizeaux, who cleaned up the bombed Federal Building in Oklahoma City, arrived on the WTC site two days later and wrote the clean-up plan for the entire operation. 
http://911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html (http://911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html)


2. The rubble pile height is a strawman. The achitects and engineers for 911, unlike Dr. Judy Wood, have a wealth of data on the way structural matter piles up in a controlled demolition. In any event, a visual of a pile of dust and other debris is not physical evidence of scalar weaponry.

3. About the effects of aluminum on concrete and steel: An aircraft has a lot of soft parts but it has parts (landing gear, engines and wing spar and frame members) made of materials equal to (wing spar and framing) or much stronger (engine and landing gear) than anything used to construct a building. The archititects that designed the twin towers figured that into the building design strength. Add strength to inertia and you have some massive penetration power. Even without strength, such as is the case with aluminum, the Good Dr. Judy Wood is misunderstanding some real world data on aircraft design. An airplane's GREATEST STRENGTH is in the wing spar and structural components. The aluminum skin is there for aerodynamics but that wing is like a bridge that supports the aircraft at up to 2.5 Gs plus and 1 G minus. The wing has to routinely remain flexible (to a point) and hold 2.5 times the weight of the aircraft off and on. When the wing hits a building, the effect of the aluminum skin is negligible (depending on the strike angle). It's the structural members of titanium underneath that have punching power.

One more thing. High velocity can do amazing things with otherwise weak materials. Hurricane winds from Andrew never got to more than 160 mph. The aluminum structure of the aircraft was moving at 450 mph PLUS when it hit the WTC.

(http://www.hurricanescience.org/images/hss/1992_andrew_windevidence_noaa.jpg)
This is a weak piece of plywood striking a much stronger and denser tree trunk at a maximum of 150 mph

(http://www.ihc.fiu.edu/images/wind_damage.jpg)
Two by four penetrates a much denser palm tree trunk during a hurricane

there was all the motive in the world for them to go scalar on 9/11, and it's all speculative. :) again, the beauty of judy wood is that she doesn't speculate. but I can think of several good reasons.

1. it's inevitable that weapons get used. what's the saying about that one again? I don't recall but it represents a more potent version of how money burns holes in pockets. godlike power. godless temptation. military urges. the boredom-laced Because They Can.

2.  to destroy evidence.

3.  arms race. show off what they have to the nonaligned while leveraging their geopolitical ambitions. (two birds with one stone.) if russia already had it then to show what dedicated motherfuckers they are leading up to ww3. sorta like a badass IRA guy smearing his shit all over his cell walls.

4.  occam's razor slash path of least resistance:  http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/scientific/JonesScientificMethod.html (http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/scientific/JonesScientificMethod.html)

5. energy efficient.

6. guy debord's Society Of The Spectacle. aesthetics. this would be my reason if I was one of them. i'd just be dying to see what it actually looks like, to disintegrate the fucking world trade centers.

7. plausible deniability.

dunno. what do you think? are those lame? they're just people. a bunch of assholes.

regarding the titanium frame of the plane, I do find that to be a decent argument since titanium is harder than steel (right?). but that aluminum skin would shear right off and remain visible. it doesn't convince me, though that the noise and fuselage would go through the gargantuan core columns, which they would have to do I'm order for the tail section to not be sticking out of the building. this is also notwithstanding of my own analysis (surely it's not original) that the outer, structural columns were buttressed by the core columns via the concrete slabs wedged between them. (do tell me if this is bollocks.)

as for the speed of the plane assisting its titanium parts in slicing through the above, this doesn't appear to me to comply with newton's 'every action is met with an equal and opposite reaction' equal law of motion. it is my understanding that if the planes and the towers were all suspended from strings in the sky and the buildings were swung into the stationary planes at the same speed, the physics would essentially be replicated.

who here would expect the dangling planes to completely disappear into the buildings?


as for the particle board going through the palm tree, judy wood covers this  type of phenomenon that results from the field effects of tornadoes and hurricanes. nothing to do with speed.

i'll address your other points tomorrow, been doing this on my glitchy phone and it's slow going and a real pita. sorry. judy addresses them all on her website.

one last thing. each tower registered significantly lower on the richter scale when dustifying than the kingdome in seattle when it was pulled after it had been completely stripped.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: reanteben on September 13, 2012, 05:57:34 PM
Reanteben,
Thanks for the reply.
Civilization is a large subject area that many of us here have discussed in depth and agree has a lot of endemic destructive inertia for Homo sapiens and the biosphere. However, the battle of the empires for turf is what the wtc towers were all about. If we have free energy, dumping the towers was illogical. Predators may be murderers and thieves but they always act out of logical motives.

I watched the video. I have watched many videos of the towers fall. I have carefully observed the top 20 or so floors on one tower begin to fall  while the rest is NOT falling. I also observe that, just as in WTC 7, the center structure (in this case the antenna tower) falls into the buiding BEFORE the floors begin to collapse. This is TEXTBOOK demolition. A total vibratory attack would produce symmetrical disintegration (you CAN observe the effects of theoretical scalar weapon by placing an aircraft model in a wind tunnel and exceeding VNE -never exceed speed - the aircraft disintegrates from extreme vibrations). Do you agree that the pentagon attacks were linked? I do. The US government does too. Why didn't they "dustify" the Pentagon and WTC 7 too? While we are at it, why bother when you can create earthquakes in Baghdad (complete with dustified Saddam castles) or any place else and then race in like a "humanitarian rescue" operation and take over. That's the smoothest imperial takedown anyone would want! IF we had scalar weapons, we would DEFINITELY employ this quick and dirty strategy. Plausible deniability is important in power politics. If we could deny that we were attacking a country because we were "rescuing" it, we would do so. Hell, we tried with the "bringing Democracy" horseshit! In-your-face evil is bad politics (see blaming the Ai-rabs at one end and the scalar weapon Illuminati at the other - gotta cover all the bases, ya know!).
Darth Vader personalities don't sell worth a shit.

You can't flip the Architects and Engineers who are assuming NOTHING and blaming NOBODY for the destruction of the WTC buildings beyond "the planes couldn't do it" physics into some sort of groupthink phenomenon. Everything they have done is REJECT gooberment groupthink on the wacky "19 punks did it" bullshit story GROUPTHINKED onto we-the-people by the media propagandists. If there is an attempt to discredit the totally science based approach of the architects and engineers for 9/11, it is a gooberment funded disinformation campain, period.

I repeat, you cannot simulate the Doppler phenomenon. Claiming a hologram doppler generator effect is not science. RE, how about some help here? This is science.
(http://www.1stradardetectors.com/assets/images/products/TLP_Radar_Doppler.jpg)

How Dr. Judy Wood was treated by anyone out there is not at issue here. If she can present PHYSICAL evidence of scalar weaponry effects beyond the interpretation of the dust produced during the tower destruction, it will be looked at. Remember that she has a hypothesis. Very well, if you have a hypothesis, it means you set out to conclusively prove or disprove your hypothesis by a series of tests. An extreme pulverization of steel, concrete and other building structures would leave chemical traces WITHOUT nanothermite or any other explosive traces. The tiny particle size is not sufficient to prove the theory. She needs mass spectrometer analysis of the dust. Scientists don't give a fuck about egos. They only care about evidence proving or disproving a hypothesis. 

Don't confuse the architects and engineers, all serious professionals, with Prisonplanet host Alex Jones or any other talk show host out there; they are literally not on the same planet. Alex may be right in a lot of his Illuminati conspiracy views but that doesn't have beans to do with the scientific investigation of the WTC destruction. Putting them together does, however, lower the street cred of the Architects and Engineers for 9/11. Who do you think benefits from that besides the gooberment out to deep six the truth?

Why would you send a, from your point of view as stated recently, inaccurate view of the events  on 9/11 to someone you barely communicate with? My old man was an Army officer. After I left West Point, we didn't get along AT ALL. When one of my brothers (the one from the beach) tried to scam me into refinancing a property under inheritance (my mom's legacy), the old man calls me to get me to sign because of all the "help" he had given me and because he was my FATHER. I told him the only thing he had ever given ME was hepatitis that he carried from Korea. That was a bit of hyperbole because he always did put food on the table and provide a roof but I knew he was in on the refi scam that would have left me with the debt and my brother with the money. One time that same brother pulled a practical joke on him in a board game, the old man, not knowing who did it (neither my brother or myself were participating in the game), got up, went to his bedroom and returned and pulled a gun on me. He never apologized to me when my other brother quickly stepped in to claim he had done the prank. What I'm trying to tell you as that when someone loves war, killing and doesn't give shit about anything but power, their behavior ALWAYS defends power, not truth or logic. He didn't give a shit who died in 9/11. He thought Vietnam was a turkey shoot! If you think anyone working in the CIA is different from my old man, you are sadly mistaken.

Dr. judy Wood's view of the physics involving aircraft impacting a structure is unscientific. If she can't do the structural engineering math to compute  shear, compression and torsion stresses from high speed objects made of various materials impacting concrete and steel, she is NOT a scientist.

You would do better to dwell specifically on the stock price of Lockheed Martin, the growth of Mossad influence on our mushrooming security apparatus and the trillions of dollars thrown at OFFENSE weapons contractors than trying to generalize cui bono on our entire, admittedly, destructive human civilization. That too, is a distraction and a strawman. Only the guilty benefit from deflecting people from the truth.

thanks, agelbert. I think.  ;D

tell me why the propulsion system of a missile with a 3D projection system (think tupac's holographic performance from this year) wouldn't create a doppler effect.

when you use the words vibratory and pulverize, you are making two (mutually exclusive I might add) assumptions about the nature of the dustification process. judy makes no such assumptions. myself, I would imagine that neither has merit. disintegrate is a neutral term.

as for dad, he claims he joined the Company as a wobbly, with the idea of changing it from the inside.

ROTFLMAO.

good cop, like chloe.

Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: reanteben on September 13, 2012, 06:05:53 PM
okay sorry, I your two assumptions aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: agelbert on September 13, 2012, 10:03:21 PM
This video is a little dated but still quite applicable. :ernaehrung004:

 Free Bees - 9-11's a Lie (Stayin' Alive).wmv - YouTube.wmv (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NptVAMwd24k#)
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread/ the fun never ends
Post by: Surly1 on September 14, 2012, 12:28:17 PM
9/11 – At Least This Aspect of It – Was NOT An Inside Job
Washington's Blog
(http://911proof.com/Clipboardwtc7.jpg)


People who state that 9/11 was an inside job are claiming that it is a false flag operation which killed people, was used to justify wars in Iraq and elsewhere and a power grab in the U.S.

But  World Trade Center building 7 – the third building to collapse on September 11th – has nothing to do with any inside job:

    * No one died as a result of the collapse

    * No airplane hit the building, and so it was not directly involved in the terrorist attack

    * No wars were launched to avenge WTC7

    * No power grabs or loss of civil liberties ensued because of the collapse of this building

    * Unlike the rest of 9/11, the government has been very quiet about its destruction

As such, the collapse of the building – also known as the “Solomon Brothers Building”  – was not an inside job.

Of course, the building might have been demolished to save lives.  For example, Paul K. Trousdale – a structural engineer with decades of experience – says:

    I had always thought the 3rd building was destroyed to prevent unpredictable collapse.

So why am I wasting your valuable time in discussing this?

Because the government – as part of its political cover-up of negligence before and on 9/11 – pretended that the building collapsed due to “natural causes”.  This should not be entirely surprising … we know that government personnel sometimes misspeak about things like the economy or Iraq and weapons of mass destruction, and they may also have made some minor errors peripherally related to 9/11:

    * The EPA misspoke about the dangers to heroic first responders from toxic chemicals at Ground Zero

    * Government officials misspoke about  9/11 being wholly unforeseeable … including pretending that Al Qaeda’s plans to fly planes into the World Trade Center and Pentagon were a complete surprise

    * Top government personnel misspoke about Iraq’s role in 9/11

Again, this post has nothing to do with “9/11 inside job”: no one died when building 7 collapsed.

There is more, with many links... Read the rest: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/09/911-at-least-this-aspect-of-it-was-not-an-inside-job.html: (http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/09/911-at-least-this-aspect-of-it-was-not-an-inside-job.html:)
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: reanteben on September 14, 2012, 03:02:52 PM
hey agelbert,

Quote
IF we had such weaponry with massive and unlimited energy at our disposal to power them, THEN we would have no need of foreign oil resources and no need to dustify the towers.

who exactly is "we"? there is no we in that sense. there's us the commoners, and them. if we, the commoners, got to have our own ZPE boxes what would that do to the control system? the control system first and foremost relies on monopolizing the energy. always has always will. they need foreign oil resources to maintain their control system.

Quote
1. Visual information is not forensic evidence needed to confirm dustification. The proven nanothermite composition of some hastily gathered dust after the towers came down is all the physical evidence we have.

that forensic evidence is more supportive of the dustification theory. thermite is aluminum and iron oxide powder. it is exactly what one would expect to find in the dust of a dustified building that was formerly composed of aluminum (facade) and steel. i say more supportive because of the apparent problems posed by bringing down (and pulverizing) a building "so perfectly" with nanothermite:

(from wood's website):

Quote

III. Pulverization

    Where is the proof that thermite has EVER been used to completely pulverize buildings in controlled demolition (not simply cleaning up debris)? The mechanisms of cutting and pulverization are mutually exclusive and thermite cuts and melts, it is not explosive. "Cutting requires action in one direction," says Jeff Strahl, a 9/11 researcher, "while pulverization requires action in all directions."

    Where is the proof, experimental or otherwise, that thermate has EVER been used to completely pulverize buildings in controlled demolition (not simply cleaning up debris)?

    Where is the proof that nano-enhanced thermite has EVER been used to completely pulverize buildings in controlled demolition (not simply cleaning up debris)? Could thermite have been used to turn the upper 80+ floors of the Twin Towers to ultra-fine dust?

    Above all, how do angle-cut columns relate to pulverizing a building? What is the connection? We fail to see it.

that excerpt was from an article titled "the scientific method applied to the thermite hypothesis," which is worthwhile in its entirety:

http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/scientific/JonesScientificMethod.html (http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/scientific/JonesScientificMethod.html)

you said:

Quote
2. The rubble pile height is a strawman. The achitects and engineers for 911, unlike Dr. Judy Wood, have a wealth of data on the way structural matter piles up in a controlled demolition. In any event, a visual of a pile of dust and other debris is not physical evidence of scalar weaponry.

it's not a strawman because i'm not trying to discredit the A&E explanation of the rubble pile. i've never seen the A&E explanation. i'm simply asking where did the towers go? in the dustification thread i detailed why the generic argument that the bathtub received the vast majority of the debris was an utterly insufficient explanation. i would be grateful, however, if you posted the A&E findings.

here's an article that calculates the length of steel in each tower, if laid end to end (including the oft-forgotten floorpans [steel plate] into which the concrete floors were poured), to be 550 miles, and does a good job of contextualizing that fact within this debris debate:

http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=145&Itemid=60 (http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=145&Itemid=60)

---

what do you think of my newton's 3rd law reframing of the plane-building impact dynamics? because as far as i can tell, the high velocity argument you made merely increases the net force of the plane on the building (newton's 2nd law) - a net force increase subsequently matched (3rd law) by the building. i believe the key to seeing, intuitively, the impossibility of airliners disappearing into the buildings lies in exposing the psychological illusion that it was possible because the plane was moving and the building was not.

what of the field effects argument? check out this fascinating page from her website:

http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/erin/erin3.html (http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/erin/erin3.html)

what of motive?

---

Quote
Dr. judy Wood's view of the physics involving aircraft impacting a structure is unscientific.

please point me to a good one.

Quote
Why would you send a, from your point of view as stated recently, inaccurate view of the events  on 9/11 to someone you barely communicate with?

i sent it for its accuracies. because the communication we do have at the moment happens to consist of me presenting an extensive case for 9/11 truth.

cheers.



Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: agelbert on September 14, 2012, 07:37:19 PM
Demolition of WTC
Demolition of WTC

Quote
As seen in this revealing photo, the Twin Towers' destruction exhibited all of the characteristics of destruction by explosives:
1. Destruction proceeds through the path of greatest resistance at nearly free-fall acceleration
2. Improbable symmetry of debris distribution
3. Extremely rapid onset of destruction
4. Over 100 first responders reported explosions and flashes
5. Multi-ton steel sections ejected laterally
6. Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete & metal decking
7. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds
8. 1200-foot-diameter debris field: no "pancaked" floors found
9. Isolated explosive ejections 20–40 stories below demolition front
10. Total building destruction: dismemberment of steel frame
11. Several tons of molten metal found under all 3 high-rises
12. Evidence of thermite incendiaries found by FEMA in steel samples
13. Evidence of explosives found in dust samples

Reanteben,
Please refer all questions on item 6 to the Architects and Engineers for 911.  They are writing from experience in these matters and have evidence to back up everything they say.

As to the effects of a large jet aircraft striking a building at 480 mph or so, MIT has a free downloadable physics course that will give you all the tools necessary to do the math after you research the different types of metals that make up all the parts. You will also have to compute the compressive strength of the static materials in the WTC towers to determine how much force is required to cause deformation and subsequent destruction of an impacted wall section. Concrete, being brittle, has high compressive strength but low tensile and shear strength so it shatters easily whereas steel has high compressive strength as well as high tensile, shear and torsion strength. Structural steel bends quite a ways before it breaks. That's why they use it for skyscrapers; this is the built in safety margin that prevents a total collapse. ONLY explosives can eliminate that safety margin.
I'm sure the A&E for 911 have done that math but since you don't seem to believe they are credible, you will have to do the math yourself.  I am satisfied that, unlike our gooberment, they aren't pushing fairy tales.
http://www.ae911truth.org/en/evidence.html (http://www.ae911truth.org/en/evidence.html)

I have seen many of the lectures below so I am not sending you on some wild goose chase. This guy is good. He teaches physics in an entertaining and interesting manner. Even if we weren't discussing controlled demolitions, I would recommend him just for his lectures on wave functions and vibratory phenomena. It's ALL free and downloadable thanks to one of the few good things Bill Gates has done (pay MIT to release the courses free).

Quote
Course Highlights

The 35 video lectures by Professor Lewin, were recorded on the MIT campus during the Fall of 1999. Prof. Lewin is well known at MIT and beyond for his dynamic and engaging lecture style.

Course Description

8.01 is a first-semester freshman physics class in Newtonian Mechanics, Fluid Mechanics, and Kinetic Gas Theory. In addition to the basic concepts of Newtonian Mechanics, Fluid Mechanics, and Kinetic Gas Theory, a variety of interesting topics are covered in this course: Binary Stars, Neutron Stars, Black Holes, Resonance Phenomena, Musical Instruments, Stellar Collapse, Supernovae, Astronomical observations from very high flying balloons (lecture 35), and you will be allowed a peek into the intriguing Quantum World.
 
Also by Walter Lewin
 
Courses:
 •Electricity and Magnetism (8.02)- with a complete set of 36 video lectures from the Spring of 2002
•Vibrations and Waves (8.03) - with a complete set of 23 video lectures from the Fall of 2004

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/physics/8-01-physics-i-classical-mechanics-fall-1999/ (http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/physics/8-01-physics-i-classical-mechanics-fall-1999/)

Occam's razor, a point you brought up, requires that you pursue conventional possibilities prior to exotic energy weapon utilization theory. As RE would say, it's  just CFS.

You asked "who is WE"? "WE" is the oil oligarchy that runs the gooberment. I thought you knew that. The claim that the 1% , as you put it, "requires foreign oil resources to control us" is nonsensical if they have scalar weapons. If you can't see that, then I certainly won't be able to convince you of the total irrationality of such a mindset. I never said a word about the 1% SHARING ZPE with the 99%. YOU implied that I said that. I said they would use the WEAPONS on us, not share the technology. Get this. If they have that kind of technology, THEY DON'T NEED US (the 99%).

You also did not answer why they were so selective about the targets. But don't worry about it. I understand.You are just defending your position and don't want to deal with issues that weaken your argument. That's good game theory but it has nothing to do with scientific truth.

If you do not think an oil oligarchy runs this country, please be kind enough to tell me who does (with some names, history and proof). Until you stop generalizing who did what, I really cannot discuss 911 Means, Motive and Opportunity with you.

Even though I disagree with your views, I respect your views but see you are not open to having them challenged so there is no point boring readers here with questions that have little bearing on the most important issue in regard to 911. The realy important question is, when do we prosecute the motherfuckers who did it!!?  When we get to that, I hope the good people (yeah, there are still some there) in government go after the people that helped cover it up. They are an accessory to genocide. A life prison sentence growing Duckweed for ethanol would be most appropriate after those pigs supporting the oil oligarchy were stripped of their assets.

Sorry I couldn't help you. I hope that reviewing some physics does.


Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: agelbert on September 14, 2012, 08:29:21 PM
Surly1,
Quote
Again, this post has nothing to do with “9/11 inside job”: no one died when building 7 collapsed.

YEP.

Your grasp of the English language far exceeds mine. WTC 7 was definetly and "outside" job.  :icon_mrgreen:

But you know, there's some strange and mendacious single press women that moved into our gooberment's press release landscape after 911. They weren't there for Slick Willie. He "did not inhale" and he "never had sex with that woman" either. Notice the style. Notice the overt mendacity. The people didn't like that. It didn't look good. So they went out and hired two single women to front for any politician caught lying his or her ass off.
These ladies are at the forefront of ALL government press releases, speeches, interviews and anythin' that ain't in writin'!  I tell ya they're takin' this country DOWN!

(http://parishbulletin.com/Organizations/16951/down-arrow-inv.png)



 Meet Miss PEAK and Miss POKE.   ;D
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: reanteben on September 14, 2012, 10:09:51 PM
see agelbert. see agelbert run.

http://www.google.com/url?q=http://vimeo.com/49080352&sa=X&ei=hAxUUJyNN-rhiALXlIHIBw&ved=0CCEQuAIwAA&usg=AFQjCNFJSxI_6khv6RBa0Cuu3Z49vbNX0g (http://www.google.com/url?q=http://vimeo.com/49080352&sa=X&ei=hAxUUJyNN-rhiALXlIHIBw&ved=0CCEQuAIwAA&usg=AFQjCNFJSxI_6khv6RBa0Cuu3Z49vbNX0g)





Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: agelbert on September 15, 2012, 07:33:24 PM
Anti-gravity Cathedral
Anti-gravity Cathedral
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: reanteben on September 18, 2012, 11:41:11 AM
Quote
The history is told that, in a certain town, men and women toiled at work in order to survive. Everyday the men and women went out to their respective jobs: the men to the fields and the bean crops; the women to the firewood and the carrying of water. At times there was work that brought them together as equals. For example, men and women would join together for the cutting of coffee, when its time had come. And so it passed. But there was a man who did not do that. He did work though, but not in the fields or bean crops, nor did he go to the coffee plantations when the beans reddened among the branches. No, this man worked planting trees in the mountain. The trees this man planted did not grow rapidly, all of them took entire decades to grow and to make all their branches and leaves. The other men laughed at and criticized this man quite a bit. "Why do you work at things that you are never going to see completed? Better to work in the fields, which will give you fruit in months, and not in the planting of trees that will be large when you have already died." "You are a fool or crazy, because you work fruitlessly." The man defended himself and said: "Yes, it is true, I am not going to see these trees full grown, full of branches, leaves and birds, nor will my eyes see children playing under their shade. But, if all of us work just for the present and for just the following day: who will plant the trees that our descendents are going to need, in order to have shelter, consolation and joy?" No one understood him. The crazy or foolish man continued planting trees that he would not see, and sensible men and women continued planting and working for their present. Time passed, and all of them died, their children continued in their work, and those were followed by the children of their children. One morning, a group of boys and girls went out for a walk and found a place filled with great trees, a thousand birds living in them and their great branches giving relief from the heat and protection from the rain. Yes, an entire mountainside was found filled with trees. The boys and girls returned to their town and spoke of this marvelous place.

    The men and women gathered together and they went to the place in great surprise. "Who planted this?" they asked. No one knew. They went to speak with their elders and they did not know either. Only an old one, the oldest of the community, could give them the information and he told them the history of the crazy and foolish man.

    The men and women met in assembly and had a discussion. They saw and understood the man whom their ancestors had dealt with and they admired that man very much and they were fond of him. They knew that memory can travel very far and arrive where no one can think or imagine, the men and women of that today in the place of the great trees.

    They surrounded one that was in the center, and, out of colored letters, they made a sign. They had a fiesta afterwards, and dawn was already approaching when the last dancers were leaving to go to sleep. The great forest was left alone and in silence. It rained and it ceased to rain. The Moon came out and the Milky Way molded its convoluted body once again. Suddenly a ray of moonlight insinuated itself among the great branches and leaves of the tree in the center, and, by its small light, the sign of colors that had been left there could be read:

    "To the first ones:

    Those who came later did understand.

    Salud"

              - subcomandante marcos
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: agelbert on September 18, 2012, 06:18:42 PM
Dr. Judy Wood Debunked (re-upload) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o24GaV0lV5I#)

 :emthup: :emthup: :emthup:
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: reanteben on September 19, 2012, 11:27:33 PM
Dr. Judy Wood Debunked (re-upload) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o24GaV0lV5I#)

 :emthup: :emthup: :emthup:

last year an old friend posted on his links blog a short vid debunking the idea that tower 7 was pulled. it was laughable and your video reminded me of it.  that you condescended to embed it here it confirms my suspicions that you have been utterly incapable of opening your mind to otherness.

segment by segment:

1. the close-up shots of the rubble mean nothing. it's blatant misuse of the power of suggestion. judy wood never said there wasn't any rubble.

2. the wilted firetruck. can you ACTUALLY see in the photos provided that the front of the truck was crushed by a "large block of building" like the witness claimed? I can't. in my reading of the witness statement, he didn't see the firetruck GETTING crushed. I suspect he assumed this to be the case (understandably) because what else was he to think in that context. can you intuitively say that that firetruck damage is more consistent with crushing damage than wilting? is so, then what of the undamaged door? what of the possibility that it was a combination of the two dynamics - crushing AND something else?

3. the half-burned cop car. you fell for this hook line and sinker? why would a car 5ft from a burning van get burned like that? did the flames jump? if so, what would you say fueled the fire on the cop car, and why do you think it burned out where it did? if you don't think the flames jumped, do you honestly think that the heat from the van fire (which in the photo is probably near or at its maximum) was intense enough to do that to the cop car? because I don't. I could stand ten feet from a bonfire about that size. the one think I can think of is that the fuel tank on the van exploded but some of the gas ran downhill onto the curbside back tire of the cop car. my trump card, though, is that if you look in the background of the first photo of the cop car, you'll see ANOTHER HALF-BURNED VEHICLE WITH NOTHING PARKED ON EITHER SIDE OF IT.

4.  the supposed debunking of the general toasted cars phenomenon is so inane. judy wood never said fire isn't a part of the toasting process! so this supposed debunker is making shit up to debunk, which didn't surprise me since debunking in our society has  largely become a sister strategy to the defaming of conspiracy theory.

gimme a break, agelbert. i'll even give you the wilted firetruck, since it's possible she didn't see photos of it before it was towed. but this cherry-picking does nothing to diminish her general point about anomalous vehicle damage.





Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: reanteben on September 20, 2012, 10:07:45 AM
you know, agelbert, I was thinking that I could've done the previous post more justice by overlaying onto that crappy debunking video an audio version of my flawless color commentary. I just forgot this time. as an example of what I mean, here's a previous, short work of mine:

http://www.thatvideosite.com/v/5852
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: widgeon on October 02, 2012, 03:43:50 PM
To be clear, I'm generally highly persuaded that at the least 9-11 was a LIHOP operation.  However, there is one sticky problem that's never been properly answered for me.

If the Pentagon event was a missile, what happened to the plane that was highjacked that the "missile" replaced in the final moments?  If there was no plane, how can Barbara Olsen be explained?

Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: JoeP on October 06, 2012, 01:32:22 PM
Three part study by Peter Dale Scott on the attacks of September 11.


LAUNCHING THE U.S. TERROR WAR (1/3) (http://www.voltairenet.org/article175984.html)

LAUNCHING THE U.S. TERROR WAR (2/3) (http://www.voltairenet.org/Parallel-secret-services)

LAUNCHING THE U.S. TERROR WAR (3/3) (http://www.voltairenet.org/article176115.html)


From "Coming to Jakarta":

To have learnt from terror

        to see oneself

    as part of the enemy

can be a reassurance
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: widgeon on October 10, 2012, 04:34:11 PM
Barbara Olson is still the one loose end to "the conspiracy" that I can't get around.

Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: widgeon on October 11, 2012, 11:40:36 AM
FWIW, I'm not talking about the reported cell phone calls from her.  I am talking about ... where did she go?  If she died, didn't they effectively kill one of their own insiders?  Just a coincidence she was on that plane?  An unfortunate coincidence that neither she nor Ted were told what was going to occur that day so, by pure coincidence, she was on that plane (that "hit" the Pentagon)?

There is the related problem that if was a missile that hit the Pentagon, then what happened to the plane that the official story credits with hitting it?  It couldn't have landed elsewhere, etc. because, again, Barbara Olson is supposedly dead.

It's the hardest part of the entire LIHOP/MIHOP case (for me).

Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: reanteben on October 11, 2012, 02:16:48 PM
FWIW, I'm not talking about the reported cell phone calls from her.  I am talking about ... where did she go?  If she died, didn't they effectively kill one of their own insiders?  Just a coincidence she was on that plane?  An unfortunate coincidence that neither she nor Ted were told what was going to occur that day so, by pure coincidence, she was on that plane (that "hit" the Pentagon)?

There is the related problem that if was a missile that hit the Pentagon, then what happened to the plane that the official story credits with hitting it?  It couldn't have landed elsewhere, etc. because, again, Barbara Olson is supposedly dead.

It's the hardest part of the entire LIHOP/MIHOP case (for me).

hey widge. boxcutter olson had face and fingerprint transplants and a do not disturb sign frequents her door 500ft below the denver airport. her husband is really in denver tonight (vp debate) because marriage is a Conservative value.

the planes? what, the ole switcheroo isn't good enough for you? okay we'll throw in the bermuda triangle of the north (shanksville)? loose fill, baby!
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: reanteben on December 22, 2012, 10:50:31 AM
it's a bird, it's a plane, it's a missile ode to the holographic universe!


(http://home.comcast.net/~skydrifter/STRK.jpg)


http://www.youtube.com/v/ek-Q0T9wK2g&fs=1

Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: widgeon on February 12, 2013, 02:01:25 PM
The problem w/ these alternative plane theories is still the same one as I describe in the Barbara Olsen question above ... if these weren't "the p[lanes" then where did all the passengers go (including Barbara Olsen) (the explanation that Ted wanted her dead notwithstanding).

I sure don't buy the official story (Building 7 For Sure), but these holographic plane & missile theories don't get it any tighter for me.

Title: Thom Hartmann on 911 & JFK assasination
Post by: agelbert on July 28, 2013, 01:38:15 PM
http://www.youtube.com/v/TBUe5vERjzY#&fs=1
(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/nocomment.gif)
Title: 9/11/2001: The New Pearl Harbor
Post by: RE on October 12, 2013, 07:12:23 PM
Part of a mammoth 5 hour film by MASSIMO MAZZUCCO (http://www.luogocomune.net/).  Available to view free online.  Also JFK, Marijuana, UFOs, the WORKS!

http://www.youtube.com/v/O1GCeuSr3Mk?feature=player_embedded

RE
Title: "High Ranking US Major General Exposes 911 official version untrue"
Post by: Randy C on August 01, 2014, 11:04:44 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0xzsbSbVUE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0xzsbSbVUE)

"High Ranking US Major General Exposes 911 official version untrue"

Excellent interview with a retired major general, USA who spent his career as an Army intelligence analyst.  I share his views, all of them, including the problem he had coming to terms with the fact that our government was most likely responsible for the attacks on 9/11/01.
Title: Re: "High Ranking US Major General Exposes 911 official version untrue"
Post by: Eddie on August 01, 2014, 11:09:52 AM
I've never been into the whole 9-11 conspiracy thing, although I consider false flags to be the American Way, for warmongering purposes. I'll have to watch that video when I get home. Thanks for the link.
Title: Re: "High Ranking US Major General Exposes 911 official version untrue"
Post by: Eddie on August 01, 2014, 04:52:28 PM
Hmmm. Watched the video. Even though I've never been a 911 truther or spent any time at all on truther sites, reading, I had already heard all of these points from the occasional posting by somebody here or at some of the other sites I do frequent. The General obviously sincerely believes what he's saying..maybe he's right. But how does he know, and how do others know what he contends about the defense systems being deliberately turned off?

Is the video of Silverstein (or whatever the owner's name is) still around on the net? The one where he allegedly says "pull it?" And why would he use that term? Sounds like something a demolition pro might say, but a billionaire building owner?

And the footage of the floors collapsing and the puffs of smoke? Is that a reliable "smoking gun"? Or is there room for debate as to the cause?

I really don't know the answer to questions like that. So what the General says, I can take it for what it is worth.The informed opinion of a man with some real qualifications to analyze the data. But as to whether he's right or not, the video doesn't completely persuade me.

But I have room for considering that he MIGHT be right. The question I have is: "Why?" Just so we could have an excuse to go into Afghanistan? What was so special about Afghanistan? If the TPTB were in control of the whole scenario, why didn't we use the false flag to attack Iran? It seems like a more strategic target.



Title: Re: "High Ranking US Major General Exposes 911 official version untrue"
Post by: Surly1 on August 01, 2014, 05:17:47 PM
Hmmm. Watched the video. Even though I've never been a 911 truther or spent any time at all on truther sites, reading, I had already heard all of these points from the occasional posting by somebody here or at some of the other sites I do frequent. The General obviously sincerely believes what he's saying..maybe he's right. But how does he know, and how do others know what he contends about the defense systems being deliberately turned off?

Is the video of Silverstein (or whatever the owner's name is) still around on the net? The one where he allegedly says "pull it?" And why would he use that term? Sounds like something a demolition pro might say, but a billionaire building owner?

And the footage of the floors collapsing and the puffs of smoke? Is that a reliable "smoking gun"? Or is there room for debate as to the cause?

The Silverstein quote is part of a PBS Frontline doc. I have not taken the time to look it up or search for it.

I once did a story about a controlled demolition of a bank building in Norfolk. The floors collapsing and puffs of smoke looked very familiar when considering WTC.

Just sayin'. As Bill Clinton once aid in a different content, "Who you gonna believe-- me, or your lyin' eyes?"

Title: Re: "High Ranking US Major General Exposes 911 official version untrue"
Post by: RE on August 01, 2014, 06:08:05 PM
But I have room for considering that he MIGHT be right. The question I have is: "Why?" Just so we could have an excuse to go into Afghanistan? What was so special about Afghanistan? If the TPTB were in control of the whole scenario, why didn't we use the false flag to attack Iran? It seems like a more strategic target.

The real reason likely has nothing to do with Afghanistan or Foreign Policy.  It's likely Financial, and was contained in the building that collapsed that was NOT hit by a Jumbo Jet, Building 7.  I've read in the past that B7 contained most of the financial records from the Enron scandal.  The Geopolitical/Terrorism story was a cover/distraction.

RE
Title: Re: "High Ranking US Major General Exposes 911 official version untrue"
Post by: agelbert on August 01, 2014, 07:10:50 PM
Quote
It's likely Financial, and was contained in the building that collapsed that was NOT hit by a Jumbo Jet, Building 7.  I've read in the past that B7 contained most of the financial records from the Enron scandal.

Yep. And don't forget the part of the Pentagon that got destroyed just happened to be the accounting department that had caused Rummy to be FORCED to tell congress that several TRILLION dollars were unaccounted for... ;)

I think it was the combination of the things you call a distraction AND financial. Just look at the several TRILLION spent to make a few bastards much richer than they ARE in the US with Iraq and Afghanistan! Just look at how Israel made out like a BANDIT with INCREASED funding by our Congress! Just look at the HUGE spike in oil costs during the Bush administration! ALL of that (and more -see Libya and Syria) was part of the big PNAC Neocon plan since 1998!

The financial fucks DO NOT NEED A WAR to steal Trillions. See over 16 TRILLION pulled out of THIN AIR for bank bailouts after 2008 that we-the-people are on the hook for! That's MORE than pentagon pilfering, Iraq and Afghanistan and Israel funding PUT TOGETHER!
Title: Re: "High Ranking US Major General Exposes 911 official version untrue"
Post by: Surly1 on August 02, 2014, 04:34:40 AM
Quote
It's likely Financial, and was contained in the building that collapsed that was NOT hit by a Jumbo Jet, Building 7.  I've read in the past that B7 contained most of the financial records from the Enron scandal.

Yep. And don't forget the part of the Pentagon that got destroyed just happened to be the accounting department that had caused Rummy to be FORCED to tell congress that several TRILLION dollars were unaccounted for... ;)

Everything you need to know about the true motivations for 9-11 in a few short sentences.


I think it was the combination of the things you call a distraction AND financial. Just look at the several TRILLION spent to make a few bastards much richer than they ARE in the US with Iraq and Afghanistan! Just look at how Israel made out like a BANDIT with INCREASED funding by our Congress! Just look at the HUGE spike in oil costs during the Bush administration! ALL of that (and more -see Libya and Syria) was part of the big PNAC Neocon plan since 1998!

The financial fucks DO NOT NEED A WAR to steal Trillions. See over 16 TRILLION pulled out of THIN AIR for bank bailouts after 2008 that we-the-people are on the hook for! That's MORE than pentagon pilfering, Iraq and Afghanistan and Israel funding PUT TOGETHER!

 Historians of the future will look upon these incomprehensible days and characterize them as, "The Banksters Coup,"  In which they compelled the working people of an entire country to make good their casino losses and thus impoverish the next generations.  And they will ask, "What could they possibly have been thinking?"

 Should any of them live to become future generations of historians, that is.
Title: Re: "High Ranking US Major General Exposes 911 official version untrue"
Post by: Surly1 on August 02, 2014, 05:33:32 AM

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-010814213945.jpeg)
 (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-028.gif)Impossible G forces for B767
As a matter of fact you COULD beef up the wings of a B767  DRONE to do this maneuver (the only possible scenario in the second twin tower strike due to speed and turn rate). However, at the Pentagon, the hole was too small. It was a missile.

http://www.youtube.com/v/W0xzsbSbVUE#&fs=1

The retired General in the video is RIGHT!


Incredible article, AG. Had seen Stubblebine before, but took 20 minutes to watch it again. Very compellling, simple to understand and clearminded case.

Any interest in turning this into a blog post?

Here is more background of interest:

Larry Silverstein, WTC 7,
and the 9/11 Demolition
(http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/cutter.html)

Larry Silverstein, the controller of the destroyed WTC complex, stated plainly in a PBS documentary that he and the FDNY decided jointly to demolish WTC 7 late in the afternoon of 9/11. In the documentary "America Rebuilds", aired September 2002, Silverstein makes the following statement;

"I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."
In the same program a cleanup worker referred to the demolition of WTC 6: "... we're getting ready to pull the building six."

There can be little doubt as to how the word "pull" is being used in this context.
Title: Re: "High Ranking US Major General Exposes 911 official version untrue"
Post by: Randy C on August 02, 2014, 09:20:01 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-a4B4aNStQ&list=WL&index=5 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-a4B4aNStQ&list=WL&index=5)

More to stir into the pot....

Behind the Smoke Curtain (The 9/11 Fable of the Pentagon Attack) - Barbara Honegger

Three hours long, well worth watching, Ms. Honegger argues that there was no plane, no missile, but rather cordite was used to do the demolition work and a tank truck full of fuel provided the smoke.

Briefly, I was in DC on 9/11/01, working on the 4th floor of the DIAC (Defense Intelligence Agency Analytical Center) updating SIOP records.  After all, the Cold War had ended ten years ago and I was still doing Cold War work..... ;D

One of my co-workers came into my cube to tell me that a plane had hit the World Trade Center tower.  I said, what kind of plane????  He didn't know, so I kept working.  I had a lot of records to up date and lots of imagery to review so I didn't head to the conference room where the TV was tuned to the events in New York.  He came back a bit later and told me a second plane had hit the second tower.  At that point I said (duh...) something is wrong and got up to make sure our team chief was aware that things were changing and that our mission might suddenly change.  He acknowledged that.  At that point I still had only briefly looked at the TV, again, those all so important records had to be updated....

The next event was the Pentagon.  It is possible to see the Pentagon from the DIAC, but on a hazy day, you can only see just the top of the east side facing I-395.  The DIAC shook from whatever happened and then I could hear people above me running towards the west side of the building and also past my cube.  Again, I was not in a position to see anything but the DIAC shook like there had been a earthquake.  I got up and walked towards the west side of the office and could see the billowing smoke.

At about this point, some guy came on the DIAC's public address system and told everyone to remain calm and at their work stations as "the building was safe."  At that point there was panic and the work force abandoned ship and ran for the exits.  While all this was going on the Air Force locked down the base and everyone was stuck there. 

I went outside after the rush soon enough to see two F-15C fly over head at full afterburners headed west towards what was the 4th airplane.

I got home around 5 pm that night, DC was grid lock going out and not many people came to work the next day.  On Thursday, the government was calling for volunteers to go to the Pentagon and sanitize the offices in the effected area of all classified materials before the bodies could be removed.  I didn't have the desire to volunteer and now wish I had so I could have seen first hand what things looked like.

BUT.... as the Major General says, I could have never possibly believed that my government would do such a thing.  Also, I knew two people, both whom I considered reliable people said they saw the plane coming over the Navy Anex and the expressway so when I heard the alternative stories, I dismissed them as nut cases. 

The video that I have listed above is a three hour case study of the Pentagon and argues that it was neither aircraft or missile, but rather that cordite charges were set in the building to destroy on going efforts into an investigation of a missing $2.1 trillion in Pentagon funding.  Now, I'm not sure if the target was ONI Office of Criminal Investigations or Army investigators, but I think the overall analysis is sound given the way Washington was shaken, it was more of a detonation than an impact.

It was not until a few years ago (2010) that I finally opened my mind and read an analysis on the collapse of WTC building 7 and how the BBC announced it had gone down a full 18 minutes before the event that I finally said, something is very wrong here.  Yes, shame on me, I should have started looking a lot sooner and if I had I probably would have left government a lot sooner.

However, because I would not support the invasion of Iraq, I left DIA in 2004 for DHS because I still believed in the mission but was not willing to go to Iraq, I went instead to defend the homeland.  Three and 1/2 years went by and after reading piles of counter-terrorism traffic, I concluded that we had created the terrorists overseas and there was not a real threat here.  Well, as you can imagine, that was not a popular view in the office and so I left to operate a small farm and forget about all of this.  It took the financial crisis and oil going to $149 a barrel before I stopped again and said, something is wrong here and it most certainly is.
Title: Re: "High Ranking US Major General Exposes 911 official version untrue"
Post by: Surly1 on August 02, 2014, 11:37:18 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-a4B4aNStQ&list=WL&index=5 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-a4B4aNStQ&list=WL&index=5)

More to stir into the pot....

Behind the Smoke Curtain (The 9/11 Fable of the Pentagon Attack) - Barbara Honegger
///

It was not until a few years ago (2010) that I finally opened my mind and read an analysis on the collapse of WTC building 7 and how the BBC announced it had gone down a full 18 minutes before the event that I finally said, something is very wrong here.  Yes, shame on me, I should have started looking a lot sooner and if I had I probably would have left government a lot sooner.

However, because I would not support the invasion of Iraq, I left DIA in 2004 for DHS because I still believed in the mission but was not willing to go to Iraq, I went instead to defend the homeland.  Three and 1/2 years went by and after reading piles of counter-terrorism traffic, I concluded that we had created the terrorists overseas and there was not a real threat here.  Well, as you can imagine, that was not a popular view in the office and so I left to operate a small farm and forget about all of this.  It took the financial crisis and oil going to $149 a barrel before I stopped again and said, something is wrong here and it most certainly is.

Thanks for the backgrounder, Randy. It would seem that you are more qualified than most of us in being able to separate wheat from chaff.

Most people, including almost everybody that I've spoken to about this (aside from its small circle of friends), suffer from the same debilitating belief: that there's no way that our government would do something so incredibly evil. It's pretty simple; it's a projection of their own inner decency. Because they cannot imagine doing something so heinous to another, they can't imagine that anybody else would do so, either.

Most people have not met Dick Cheney.  it is our own collective decency that they use against us to marginalize as crazy "conspiracy theorists" those few outliers who collect dots of information (in Gen. Stubblewines phrase), and then connect them.
Title: Re: "High Ranking US Major General Exposes 911 official version untrue"
Post by: Randy C on August 02, 2014, 11:54:40 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-a4B4aNStQ&list=WL&index=5 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-a4B4aNStQ&list=WL&index=5)

More to stir into the pot....

Behind the Smoke Curtain (The 9/11 Fable of the Pentagon Attack) - Barbara Honegger
///

It was not until a few years ago (2010) that I finally opened my mind and read an analysis on the collapse of WTC building 7 and how the BBC announced it had gone down a full 18 minutes before the event that I finally said, something is very wrong here.  Yes, shame on me, I should have started looking a lot sooner and if I had I probably would have left government a lot sooner.

However, because I would not support the invasion of Iraq, I left DIA in 2004 for DHS because I still believed in the mission but was not willing to go to Iraq, I went instead to defend the homeland.  Three and 1/2 years went by and after reading piles of counter-terrorism traffic, I concluded that we had created the terrorists overseas and there was not a real threat here.  Well, as you can imagine, that was not a popular view in the office and so I left to operate a small farm and forget about all of this.  It took the financial crisis and oil going to $149 a barrel before I stopped again and said, something is wrong here and it most certainly is.

Thanks for the backgrounder, Randy. It would seem that you are more qualified than most of us in being able to separate wheat from chaff.

Most people, including almost everybody that I've spoken to about this (aside from its small circle of friends), suffer from the same debilitating belief: that there's no way that our government would do something so incredibly evil. It's pretty simple; it's a projection of their own inner decency. Because they cannot imagine doing something so heinous to another, they can't imagine that anybody else would do so, either.

Most people have not met Dick Cheney.  it is our own collective decency that they use against us to marginalize as crazy "conspiracy theorists" those few outliers who collect dots of information (in Gen. Stubblewines phrase), and then connect them.

 :icon_sunny:
Title: Diner 9-11 Anniversary Update
Post by: RE on September 11, 2014, 12:03:22 AM
(http://media.trb.com/media/photo/2011-08/64065718.jpg)

It's THAT DAY again here, so time to revisit the various Theories circulating about the REAL story of 9-11.

I put up a Documentary on the Homepage in the Feature Vid spot to get things rolling.  I haven't watched this vid myself due to the bandwidth issue.  Hopefully however it will Jack Up the Time on Site numbers if a few Conspiracy Aficionados with Alexa Toolbars installed watch the whole thing on the Diner.   :icon_mrgreen:

http://www.youtube.com/v/hD5ydMqYecE?feature=player_detailpage

RE
Title: The 9-11 Scam
Post by: Surly1 on September 11, 2014, 04:11:47 AM
There is a page on reddit for conspiracies: http://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/ (http://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/)

It's a remarkable windfall for the conspiracy minded. It is from this post that I have derived the following: http://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/2g1c9z/911_was_a_sham_it_was_a_lie_instead_of_looking_at/ (http://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/2g1c9z/911_was_a_sham_it_was_a_lie_instead_of_looking_at/)

I have vetted none of this for accuracy, but indeed "accuracy" in these matters also lies in the eye of the beholder.  On the 13th anniversary of 9/11, this collection makes a good start for those who wish to wander further down the rabbit hole.
-S


9/11 Was a sham, it was a lie. Instead of looking at individual details like building 7, take a look at the finer, hidden elements of the 'conspiracy' (http://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/2g1c9z/911_was_a_sham_it_was_a_lie_instead_of_looking_at/)

http://www.youtube.com/v/n_fp5kaVYhk

I am going to be transcribing the key points of the video here. This post will be constantly edited till I finish watching the video. Help me find sources and maybe we can make a difference. EDIT: all the sources for the video are in the video's description.

September 1991 - George H.W. Bush and a number of bankers and people in intelligence, finance a $240 billion dollar covert operations war chest (called Project Hammer) that were scheduled to come due on September 12th, 2001.

Project Hammer was mainly used to finance a cover economic operation against the collapsing Soviet Union, where "unknown" Western investors bought up much of the Soviet industry, with a focus on oil and gas, crashing the Russian economy, looting its central bank, orchestrating the "great ruble scam" and a number of other clandestine operations meant to keep Russia from ever competing with the U.S. as a world super-power.

Several agencies were collecting and compiling evidence on Project Hammer up until 9/11. This included the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI), which was moved to the outer E ring of the recently renovated section of the pentagon that was hit on 9/11.

DIA E.P. Heidner of ONI said they had been investigating the crimes associated with the plundering of Russia. 39 out of the 40 people who worked in those offices were killed on 9/11, including ONI's entire chain of command.

Many passengers on Flight 77 held 'top secret clearances' and were connected with Pentagon black operations.

Agents of ONI were also investigating financial transactions linked to securities being managed by those security dealers in the world trade center that were also targeted.

31% of the 125 fatalies in the Pentagon were from the Naval Commander Center that housed the Office of Naval Intelligence.

41% of the fatalities in the Twin Towers came two companies that managed U.S. government securities: Cantor Fitzgerald and Eurobrokers.

There were three major securities brokers in the World Trade Center: Cantor Fitzgerald, Eurobrokers, and Garbon Inter Capital. Cantor Fitzgerald was the largest securities dealer in the U.S.

Fire and explosions reported in the World Trade Center: under the FBI offices in the North Tower on the 23rd floor, fires on the 22nd floor at 8:47, explosions and fires reported at Garbon Inter Capital on the 25th floor and basement of Tower 1. Shortly after, at 9:03, Flight 175 hit the South Tower- directly beneath the floors in which Euro Brokers was situated. In all these cases, the explosive, fire destruction consumed the offices in the several floors above, destroying files and trapping victims.

Building 6 was destroyed by an explosion that took place before either tower fell. This secondary explosion took out a portion of the building which just happened to include the El Dorado Task Force's offices.

The El Dorado Task Force was an inter-agency money laundering watchdog group responsible for coordinating all major money-laundering investigations in the U.S. In the immediate aftermath of September 11th, these groups would be redirected to investigate terrorist financing.

FEMA photographer and 9/11 whistleblower Kurt Sonnenfield testified to entering the U.S. Customs Vault in the basement of WTC 6, which was found completely empty and left with the door wide open. All of its contents appear to have been looted during the attacks. There is also evidence that gold was being looted from the vaults beneath WTC 4- there were several early reports of a 10-wheel truck packed with stolen bullion, caught fleeing WTC 5 when the vehicle had become stuck on a collapsed ceiling brace, forcing the driver to flee the scene.

Fireproofing "upgrades" on the exact floors coinciding with failure and impact in the towers. Suspicious power-downs and evacuation drills.

Some other collected thoughts and llnks from poster OWN the NWO:


Going specifically with all the LIHOP evidence is the best door opener for any new person.
ever forget that the victims families asked questions and demanded answers, but all they got were lies and cold shoulders.
9/11 PRESS FOR TRUTH (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzRmb3Z-E0A#ws)

Never forget that Christy Todd Whitman head of the EPA knowingly lied about the safety of the air at ground zero and premeditatedly murdered the first responders.
We Were Also Killed on 9-11 short (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qC3YlKERdg8#)

Never forget all the 9/11 whistle blowers who died mysteriously.
! Private video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvay28lZiHU#)

Never forget PDD W199i where the Bush Administration threatened prosecution of any FBI agent by the DoJ for investigating the Bin Laden family or the active cells.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/911.html#w199i (http://www.prisonplanet.com/911.html#w199i)

Never forget the FBI admitted they had "No Hard Evidence" Connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13664.htm (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13664.htm)

Never forget that alleged hijackers were still alive
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm)

Never forget all the National security whistle blowers trying to wake all the sleep walking sheep in total denial of reality that there were in fact whistle blowers on 9/11, a lot of them.
http://www.nswbc.org/Press (http://www.nswbc.org/Press) Releases/NSWBC-911Comm.htm

Never forget that 7 out of 10 of the 9/11 commissioners don't even buy the story of their own commission
Most of the 9/11 Commissioners don't buy the official story, so why do you? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Atju9lOAtn8#)

Never forget who created Al Qaeda
Hillary Clinton : We created Al-Qaeda (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dqn0bm4E9yw#)

Never forget all these professionals, victims and insiders who question the official fairytale of 9/11 many of which are also whistle blowers. Including: 220  Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials 2000  Engineers and Architects 250  Pilots and Aviation Professionals 400  Professors Question 9/11 300  9/11 Survivors and Family Members 200  Artists, Entertainers, and Media Professionals 400  Medical Professionals
http://patriotsquestion911.com/ (http://patriotsquestion911.com/)

Never forget that NORAD stood down
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2008/03/norad-stand-down-in-2-minutes.html (http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2008/03/norad-stand-down-in-2-minutes.html)
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Surly1 on March 12, 2015, 04:19:51 AM
The 9/11 Commission Didn’t Believe the Government … So Why Should We? (http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/03/911-commissioners-didnt-believe-government.html)
Posted on March 12, 2015 (http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/03/911-commissioners-didnt-believe-government.html) by WashingtonsBlog (http://www.washingtonsblog.com/author/washingtonsblog)



9/11 Commissioners Admit They Never Got the Full Story
The 9/11 Commissioners publicly expressed anger at cover ups and obstructions of justice by the government into a real 9/11 investigation:
No wonder the Co-Chair of the congressional investigation into 9/11 – Bob Graham – and 9/11 Commissioner and former Senator Bob Kerrey are calling for either a “PERMANENT 9/11 commission (http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2009/03/911-commissioner-bob-kerrey-it-might-take-a-permanent-911-commission-to-end-the-remaining-mysteries-of-september-11.html)” or a new 9/11 investigation (http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/03/911-commissioner-and-co-chair-of-congressional-inquiry-into-911-say-in-sworn-declarations-that-saudi-government-linked-to-911-attacks.html) to get to the bottom of it.

Some examples of obstruction of justice into the 9/11 investigation include:
Quote
Quote
Senator Bob Graham, the Florida Democrat who is a former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, accused the White House on Tuesday of covering up evidence ….The accusation stems from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s refusal to allow investigators for a Congressional inquiry and the independent Sept. 11 commission to interview an informant, Abdussattar Shaikh, who had been the landlord (http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/12/big-brother-spying-didnt-stop-connecticut-school-shooter-or-911.html#) in San Diego of two Sept. 11 hijackers.
Both the 9/11 Commission Investigation and 9/11 Trials Were Based on Unreliable Evidence Produced by Torture
The CIA videotaped the interrogation of 9/11 suspects, falsely told the 9/11 Commission that there were no videotapes or other records of the interrogations, and then illegally destroyed all of the tapes and transcripts of the interrogations (http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2010/03/the-reason-for-this-cover-up-goes-right-to-the-white-house.html).

9/11 Commission co-chairs Thomas Keane and Lee Hamilton wrote (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/opinion/02kean.html):
Quote
Those who knew about those videotapes — and did not tell us about them — obstructed our investigation.
The chief lawyer for Guantanamo litigation – Vijay Padmanabhan – said (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/03/27/politics/main4897315.shtml?tag=topHome) that torture of 9/11 suspects was widespread.

And Susan J. Crawford – the senior Pentagon official overseeing the military commissions at Guantánamo told (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/13/AR2009011303372.html?hpid=topnews) Bob Woodward:
Quote
We tortured Qahtani. His treatment met the legal definition of torture.
Indeed, some of the main sources of information were tortured right up to the point of death (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/al-qaeda/11080450/CIA-tortured-al-Qaeda-suspects-close-to-the-point-of-death-by-drowning-them-in-water-filled-baths.html).

Moreover, the type of torture used by the U.S. on the Guantanamo suspects is of a special type. Senator Levin revealed that the the U.S. used Communist torture techniques specifically aimed at creatingfalse confessions. (http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2009/04/senator-government-used-communist-torture-techniques-aimed-at-extracting-false-confessions.html) (and see this (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/66622.html?ref=fp1), this (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/02/us/02detain.html?_r=3&pagewanted=all&), this (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/14/iraq.torture/index.html) and this (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/15/ksm-was-questioned-about_n_203898.html)).

And according to NBC News (http://web.archive.org/web/20090212035205/http://deepbackground.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/30/624314.aspx):
If the 9/11 Commissioners themselves doubt the information from the government, why should we believe it?
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: MKing on March 12, 2015, 05:55:42 AM
It all sounds pretty...GovCo normal...like they EVER want to advertise how badly they screwed up.

But it doesn't appear to change the idea that a couple of planes smashed into some government buildings and killed a bunch of folks. Certainly it seems to reinforce the idea that there was quite a bit of CYA going on after the fact, people maneuvering so they wouldn't look bad during the perfunctory and undoubtedly expected proctology exam.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Eddie on March 12, 2015, 06:15:39 AM
Whatever the real story is...and i doubt we'll ever know, the real tragedy of 9-11 is not the loss of life, bad as it was for those who died and their families...the real costs have more to do with the REACTION to 9-11...the huge waste of resources and the senseless scrutiny suddenly and permanently added to the cost of travel, the increase in the police state through the creation of Homeland Security, and the complete and utter trashing of the last of our civil liberties through the creation of the Patriot Act.

As a nation, we would have been far better off to ignore that 9-11 ever happened, than to react in such a predictable, poorly thought out way. Purely an emotional response, and (on the part of politicians) a sop to satisfy the irrational fears of a nation too long lulled into a false sense of security.

And for bin Laden...a complete victory. It's hard to see how a terrorist could ever get more bang for a buck.

Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: RE on March 12, 2015, 06:54:43 AM
As a nation, we would have been far better off to ignore that 9-11 ever happened, than to react in such a predictable, poorly thought out way. Purely an emotional response, and (on the part of politicians) a sop to satisfy the irrational fears of a nation too long lulled into a false sense of security.

In retrospect this is probably true, but it is pretty hard to IGNORE the collapse of two major skyscrapers in NY Shity along with the loss of life of a few thousand people.

You also don't really have a good idea of who in reality was responsible, even if OBL was the vector through which it was accomplished, even if that is true and that is not certain either.

Now, as we move forward here, there are likely to be many more events which are questionable in terms of how they came to be and who planned and executed them, the recent Assassination of Boris Nemtsov is an example of that.  Probably, IGNORING it occurred is the best thing, except how long do you ignore stuff that is destabilizing everywhere?  It's like Hitler's invasion of the Sudetanland, Neville Chamberlain essentially ignores it, but then it escalates further.  Chamberlain gets pitched out in favor of Churchill, WWII in Europe ensues.

When an economic collapse goes Global, all sorts of nasty things occur.  Whole countries start unravelling.  See Greece, Ukraine, etc. Millions of people start Starving.  You get  a few Big Events like Skyscraper Collapses here and there, but how long can you ignore what is occurring all around you and do nothing?

When you do do something, what is the right thing to do?  Escalating the warfare doesn't seem to be a very good idea these days, but what is the alternative and how do you implement it?

RE
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Surly1 on March 12, 2015, 06:54:58 AM

And for bin Laden...a complete victory. It's hard to see how a terrorist could ever get more bang for a buck.

Agreed.

From: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2007/02/the_strategy_and_objectives_of.html#ixzz3UBBTZfD5 (http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2007/02/the_strategy_and_objectives_of.html#ixzz3UBBTZfD5)

Al-Qaeda has four basic strategies in order to reach their ultimate goal of destroying Israel and America.  They are:
Overwhelm the enemy
Strangle the enemy financially
Have the enemy fight amongst themselves
Stretch the enemy thin

(http://www.prosebeforehos.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/bin-laden-objectives.png)
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Eddie on March 12, 2015, 07:36:08 AM
but ultimately he sleeps with the fishes, and it was a good ol' fashion Kyle sort of guy who made it happen. The ending just wouldn't have had the same effect if he had been incinerated in some Hellfire missile attack.

I think guys like bin Laden, or say Jihadi John, they consider their lives forfeit from the moment they decide to go up against the empire. To say that we took any individual one of them out should not make us feel better. It's actually counter-productive most of the time, especially for a high profile character like bin Laden.

For every one that we make into a martyr, ten more will arise from the slums to replace him. It's a losing game. We don't need more Chris Kyles. We need some smarter fucking leadership.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Surly1 on March 12, 2015, 07:42:40 AM
We don't need more Chris Kyles. We need some smarter fucking leadership.

Quote of the Month.

Maybe the year.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: RE on March 12, 2015, 08:02:34 AM
We need some smarter fucking leadership.

No doubt there, but exactly what and how would the Smarter Leadership operate with to fix the problems?  If you were the Smart Leader Capo di Tutti Capis in charge, how would you fix it up without dropping bombs all over the place and mowing down women and children with drones?

RE
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Eddie on March 12, 2015, 08:43:54 AM
We need a fearless Trust Buster who has the balls to seriously downsize the military and reform banking.

In other words, we need Ron Paul. Too bad the American public passed their last best chance at having an effective POTUS. I don't hold much hope now. The choice was quite clear to anybody with any sense, but Americans with good sense are an endangered species.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: RE on March 12, 2015, 09:02:52 AM
We need a fearless Trust Buster who has the balls to seriously downsize the military and reform banking.

In other words, we need Ron Paul. Too bad the American public passed their last best chance at having an effective POTUS. I don't hold much hope now. The choice was quite clear to anybody with any sense, but Americans with good sense are an endangered species.

Well, I agree RP would have been a better choice than the Obamanista  or the Catcher's Mitt, but sadly all a Fed Aduit and Acounting would do is crash the syatem faster than it is already crashing.  Working on a script for a new rant on this now.

I also doubt all the libertarian deregulation ideas would work all too well, and then there is also the Gold issues, which are monetarily ludicrous these days.

RE
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: MKing on March 12, 2015, 09:07:41 AM
but ultimately he sleeps with the fishes, and it was a good ol' fashion Kyle sort of guy who made it happen. The ending just wouldn't have had the same effect if he had been incinerated in some Hellfire missile attack.

I think guys like bin Laden, or say Jihadi John, they consider their lives forfeit from the moment they decide to go up against the empire. To say that we took any individual one of them out should not make us feel better.

Depends on whether or not someone is a death penalty I suppose. I'm not convinced that those who go off to become terror legends don't think they are invincible, in Osama's case, after that first year or two without us catching him, I'm betting he was feeling pretty optimistic. But I feel wonderfully better, him not being in a position to be able to do it again, which is all the death penalty is REALLY good for....making sure that someone has zero opportunity to ever do it again.

Quote from: Eddie
It's actually counter-productive most of the time, especially for a high profile character like bin Laden.

Unless the goal is to make sure that there is zero possibility of the same person ever pulling off the same stunt again, in which case it is 100% effective, EVERY SINGLE TIME. I like the certainty of the solution myself, but then I have some experience dealing with murderous humans, hell, I've got his GENES in me.

Quote from: Eddie
For every one that we make into a martyr, ten more will arise from the slums to replace him. It's a losing game. We don't need more Chris Kyles. We need some smarter fucking leadership.

So let them. And upon application of the "if we kill you, we don't ever have to worry about you again either", the geometric nature of your argument runs out of people pretty quickly. Plus, as we all sit here more than a decade after 9/11, we know that it isn't all that easy to orchestrate the level of destruction that Osama did here in this country, and as you certainly prefer Eddy, it is best that all the blowing up and whatnot take place somewhere other than in the streets outside your business. You appreciate it, even if you hate the mechanism built to create it, but you certainly take advantage of it every single day the doors to your business are open.

Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Eddie on March 12, 2015, 09:44:39 AM
it is best that all the blowing up and whatnot take place somewhere other than in the streets outside your business. You appreciate it, even if you hate the mechanism built to create it, but you certainly take advantage of it every single day the doors to your business are open.


I can't believe you would even buy into this false paradigm. We aren't at particular risk from terrorists in this country. Statistically speaking, we're more likely to be killed by a lightning strike, or maybe a meteor, or one of az's volcanic eruptions.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Eddie on March 12, 2015, 09:48:17 AM
Besides, all the security efforts amount to jack shit. Anybody with money and a little ingenuity could blow up any number of soft targets here, any old day. You know that.

Title: Danish High Court to Rule on 9-11
Post by: RE on March 25, 2015, 07:30:08 PM
The Architects & Engineers for 9-11 Truth have not given up the fight.

RE

9/11 Truth: WTC 7 and Controlled Demolition: Evidence of Nano-Thermite presented to Danish Court (http://www.globalresearch.ca/911-truth-wtc-7-and-controlled-demolition-evidence-of-nano-thermite-presented-to-danish-court/5438542)

By Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth
Global Research, March 25, 2015
Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth
Region: Europe
Theme: 9/11 & 'War on Terrorism'

By Josef Hanji

Copenhagen, Denmark — March 14, 2015

In an article titled “Madness in the Royal Library” published in the Danish newspaper Weekendavisen on December 7, 2012, journalist Søren Villemoes accused esteemed chemist Dr. Niels Harrit of being a “crackpot” for daring to conclude that the destruction of three World Trade Center towers on September 11, 2001, was a controlled demolition.

Harrit, a 40-year professor of chemistry at the University of Copenhagen and co-author of a scientific paper on the nano-thermite found in dust samples taken from Ground Zero, filed a libel lawsuit against both the newspaper’s editor, Anne Knudsen, and the offending journalist. After he lost his case in City Court on August 16, 2013, he appealed to the Danish High Court.

The High Court set a court date of March 12, 2015, for the case to be tried. Last month, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth informed Harrit’s supporters of the impending appeal and helped raise funds from those supporters to pay his legal expenses.

Below, we will describe how Dr. Harrit’s appeal fared.

The High Court session had it all — persuasive forensic evidence, courtroom drama, and the strong voice of a reputable scientist who expertly defended the basic laws of physics as well as the evidence of nano-thermite in the WTC dust. Though the verdict will not be known until April 9, it is clear to this observer that Dr. Harrit did an excellent job, not only solidifying his integrity and expertise in the eyes of the public, but also advancing the cause of the 9/11 Truth Movement in the process.

Though the High Court case was to convene at 9:30 AM, the court room was already 80% full by 9:00 AM. The 16 seats on the court benches quickly became 20 as people moved closer together. Four more chairs were brought in, but after they, too, were quickly occupied, other would-be onlookers were turned away. By the time the three judges entered the court room, it was filled to capacity.

The trial started with Dr. Harrit, who represented himself, asking the court to indulge him as he reviewed the City Court trial and verdict. He also requested the judges’ guidance in case he made any mistakes during the proceedings. In fact, the legal counsel he had received in advance from Danish attorney Mads Krøger Pramming, chairman of the Danish whistleblower organization Veron, made Harrit’s presentation mistake-free. This observer got the impression that, had he not chosen to study and teach chemistry, Dr. Harrit would have made a formidable lawyer.

On display was not only the intellect of a professor who inspires students but the prowess of a music and theater performer who impresses audiences — the latter talent developed in Harrit’s after-hours during many of his 70 years. Combining his classroom and stage skills, he proved himself a masterful speaker as he read the “Madness in the Royal Library” article aloud to the judges.

In it, Villemoes had written about a 2012 art exhibition at the Royal Library of Denmark that portrayed “The Armenian Genocide.” Calling it “madness” for the library’s director to have allowed the Turkish government to also tell its side of the genocide story, Villemoes went on to cite other examples of “madness”: the beliefs of creationists, Holocaust deniers, and 9/11 skeptics such as Dr. Harrit. Indeed, while Dr. Harrit’s reading was as compelling as listening to a great musician performing, it was his sincerity that caught everyone’s attention.

Finally, it was time for Dr. Harrit to present the first piece of new evidence. He projected a video of World Trade Center Building 7′s collapse onto the wall of the High Court. As the video played the 6.5-second collapse of the 600-foot, 47-story building over and over, the professor described what was happening, and in so doing showed himself to be a logical scientist who naturally had questions about a phenomenon that was identical in appearance to a controlled demolition. From the expression on one judge’s face — a look of disbelief that 9/11 skeptics know quite well — it was obvious he had never before seen the video. Whether the other two judges had watched the collapse of WTC 7 before is hard to say; their faces were inscrutable. Making the judges watch WTC 7 fall again and again was what Dr. Harrit later called his biggest achievement of the day.

Dr. Harrit also presented various documents he had submitted as attachments to the case, including the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth petition (currently signed by 2,332 credentialed architects and engineers and 20,100 other supporters), the 2009 nano-thermite report he co-wrote with a team of scientists (“Active Thermitic Material Found In The Dust From The 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe”), the AE911Truth-sponsored polls taken by professional pollsters in the USA and Canada (in both countries, roughly half of those surveyed believed, after being shown the collapse of WTC 7, that it either definitely was or most likely was a controlled demolition).

Next, the plaintiff quoted from the 2005 report published by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, which purportedly explained the collapse of The Twin Towers. He homed in on what he considers to be the most important footnote written since WWII — namely, footnote 13 on page 82.

First Dr. Harrit read it to the judges in English:

    The focus of the investigation was the sequence of events from the instant of aircraft impact to the initiation of collapse for each tower. For brevity in this report, this sequence is referred to as the “probable collapse sequence,” although it does not actually include the structural behavior of the towers after conditions for the collapse initiation were reached and collapse became inevitable.

Then he translated it into Danish. He went on to explain that the footnote was a prime example of “academic terror” in the NIST report. That is, not even a reader trained in physics and familiar with physics reports would be able to understand what this footnote said when reading it for the first time. The professor’s point was proved when the judge in charge of keeping the court protocols asked Dr. Harrit to translate the last sentence again.

Dr. Harrit pointed out that between the lines in this footnote NIST was actually admitting that there is no public theory on how the North Tower and South Tower were destroyed, nor is there an explanation of the collapse sequence, as the report stops at the moment the towers were about to go down. Upon hearing this explanation, the accused Søren Villemoes raised his eyebrows in seeming surprise and leaned back in his chair.

The day of 9/11 Truth evidence schooling for Villemoes and the judges had hardly begun. The plaintiff proceeded with the next bit of evidence: A screenshot from a Facebook update Villemoes had written the day after the City Court trial in 2013 showed him admitting that he had not been fair to Dr. Harrit.

After Dr. Harrit had presented his case to the High Court, it was time for the four witnesses to take the stand, one by one.

A young lawyer representing Villemoes (substituting for lawyer Søren Juul, who had handled the case in City Court) rose from his chair and started speaking. Acting nervous and seeming unprepared, he started asking Niels Harrit questions in a barely audible voice. He tried to make a case to the court that Dr. Harrit was saying the United States itself was behind the 9/11 attacks. To that charge, Harrit replied that he was a natural scientist and that he has conducted science-based presentations on the collapse of WTC 7 more than 230 times without ever pointing fingers at any suspects. “I believe in the rule of law,” Dr. Harrit said, “and there has never been any a legal investigation of 9/11 in court, making it impossible for a person like me, who believes in the law, to name anyone who should have committed the crime.”

Villemoes then took the stand. Harrit first asked the journalist about the 2013 Facebook comment he had made about not having treated the chemist with fairness. Villemoes answered that he had felt pity on Dr. Harrit after the City Court case. Next, Harrit brought up a statement Villemoes had made in City Court, in which he claimed to have seen Harrit’s lecture about WTC 7 but couldn’t remember where he had seen it. Villemoes answered that he now recalled the lecture had been on the Danish island of Bornholm. Harrit pointed out that he had given that lecture in June 2013, just two months before the City Court date. He remarked how odd it was that Villamoes couldn’t remember (in City Court) where he had seen it two months earlier but could now remember it (in High Court) one and a half years later. “For how long did you watch my lecture?” Dr. Harrit then asked. Villemoes replied that he had seen only five minutes of the 2½-hour long lecture — an answer that revealed his factual basis for criticizing Dr. Harrit to be exceedingly weak.

Villemoes twitter harrit fav

In City Court, Villemoes had claimed that the WTC dust in the nano-thermite report could have been unauthentic. That charge gave Dr. Harrit a reason to submit the WTC dust as evidence to the High Court. In so doing, Dr. Harrit verified the authenticity of his dust samples by pointing to two photographs on page 24 in the nano-thermite report, which showed the same kind of iron microspheres found in the dust by RJ Lee Group in 2003 and by the US Geological Survey in 2005. He then held before Villemoes a plastic bag with his own sample of WTC dust, dragging a strong magnet along the side of the plastic, trying to make a little rim of black particles gather near the edges of the magnet. On the first attempt, Villemoes failed to see the black rim. But on the second try, he said he could see it, and Dr. Harrit told him that, since we all know that magnets attract iron, this was the iron microspheres being separated from the dust particles not containing iron. This was proof that a thermitic reaction had taken place on 9/11, Dr. Harrit told Villemoes.

After a short break, the court reassembled to carry on with the two last witnesses. One witness was architectJan Utzon, who had worked on recent projects for the Sydney Opera House in Australia, which his father Jørn had designed nearly 50 years earlier. The other witness was a former colleague of Dr. Harrit, Per Hedegaard, who taught physics at the Niels Bohr Institute at the University of Copenhagen.  Utzon had already taken the stand as a witness in City Court, where he represented AE911Truth and its signatories. Dr. Hedegaard was a new witness who purportedly had changed his position from being against the theories presented by Dr. Harrit to admitting that the official explanation of what happened to WTC 7 was in violation of Newton’s laws of physics.

Jan Utzon reiterated the testimony he had already given at City Court, telling the judges that no steel-framed high-rise has ever collapsed due to fire and that he had no doubts about the collapse of WTC 7 being a controlled demolition.

When Per Hedegaard finally entered the court room, he looked nervous and confused. Asked specific questions by Dr. Harrit, he was unable to give direct answers. For example, even though the looping video of the collapse of WTC 7 was shown a second time during the testimony of Utzon and a third time when he took the stand, Dr. Hedegaard said he could not see any violation of physical laws. While agreeing that the collapse of WTC 7 looked close to free-fall acceleration, he noted that it was too complicated for him to say for sure.

“But what does it mean when a building is falling 9.8 metres per second squared, Per?” Harrit asked. The professor of physics said he did not know. “This means the building is in free fall, Per,” Harrit elaborated. “And when a building is in free fall, is there then energy left to destroy the supporting structure?” Hedegaard’s answer was confusing. He talked about how energy moved faster than free-fall and suggested that WTC 7 could have fallen even faster than free-fall.

“But Per, you told me you had looked at the data, and that you supported it,” Harrit responded. Again, Hedegaard gave a confusing answer. The judge in charge of court protocols asked the witness what data it was that he actually supported. “Only the report,” he replied, referring to the nano-thermite report. “I read some of it, and it looked good.”

Hedegaard had earlier calculated, on his own, that at least 60 tons of thermite would have been needed to take down the Twin Towers, and on that basis he found it difficult to believe that controlled demolition had been used to level those two buildings.

Though Hedegaard did say he found the nano-thermite report “good,” his other answers were clearly not what Harrit had been expecting. An obviously disappointed Harrit told the judges he had no more questions for the witness.

Villemoes’ lawyer asked Hedegaard if he could support statements he had made about Harrit quoted in an article used in City Court — statements substantiating that Dr. Harrit was a “crackpot”. Hedegaard replied that he still agreed with his statements in the article, in which he had called Harrit’s theories “nuts.” That became the final answer from the last witness of the day.

After a lunch break, the High Court reconvened and gave both Niels Harrit and the lawyer for the accused Villemoes each 30 minutes to give their final statement, called a procedure.

Those who had seen the outstanding procedure Harrit gave in City Court 1 ½  years earlier now witnessed a procedure that was even more brilliant, displaying the skills of a top-drawer attorney. He named paragraph 267of the Danish Criminal Code and Article 10, Sections 1 and 2, of the European Human Rights Convention, pointing out that should Villemoes be found not guilty, then the Danish criminal code is obsolete. All other libel cases tried in Danish courts, he said, have been decided based upon the occurrence of a factual basis for the utterance. Yet in this case, Harrit declared, “We have seen no facts from Villemoes showing any kind of factual basis for his claims. And this is why the court must find him guilty in libel, according to the law.”

Harrit referred to the historical court case against Galileo Galilei in 1633, where the accused was brought in front of the inquisition of the Roman Catholic Church and tortured until he renounced his belief that the earth rotated around the sun and acknowledged that the earth was the center of the universe.

When he concluded his procedure, there was no doubt that Dr. Harrit had made an impact upon the High Court. The three judges looked as if they approved the legal points he made, and both Villemoes and his lawyer appeared a bit shaken.

Villemoes’ lawyer, in his procedure, said there was no reason to put forward a factual basis for the statements his client made in the article, as it could be read in all the official 9/11 reports. His statement seemed weak compared to all the evidence brought forward during the day — evidence showing that it is more than reasonable to question the official 9/11 story about Osama bin Laden and the 19 alleged hijackers who, armed with box cutters, managed to carry out a highly coordinated attack on the world’s most advanced military power.

The judgment from the three High Court judges runs for four weeks from the court date, meaning the verdict will be announced on April 9, 2015, at 10 AM Denmark time. Coincidentally, this date is precisely 75 years after the 1940 German occupation of Denmark during WWII. On April 9, 2015, we will see whether the system of justice in Denmark protects the free speech of the common man or continues the deception that has plunged the world into an endless “War on Terror.” Hopefully, we will one day look back on this date as the occasion when the Danish High Court acknowledged that skepticism about the official story of 9/11 is a legitimate way of thinking and ordered that it be protected within the Danish laws of free speech.

Less than an hour after the trial ended, Dr. Harrit did this interview with www.911truth.dk (http://www.911truth.dk), in which he gives his view of the High Court meeting.

Besides listening to that interview, you can visit Niels Harrit’s Facebook page, which details his contributions to the 9/11 Truth Movement.

Support from all over the world for this High Court case has been overwhelming to both Dr. Harrit and the 9/11 activists who helped raise awareness for this historical event. Thank you to all who have followed and supported his case. May justice be served.
Title: 9-11 conspiracy: Dr. Judy Wood- High Energy "Dustification"
Post by: RE on January 11, 2016, 05:18:34 PM
Had lunch this afternoon with my friend, who is a big 9-11 Conspiracy freak.  His belief along with Dr. Judy Wood here is that the Illuminati have some new type of Energy Weapon capable of "dustification" of matter.  The theory is this was not airplanes, not thermite, not a controlled demolition, but rather some new weapon that was used to destroy the WTC on 9-11.  He recommended her videos.

You can decide for yourself the validity of her arguments and evidence.  I only watched about the first 10 minutes.

http://www.youtube.com/v/vadSaWyiozg

RE
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Eddie on January 11, 2016, 06:37:11 PM
AZ and AG and anybody else who watched the Dr.Steven Greer UFO video can back me up when I say that this theory of Dr. Wood's ties in pretty neatly with the ET tech stuff that the rogue Deep State spooks are said to have captured from space aliens, as described by Greer.

I expect maybe she knows all about that stuff too, but I really have no idea. I never have been down these rabbit holes because I could never see the point. I listened to about 30 minutes of her presentation. It does seem like the debris field was pretty minimal, but I know nothing about how buildings come down.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Palloy on January 28, 2016, 02:25:22 AM
Quote
I only watched about the first 10 minutes.

You're lucky.  I just watched the whole 2+ hours, and believe me the presentation was as badly executed throughout as the first 10 minutes.  The woman has no I idea how to present a clear logical case.  The images used are so complex, and flashed up so quickly, with I suppose a laser dot which she could see but I couldn't, that most of the time I didn't know what I was looking at, or why, or what point I should be taking from it.

In the second half we are shown photos of a lot of results of experiments, which weren't described, done by someone whose credentials were never given, involving interactions between an electrostatic field and microwaves.  The constant repetition of "this is weird" to these photos and to WTC photos is supposed to make you think "this is weird, and is something to do with directed beam energy physics that I don't understand".  It is classic "group think" by constant repetition, which she started off by saying was the ultimate sin.

Cold fusion and Tritium were dragged in there, but I don't know why, except that she said high levels of Tritium were found in the basement of WTC6.  But Tritium is a very light gas and wouldn't be found in a basement at all.

Tesla and Free Energy also make a brief appearance, but I don't know why.

My judgement: she is a very very muddled thinker, looking for weird similarities between totally unconnected thing, and connecting them by their weirdness.  That's not evidence, it's hocus pocus.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Surly1 on August 21, 2016, 08:33:18 AM
Some Sunday morning speculations.

This clip is that of a very important episode of "The Truthseeker", which was taken down from RT's site and which had disappeared from YouTube for some two years until the August 14th publication of an article from RT, claiming that 9/11 was an inside job.

This 800-pound gorilla in the room that is the laughably false version of what happened on 9/11 that has been promulgated by the US Government for the past 15 years must be squashed and the truth must be made publicly known and the real perpetrators of these events must be prosecuted, as the first step to stop the genocidal evil which has been unleashed upon the world, mostly but not limited to several defenseless Third World Middle Eastern countries.

This would be a welcome development for Jon Cole, from Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, who appears in this episode of "The Truthseeker". When asked who brought down the towers, he replies:

"Who didn't do it was the 19 hijackers that allegedly flew the planes. It is impossible, impossible to melt that steel by the office fires, the jet fuel, for the collapse itself. It's a physical impossibility. It can not be replicated experimentally. It defies the laws of physics."

RT's most hard-hitting show ever, "The Truthseeker" was canceled two years ago, amid ongoing complaints by the UK government-controlled propaganda television network, the BBC to the British
Office of Communications. "Ofcom" is the regulatory agency that issues broadcasting licenses and that serves as the the UK's official censorship agency for television, radio, telecommunications and the postal service.

http://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/rt-report-9-11-was-an-inside-job-27806 (http://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/rt-report-9-11-was-an-inside-job-27806)

http://www.youtube.com/v/h9MBi-W-JtI
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Palloy on August 21, 2016, 03:31:31 PM
Quote
?: This clip is that of a very important episode of "The Truthseeker", which was taken down from RT's site and which had disappeared from YouTube for some two years until the August 14th publication of an article from RT, claiming that 9/11 was an inside job.

It's not clear whose words those were, I think not Surly1's, so I clicked the link http://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/rt-report-9-11-was-an-inside-job-27806 (http://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/rt-report-9-11-was-an-inside-job-27806) :

Quote
http://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/rt-report-9-11-was-an-inside-job-27806
RT Report: ‘9/11 Was An Inside Job’
RT

Forbidden Knowledge TV | Aug 16, 2016 | Alexandra Bruce

Embedded video https://youtu.be/h9MBi-W-JtI (https://youtu.be/h9MBi-W-JtI)

This clip is that of a very important episode of "The Truthseeker", which was taken down from RT's site and which had disappeared from YouTube for some two years until the August 14th publication (https://www.rt.com/sport/354634-rio-olympic-games-timeline/) of this article from RT, claiming that 9/11 was an inside job.

This 800-pound gorilla in the room that ...

Clicking the link to the August 14th RT article :

Quote
https://www.rt.com/sport/354634-rio-olympic-games-timeline/
Rio 2016 Olympic Games Live updates
Published time: 4 Aug, 2016 16:26
Edited time: 14 Aug, 2016 02:26
Get short URL
© Matthew Childs
© Matthew Childs / Reuters
RT brings you all the latest news as the best athletes from across the world compete at the first-ever South American Olympic Games in Rio, Brazil.

    15 August 2016
    19:01 GMT

    Russian gymnast Denis Ablyazin has won his second medal of the day, this time landing silver in the men's vault with 15.516 points.

    The gold medal went to North Korea’s Ri Se-gwang, who earned 15.691 points, while bronze went to Kenzo Shirai of Japan (15.449 points).

    Earlier today Ablyazin earned the bronze in the men's rings.
    18:14 GMT

     - Two people were lightly injured when a television camera suspended by cables fell to the ground in the Olympic Park outside the basketball arena, Globonews reported.

        Câmera cai em cima de 2 mulheres no parque olímpico. pic.twitter.com/LqYs79eyqG
        — Maria Jose (@mjascencao) August 15, 2016

    Television images showed one woman who was treated by medics walk from the scene wearing a neck brace, while the other victim was carried off on a stretcher.

    17:33 GMT

    Russian gymnast Denis Ablyazin has won the bronze medal in the men's rings. Ablyzin now has silver and bronze medals at the Rio Games.

        Denis Ablyazin
        Gymnastics- Russia pic.twitter.com/ylD7o6Ez6M
        — vicky (@possiblyvicky) August 9, 2016

    The gold medal was won by Eleftherios Petrounias of Greece. Brazilian Arthur Zanetti received the silver.
    14:29 GMT

    Russian kayakers Elena Anyushina and Kira Stepanova are through to the women’s kayak double 500m canoe sprint event.

        Российские байдарочницы Елена Анюшина и Кира Степанова, а также каноист Илья Штокалов вышли в финал #Rio2016! pic.twitter.com/GcCHrRKgK8
        — Молния Рио-2016 (@molniasport) August 15, 2016

    Canoeist Ilia Shtokalov is through to the men’s canoe single 1000m.

    14:07 GMT

    Russian wrestler Davit Chakvetadze is through to the quarterfinal in the men’s Greco-Roman 85kg event.

        GR85 Qualification: Davit CHAKVETADZE (RUS) df. Saman Ahmed TAHMASEBI (AZE), 3-0. #wrestling#RioWrestle#Rio2016pic.twitter.com/yGNI44BuZI
        — World Wrestling (@wrestling) August 15, 2016

    05:28 GMT

    The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has upheld the appeal of Russian long-jumper Darya Klishina against the International Athletics Federation (IAAF). The decision will allow her to compete in Rio. The women’s long-jump qualification is scheduled to take place on Tuesday.

        #CAS удовлетворил апелляцию Дарьи Клишиной, она выступит на Олимпиаде в #Рио#спорт#допинг#Клишина#Россия#прыжкиpic.twitter.com/qrvHzCIqtZ
        — wp_women (@wp_women) 15 августа 2016 г.

    04:26 GMT

    Russia’s women’s volleyball team suffered its first setback in Rio, losing to the Olympic hosts. The Brazilians beat the Russians with a sweep victory of three sets to zero.
    However, the Russians managed to qualify for the quarterfinals, where they will play Serbia, due to their second place in the group.

    On their road to the next stage, the Russian team proved stronger than Argentine, South Korea and Cameroon.

        Российские волейболистки проиграли в Рио Бразилии и ждут жеребьевку плей-оффhttps://t.co/OK6zRvsPl5pic.twitter.com/RFoiGuvQbt (https://t.co/OK6zRvsPl5pic.twitter.com/RFoiGuvQbt)
        — Life | Новости (@lifenews_ru) 15 августа 2016 г.

    “Yes, it was our first late match at the tournament while Brazilian team always plays at this time, but it is not an excuse. We felt OK, we were simply struggling a lot, that’s why we lost,” Russian volleyball player Nataliya Goncharova told journalists.
    01:51 GMT

    Superstar sprinter Usain Bolt won gold in the men’s 100m with 9.81 seconds, leaving his American long-time nemesis Justin Gatlin in second place. The Jamaican remains undefeated at his favorite distance since the 2008 Beijing Olympics. Andre De Grasse from Canada reached the finish line third to claim bronze.
    READ MORE: Jamaica celebrates: Bolt beats Gatlin in 100m sprint to win Rio gold & 7th Olympic title

        Genio del atletismo mundial: Usain Bolt.😃☺😀 pic.twitter.com/1Jiw6xQnSO
        — Phillips Guerrero (@Phillipito17) 15 августа 2016 г.

    00:51 GMT

    British tennis player Andy Murray has clinched victory in a 4-hour epic battle with Argentinian Juan Martín del Potro. Murray, the world No. 2, became the first ever two-time individual Olympic champion in tennis history. Murray won his first Olympic gold at the 2012 London Olympics.

        #GBR's @andy_murray takes #Gold and becomes the 1st #Tennis player to successfully defend #Olympics Single's Title pic.twitter.com/lO4FT0LsuO
        — Rio 2016 (@Rio2016_en) August 15, 2016

    Kei Nishikori from Japan beat Rio Olympics men’s doubles champion Rafael Nadal to claim bronze.

        Prize ceremony for @andy_murray@keinishikori and @delpotrojuan 3 unbelievable tennis players 👍🏻 pic.twitter.com/5zP4Fvw4Bj
        — Robin Söderling (@RSoderling) August 15, 2016

    14 August 2016
    23:58 GMT

    Two different DNAs were allegedly found in Russian long jumper Darya Klishina’s urine sample, ARD television journalist Hajo Seppelt tweeted. In addition, some of the bottles with Klishina’s samples had scratches on them, which prompted a last-minute suspension of the athlete, he claimed.

    The final decision on Klishina, who appealed the ban to CAS, is expected to be made Monday morning.

    “The issue is being considered. The decision is likely to be announced on Monday morning,” a CAS spokesman told R-Sport.

    14 August 2016
    22:26 GMT

    Russian wrestler Roman Vlasov became Olympic champion in the Greco-Roman wrestling 75kg division, bringing Russia its ninth gold in Rio. The reigning world and 2012 Olympics champion defeated Mark Overgaard Madsen from Denmark 3-1. South Korea’s Kim Hyeon-Woo and Iranian Saeid Abdevali beat their respective opponents from Croatia and Hungary in matches for bronze.

        Борец греко-римского стиля Роман Власов завоевал ДЕВЯТОЕ золото ОИ в категории до 75 кг.
        БРАВО РОМАН!
        ВПЕРЕД РОССИЯ! pic.twitter.com/C39QHr3MIy
        — Игорь Абрамов (@AbramovDeputat) 14 августа 2016 г.

    21:53 GMT

    Russian track cyclist Denis Dmitriev won bronze in the men’s sprint. The 30-year old was faster than Australian Matthew Glaetzer in two races. Defending Olympic champion Jason Kenny from Britain claimed another gold at Rio, beating his compatriot Callum Skinner in an all-British final.

        Россиянин Денис #Дмитриев выиграл «бронзу» на Олимпиаде в Рио в велотреке: https://t.co/p58ej4eMxOpic.twitter.com/QQ5YFzIkma (https://t.co/p58ej4eMxOpic.twitter.com/QQ5YFzIkma)
        — Комсомольская правда (@kpru) 14 августа 2016 г.

    21:50 GMT

    Russian sailor Stefania Elfutina brought Russia its 9th bronze medal. The 19-year old Olympic debutant and two-time junior world champion scored 69 points in women’s RS:X windsurfing race. Charline Picon from France became Olympic champion finishing ahead of Chinese Chen Peina.

        19-летняя Стефания Елфутина (@BelayaAkula) завоевала вторую медаль в истории парусного спорта России - бронза pic.twitter.com/PwbLALDmb3
        — Йод (@YodNews) 14 августа 2016 г.

    18:45 GMT

    All-around artistic gymnastics champion Simone Biles has won her third gold medal at the Rio Olympics as she triumphed in the vault final.

    The American beat world champion Maria Paseka of Russia with a score of 15.966 from her two vaults, with the bronze going to Giulia Steingruber of Switzerland.

        Ура! Мария Пасека! Медаль! Серебро! pic.twitter.com/pwDZDNqVlv
        — Konstantin Karasik (@KarasikKostya) 14 августа 2016 г.

    Uzbekistan's Oksana Chusovitina, bidding to become the oldest ever gymnast to win an Olympic medal at the age of 41, finished seventh out of the eight finalists.

        .@Simone_Biles (#USA) just won women's vault in #ArtisticGymnastics with a score of 15.966! Congrats! #Olympicspic.twitter.com/1enZ1Jo9zl
        — Olympics (@Olympics) August 14, 2016

    13:53 GMT

    Russian Sports Minister Vitaly Mutko said on Sunday that the suspension of long jumper Darya Klishina at the Rio Games may not be the “last provocation” against Russian athletes, TASS reported.

    Klishina was banned from competing at the Olympic Games just a day after she landed in Rio de Janeiro.

        #IAAF confirms Rio ban on Russian long jumper #Klishinahttps://t.co/xfOPhv76JO#Rio2016
        — RT Sport (@rtsportnews) August 13, 2016

    “I must say, this may be not the last provocation,” said Mutko.

    “They [IAAF] have allowed her, insisted she is allowed, the International Olympic Committee confirmed she is allowed.”

    “Those are certain provocations, which are made intentionally.”

    “Their target is Russian sport now, and, besides, this is supported informationally,” added Mutko.
    04:51 GMT

    02:20 GMT

        And just like that @TeamUSA take the 4x100 Medley #Gold making @MichaelPhelps' last race epic #USApic.twitter.com/IW02nWeQAg
        — Rio 2016 (@Rio2016_en) August 14, 2016

        That's it. Michael Phelps goes out with gold in the 4x100 m medley relay.
        Final career total: 28 medals (23 gold) pic.twitter.com/6BtgS9uYAz
        — ThePostGame.com (@ThePostGame) August 14, 2016

    01:37 GMT

        #ITA takes the #Gold as Gregorio Paltrinieri wins the Men’s 1500m Freestyle final! 👏🏼👏🏼 #Swimmingpic.twitter.com/KXzujeV5Ni
        — Rio 2016 (@Rio2016_en) August 14, 2016

    01:34 GMT

        What a thriller!@Mo_Farah wins 10,000m Olympic #gold in 27:05.17 despite an early fall.#Athletics#Rio2016pic.twitter.com/HCTx8koDTH
        — IAAF (@iaaforg) August 14, 2016

    13 August 2016
    23:50 GMT

    The US national team has won its 1,000th gold medal in the history of the Summer Olympics with a victory in the women’s 4x100m medley relay. Kathleen Baker, Lilly King, Dana Vollmer and Simone Manuel touched down first at 3.53.13, almost two seconds ahead of Australian team with 3.55.00. Denmark took bronze, clocking in at 3.55.01. The Russian team finished sixth with 3.55.66.

[Lots more]

It is a sports report, and August 14th doesn't claim "that 9/11 was an inside job", it doesn't mention 9/11 at all.

The RT video was re-posted at Youtube on the channel topinfopost on Apr 21, 2016:

Quote
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9MBi-W-JtI&feature=youtu.be
9 11 OPERATION GLADIO
topinfopost
topinfopost
3,041
203,476 views
Published on Apr 21, 2016

https://www.facebook.com/anonews.co (https://www.facebook.com/anonews.co)

    Category
        News & Politics
    License
        Standard YouTube License

This is a cheap trick by forbiddenknowledgetv.net to dredge up the original RT report again, using a copy of the original RT video, uploaded by "topinfopost" aka "anonews.co" 4 months ago.

The video fails to make any mention of the fact that WTC 7 was built on top of two other buildings of differing height and spanning a road, so was an architectural/structural mess.  It also fails to mention that at temperatures that CAN be achieved by jet fuel, steel doesn't melt but it loses its strength/temper and bends.  It also fails to mention that thermite wouldn't manage to sever all the columns at exactly the same time, so wouldn't bring the building down in its own footprint, or that it would take months to set up.  In other words, the video doesn't try and give a balanced view of the facts.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Surly1 on August 21, 2016, 05:28:42 PM

This is a cheap trick by forbiddenknowledgetv.net to dredge up the original RT report again, using a copy of the original RT video, uploaded by "topinfopost" aka "anonews.co" 4 months ago.

The video fails to make any mention of the fact that WTC 7 was built on top of two other buildings of differing height and spanning a road, so was an architectural/structural mess.  It also fails to mention that at temperatures that CAN be achieved by jet fuel, steel doesn't melt but it loses its strength/temper and bends.  It also fails to mention that thermite wouldn't manage to sever all the columns at exactly the same time, so wouldn't bring the building down in its own footprint, or that it would take months to set up.  In other words, the video doesn't try and give a balanced view of the facts.

One wonders why forbiddenknowledge would use a phony URL.

Nothing from you about the merits of the video. Or the likelihood that THREE buildings would fall into their own footprint without benefit of controlled demolition.
WTC7 was hit by nothing, but it too fell into its own footprint, whatever its architectural shortcomings.

OF COURSE the video doesn't give what you might consider a "balanced view." Your so-called balance is all over mass media, and what is by now the official history of the Big Lie.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Palloy on August 21, 2016, 06:33:44 PM
Quote
WTC7 was hit by nothing

I recall that one version of the story is that an engine from one plane that hit WTC-1 or 2 hit WTC-7 on the sixth (?) floor, where the fuel tank for the central heating system was located, and the pumps for the sprinkler system.  I don't remember who gave that version, or whether it fits with "the facts", but it does suggest how there could have been a lot of fuel around and no sprinklers to put the fire out.

The other thing is the question of how big a catastrophe "they" would have had to plan to be big enough to warrant attacking Afghanistan.  Did some people really sit around a table and decide that WTC-1, WTC-2, the Pentagon, and White House wasn't enough, and they needed to blow up WTC-7 as well?  I would have thought that simply intercepting an Al Qaeda terrorist team at the airport would have been enough of an excuse.
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: Surly1 on August 22, 2016, 03:53:47 AM
Quote
WTC7 was hit by nothing

I recall that one version of the story is that an engine from one plane that hit WTC-1 or 2 hit WTC-7 on the sixth (?) floor, where the fuel tank for the central heating system was located, and the pumps for the sprinkler system.  I don't remember who gave that version, or whether it fits with "the facts", but it does suggest how there could have been a lot of fuel around and no sprinklers to put the fire out.

We are told that WTC 7 came down primarily due to fire. Some argue fire was exacerbated by diesel stored on site. This was the first time in history that a steel-framed high-rise had collapsed due to fire. Two TV networks announced the collapse prematurely.

The other thing is the question of how big a catastrophe "they" would have had to plan to be big enough to warrant attacking Afghanistan.  Did some people really sit around a table and decide that WTC-1, WTC-2, the Pentagon, and White House wasn't enough, and they needed to blow up WTC-7 as well?  I would have thought that simply intercepting an Al Qaeda terrorist team at the airport would have been enough of an excuse.

Tenants included Salomon Smith Barney, the Internal Revenue Service, Department of Defense, Central Intelligence Agency. Supposedly The Collapse of WTC 7 resulted in a wholesale loss of documents affecting pending investigations, including Enron.

Interestingly, Mayor Rudy 9-11's Office of Emergency Management command center was located on the 23rd floor. This floor received 15 million dollars worth of renovations, including independent and secure air and water supplies, and bullet and bomb resistant windows. Curious that on the day of the attack, Guiliani and his entourage set up shop in a different HQ, abandoning the special bunker designed precisely for such an event. Just another lucky coincidence.
Title: What is a Conspiracy Theory? What is the Truth?
Post by: RE on August 29, 2016, 03:13:31 PM
http://www.globalresearch.ca/what-is-a-conspiracy-theory-what-is-the-truth/5429344 (http://www.globalresearch.ca/what-is-a-conspiracy-theory-what-is-the-truth/5429344)

What is a Conspiracy Theory? What is the Truth?
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, August 27, 2016
Theme: Media Disinformation


(http://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/end-game-chess.jpg)
First published in February 2015

Obama is on a hot war footing. Western civilization is allegedly “threatened by the Islamic State”. 

 The “Global War on Terrorism” is  heralded as a humanitarian endeavor.

We have a “Responsibility to Protect”. Humanitarian warfare is the solution.

Evil folks are lurking. ‘Take ‘em out”, said George W. Bush.

(http://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/conspiracy.jpg)
The Western media is beating the drums of war. Obama’s military agenda is supported by a vast propaganda apparatus.

One of the main objectives of war propaganda is to “fabricate an enemy”. As the political legitimacy of the Obama Administration falters, doubts regarding the existence of this “outside enemy”, namely Al Qaeda and its network of (CIA sponsored) affiliates  must be dispelled.

The purpose is to tacitly instil, through repeated media reports, ad nauseam, within people’s inner consciousness, the notion that Muslims constitute a threat to the security of the Western World. 

Humanitarian warfare is waged on several fronts: Russia,  China and the Middle East are currently the main targets.

Xenophobia and the Military Agenda

The wave of xenophobia directed against Muslims which has swept across Western Europe is tied into geopolitics. It is part of a military agenda. It consists in demonizing the enemy.

    Muslim countries possess more than 60 percent of total oil reserves.  In contrast, the United States of America has barely 2 percent of total oil reserves. Iraq has five times more oil than the United States. (See Michel Chossudovsky, The “Demonization” of Muslims and the Battle for Oil, Global Research, Jannuary 4, 2007).

A large share of the World’s oil lies in Muslim lands. The objective of the US led war is to steal and appropriate those oil reserves. And to achieve this objective, these countries  are targeted: war, covert ops, economic destabilization, regime change.

The American Inquisition

A consensus building process to wage war is similar to the Spanish inquisition. It requires social subordination, the political consensus cannot be questioned. In its contemporary version, the inquisition requires and demands submission to the notion that war is a means to spreading Western values and democracy.

A good versus evil dichotomy prevails. We must go after the bad guys.

War is peace.

The ‘big lie’ has now becomes the truth … and the truth has become a ‘conspiracy theory’.

Those who are committed to the Truth are categorized as “Terrorists”.

According to Paul Craig Roberts (2011), the conspiracy theory concept “has undergone Orwellian redefinition”…

A “conspiracy theory” no longer means an event explained by a conspiracy.  Instead, it now means any explanation, or even a fact, that is out of step with the government’s explanation and that of its media pimps….

In other words, as truth becomes uncomfortable for government and its Ministry of Propaganda, truth is redefined as conspiracy theory, by which is meant an absurd and laughable explanation that we should ignore.

Fiction becomes fact.

Investigative journalism has been scrapped.

Factual analysis of social, political and economic issues is a conspiracy theory because it challenges a consensus which is based on a lie.

What is the Truth

The real threat to global security emanates from the US-NATO-Israel alliance, yet realities in an inquisitorial environment are turned upside down: the warmongers are committed to peace, the victims of war are presented as the protagonists of war.

The homeland is threatened.

The media, intellectuals, scientists and the politicians, in chorus, obfuscate the unspoken truth, namely that the US-NATO led war destroys humanity.

When the lie becomes the truth there is no turning backwards.

When war is upheld as a humanitarian endeavor, Justice and the entire international legal system are turned upside down: pacifism and the antiwar movement are criminalized. Opposing the war becomes a criminal act. Meanwhile, the war criminals in high office have ordered a witch hunt against those who challenge their authority.

The Big Lie must be exposed for what it is and what it does.

It sanctions the indiscriminate killing of men, women and children.

It destroys families and people. It destroys the commitment of people towards their fellow human beings.

It prevents people from expressing their solidarity for those who suffer. It upholds war and the police state as the sole avenue.

It destroys both nationalism and internationalism.

Breaking the lie means breaking a criminal project of global destruction, in which the quest for profit is the overriding force.

This profit driven military agenda destroys human values and transforms people into unconscious zombies.

Let us reverse the tide.

Challenge the war criminals in high office and the powerful corporate lobby groups which support them.

Break the American inquisition.

Undermine the US-NATO-Israel military crusade.

Close down the weapons factories and the military bases.

Bring home the troops.

Members of the armed forces should disobey orders and refuse to participate in a criminal war.
The original source of this article is Global Research
Copyright © Prof Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, 2016
Title: Re: What is a Conspiracy Theory? What is the Truth?
Post by: Surly1 on August 30, 2016, 03:14:10 AM
http://www.globalresearch.ca/what-is-a-conspiracy-theory-what-is-the-truth/5429344 (http://www.globalresearch.ca/what-is-a-conspiracy-theory-what-is-the-truth/5429344)

What is a Conspiracy Theory? What is the Truth?

(http://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/conspiracy.jpg)//

When war is upheld as a humanitarian endeavor, Justice and the entire international legal system are turned upside down: pacifism and the antiwar movement are criminalized. Opposing the war becomes a criminal act. Meanwhile, the war criminals in high office have ordered a witch hunt against those who challenge their authority.

The Big Lie must be exposed for what it is and what it does.

It sanctions the indiscriminate killing of men, women and children.

It destroys families and people. It destroys the commitment of people towards their fellow human beings.

It prevents people from expressing their solidarity for those who suffer. It upholds war and the police state as the sole avenue.

It destroys both nationalism and internationalism.

Breaking the lie means breaking a criminal project of global destruction, in which the quest for profit is the overriding force.

This profit driven military agenda destroys human values and transforms people into unconscious zombies.

Let us reverse the tide.

Challenge the war criminals in high office and the powerful corporate lobby groups which support them.

Break the American inquisition.

Undermine the US-NATO-Israel military crusade.

Close down the weapons factories and the military bases.

Bring home the troops.

Members of the armed forces should disobey orders and refuse to participate in a criminal war.

One of his best ever.
Support the troops: bring them home.
Title: 9-11 Toronto Hearings: Video Trailer: 10 years of Deception
Post by: RE on September 10, 2016, 05:38:29 PM
http://www.youtube.com/v/1rSJZqMwNoY
Title: 9/11 and the Global War on Terrorism: Michel Chossudovsky
Post by: RE on September 10, 2016, 10:24:35 PM
Hard to believe 15 years have past since 9-11.   I was still trucking then, on the road in TN when I heard about it on the radio while in a rest stop on the I-40.  I drove up the road a ways to a truckstop, pretty much just in time to see the Towers come crashing down, although it may have been video repeats by the time I got there, not sure. It was a Love's Truckstop as I recall.

Life over the road changed drastically after that day.  Freight dropped off the map, there were random stops on the roads, and yours truly had an assault rifle pointed at him at the Canadian border.

I doubt we will ever have the real answers to this, anymore than we will ever have the real answers to the JFK assassination.  But it will certainly remain a topic of debate until the Internet Goes Dark.  This one has legs!

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/fwfIRCwoqPo

Video: 9/11 and the Global War on Terrorism: Michel Chossudovsky on GRTV
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky and James Corbett
Global Research, September 10, 2016
Region: USA
Theme: 9/11 & 'War on Terrorism'

As we reach the 15th anniversary of 9/11, the establishment is attempting to derail 9/11 truth with disinformation about Saudi Arabia.

But as Prof Michel Chossudovsky of Global Research  points out, if we ever hope to derail the never-ending war on terror, we must be absolutely clear that neither Al Qaeda nor Saudi Arabia could have pulled off the attacks of that day.
“The tragic events of September 11, 2001 constitute a fundamental landmark in American history,  a decisive watershed, a breaking point.
Millions of people have been misled regarding the causes and consequences of 9/11.
9/11 marks the onslaught of the “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT), used as a pretext and a justification by the US and its NATO allies to carry out a “war without borders”, a global war of conquest. 
A far-reaching overhaul of US military doctrine was launched in the wake of 9/11.
9/11 was also a stepping stone towards the relentless repeal of civil liberties, the militarization of law enforcement and the inauguration of “Police State USA”.

Michel Chossudovsky, 15 Years later, September 10, 2016

GRTV Video produced by James Corbett
Title: Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
Post by: reanteben on August 04, 2017, 07:58:09 PM
Reanteben,
The issue of all the details as to how the buildings were brought down is certainly worth study. Architects and Engineers for 911 are doing just that.

(http://www.thenational.ae/deployedfiles/Assets/Richmedia/Image/SaxoPress/AD2011090927193-1-Architects%20&%20En.jpg)

However, I agree with Surly1 on this:
Quote
On one thing we can probably agree: that 9-11 was indeed PNAC's coveted "New Pearl Harbor," which led to total war on the Bill of Rights and the common people of the FSA. Would that the Fourth Amendment had as well-organized and well-funded a defense lobby as the Second.

Since your father was CIA, have you asked him what he thinks?
Was your father in field operations or based at Langley doing analysis?
The CIA is highly compartmentalized and operates on the "Need to know" principle so, unless your father was in a foreign country doing field work for the Directorate of Operations, he would not be any more knowledgeable about 9/11 than the average citizen. Then again, if he knew something that compromised the "company" (inside parlance for the CIA), he would never tell you. That's just the way they operate. Read "Neck Deep" by Robert Parry for some CIA modus operandi background. :(

While we are on the subject of 911, I'd like to mention a deliberate distraction that was put out there when people began questioning the wacky conspiracy theory the gooberment and media were shoving down our throats (19 punks with single engine Cessna flying skills did the whole caper).

A team of propagandists put out the bullshit that there were NO aircraft hitting the buildings. They claimed what we saw were holograms. They ran a credible scam but, like a magician, they made people look in the wrong place so as to confuse the issue. When someone wants you to "look" with just your eyes, you get fooled as long as you don't "look" with any other senses. It was really quite clever. People had figured out that the planes DID NOT bring down those towers.

So-o-o-o the propagandists, in an attempt to discredit the people alleging that the twin towers were destroyed by explosives, not airplanes, made the ridiculous argument that there were NO AIRPLANES!

(http://www.serendipity.li/wot/911_plane_03.jpg)
Reapeat after me: That's a hologram, not an airplane, you are getting very sleepy. When you awake you will remember that Slavery is Freedom


Of course there was an army of naysayers on the internet saying how the Arab baddies were out to get us and doubting the gooberment was treason or "unpatriotic". The line about "we must trust the government because Bush and Cheney know things we don't" by people like Pat Boone was echoed throughout the internet as well. The propagandists were working the "problem" of people out there using critical thinking skills from several directions.

When I read the hologram hypothesis, I thought about it. I fell in to the trap because I watched those buildings come down like they were riding a down elevator. It was obvious the aircraft didn't do that because the top parts would have fallen asymmetrically rather than in their footprint. As a matter of fact, the first building DID lurch a little (about 15 feet) to one side before it came down minutes later. I believe the boyz running the charges from building seven said we better bring this sucker down NOW before the top 20 something floors or so lurch off to the side and take out some buildings we don't want taken out.

Back to the hologram hypothesis. I saw the accidental 911 documentary from the French Camera team that had been working with some Fire Department nearby. They heard the noise and filmed the first impact. Then it hit me. The NOISE. Sound waves from a moving jet aircraft produce a Doppler effect. It is impossible for a hologram to generate a Doppler effect ALL OVER NEW YORK CITY. Sure, you can do it in a movie theater but that was not a movie theater. Just as you hear the sound pitch of an approaching object climb, so you hear it descend as the Doppler effect spaces the sound waves farther and farther apart. You can clearly here the sound of the engines of a jet moving AWAY from the camera's position as it approaches the building.

The hologram hypothesis is disinformation and FURTHER PROOF that the oil oligarchy that runs the USA will spend money, a lot of money, to pull the wool over people's eyes.

Reanteben, it has been 11 years. There is only one thing you or anyone else needs to ask about 9/11.

CUI BONO?

I agree with Surly1 as to who benefited.

thanks, agelbert.
in the dustification thread I posted a video of the top of tower 2 clearly falling outside of the outer walls

(before dustifying), which is contrary to what you stated. why don't you check it out (again?) and tell me what you see:






http://www.doomsteaddiner.org/forum/index.php?topic=277.msg1915#msg1915 (http://www.doomsteaddiner.org/forum/index.php?topic=277.msg1915#msg1915)

what do you think of my physical analysis in the thread, including the plane-into-building  dynamicI consider it CFS but i'd prefer to be stood corrected because i'd rather the Conduits fail than the permanent oligarchy parlay their shit into a hunger games control system (HGCS).

my conception of the hologram theory (which i'm open to) is inclusive of the doppler effect heard in the frenchy documentary (illuminati mockumentary?  check out this article by dirdy birdy's alter:  http://www.serendipity.li/wot/naudet/raphael.htm (http://www.serendipity.li/wot/naudet/raphael.htm)) because the a missile with 3D projectors would also create a doppler effect. so what was it, exactly, that caused you to dismiss it as disinfo? what makes the hologram theory disinfo, in order to discredit by association the architects and engineers, as you suggest, instead of the architects and engineers narrative being disinfo so as to discredit the hologram theory? it seems to me that steering people away from ZPE weaponry would be more important than steering them away from conventional weaponry, because it's not like 40pc or whatever of the domestic pop aren't already disbelieving the warren commission 2.0. know what i'm saying?