Are you serious? Mainstream BS (BBC)

I will just leave the link as it pretty much sums up the Mainstream and their chosen side when it comes to a Global takeover...

I will say you would'nt get this much attention and support as an anti-offical persona....

www.bbc.co.uk...

One of the comments that annoyed me the most though:

"Ten years on from the attacks which killed nearly 3,000 people, conspiracy theories have continued to evolve. They now question every aspect of the official account, despite the fact that every year has provided more witnesses and evidence to bolster the official explanation." - seriously I would say its the opposite. I would say the offical story has very little plausible fact left to offer.

"Nothing is taken on trust about 9/11. If an eyewitness, an official or an expert counters a conspiracy theory, their motives are immediately questioned". = No one trusts the Goverment? Surprise, surprise...

Notice they gloss over anything worthwhile. The improbable physics, the legitimate witness's who spoke about explosions on lobby floor eg. John Shrowder(Correct spelling?), the 3rd tower #7, the fast removal of debris - mainly steel = a breach of federal law.

The 4 Almost indestructible black boxes never found; William cooper who predicted exact events less than 3 months prior - Found dead 2 months afterwards; Wally miller stating that in pensilvania crashsite no blood, no bodies, crash site looked like someone had dug a pit and dumped scrap metal inside it - he of course later did a complete U-turn for no apparent reason; The lack of investigation (why the F would'nt you investigate a terrorist attack of that magnitude until people pressure you into it 441 days later?); The team who worked on 9/11 commission claiming "their investigation was being tampered with by Gov" and "investigation was comprimised".

Anyway the list goes on and on with both the big and small, but of course none of that means anything because

"The myriad of conspiracy theories, on the other hand, are rarely spelt out in great detail - perhaps because when they are, they have been quickly debunked. Nor is a motive usually explained". == Errrr you what? He has obviously never seen a 31/2 hour documentary on this stuff plus many hours of others like the rest of us. == No motive? Plenty of motives have been offered. Most theories are centralised on a motive.

Wow

VLR VLR

a reply to: RevolutionAnon

Oooooooh that last bit fking SUCKS. I hate MSM, we all buy it, read it, and repeat it like it's fact, every.... Single..... Day. We are so dumb, it seems like we're never gonna wake up. I don't want to use the word sheeple, but I'm going to use the word sheeple.

a reply to: OpenEars123

Lol. I feel Sheeple is relevant.

a reply to: RevolutionAnon

Sorry dude I forgot I flagged you and tried again, it then took the flag away and said I failed. Bit rude really! Anyway I flagged you and meant it, and they can STICK IT if they won't let me correct it lol

originally posted by: RevolutionAnon
a reply to: OpenEars123

Lol. I feel Sheeple is relevant.

Yeah I feel it's been overly abused on here through the years, but yes, I think it is relevant in this post too.
Cheers bro

a reply to: RevolutionAnon

Why would anyone take the BBC seriously these days? I mean this is classic hypocrisy coming from the station that said building 7 had collapsed...20 minutes before building 7 collapsed?

The BBC (as well as all MSM outlets) do not deliver truth - they deliver agenda diatribe designed to control thoughts and ideas and create dissent among populations.

9/11 was an inside job, by design in taking advantage of the warning signs and allowing the events of that day to transpire. Who gave NORAD the stand-down order. Osama Bin Laden named within an hour as the main perpetrator. Patriot Act ushered in and the ink was still wet. Afghanistan attacked, pipeline plans went ahead. Department of Homeland Security and Transport Safety Authority created. Haliburton got a military escort into Iraq.

These, as well as many other signs, point to the event being the cornerstone to usher in the new world order, the global rise of Islamic terrorism and latest status of the current refugee crisis in Europe, just to name a few, can all be linked back to the consequential effect resultant from that fateful day.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

I dont take the BBC seriously....

Just thought some people would be interested to hear such blatant lies being said from someone with an obvious lack of experience when it comes to conspiracy "theorists".

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: RevolutionAnon

Why would anyone take the BBC seriously these days? I mean this is classic hypocrisy coming from the station that said building 7 had collapsed...20 minutes before building 7 collapsed?

The BBC (as well as all MSM outlets) do not deliver truth - they deliver agenda diatribe designed to control thoughts and ideas and create dissent among populations.

9/11 was an inside job, by design in taking advantage of the warning signs and allowing the events of that day to transpire. Who gave NORAD the stand-down order. Osama Bin Laden named within an hour as the main perpetrator. Patriot Act ushered in and the ink was still wet. Afghanistan attacked, pipeline plans went ahead. Department of Homeland Security and Transport Safety Authority created. Haliburton got a military escort into Iraq.

These, as well as many other signs, point to the event being the cornerstone to usher in the new world order, the global rise of Islamic terrorism and latest status of the current refugee crisis in Europe, just to name a few, can all be linked back to the consequential effect resultant from that fateful day.

Thank you for elaborating, and sharing what we agree with. It's all a load of premeditated BS. And us suckers but into it.
I'm ashamed

a reply to: OpenEars123

Lol, Much appreciated and no problem. Dont ever...let them monitor your right to flag.

originally posted by: RevolutionAnon
a reply to: Sublimecraft

I dont take the BBC seriously....

Just thought some people would be interested to hear such blatant lies being said from someone with an obvious lack of experience when it comes to conspiracy "theorists".

Us/we conspiracy theorists are on the ball (most of the time) the MSM can't handle the truth, so mock is to the sheeple. It's a pretty good tact in their favour, but more and more and more of us are researching real truth now, and they are fking worried believe me!

originally posted by: OpenEars123

originally posted by: RevolutionAnon
a reply to: Sublimecraft

I dont take the BBC seriously....

Just thought some people would be interested to hear such blatant lies being said from someone with an obvious lack of experience when it comes to conspiracy "theorists".

Us/we conspiracy theorists are on the ball (most of the time) the MSM can't handle the truth, so they mock the sheeple. It's a pretty good tact in their favour, but more and more and more of us are researching the real truth behind the MSM now, and they are fking worried believe me!

a reply to: RevolutionAnon

What do you expect from the BBC who brought you this?

a reply to: RevolutionAnon

Unfourtunatley many people (by many i mean majority ofc) buy into this rubbish. It does make me laugh when an anti-truther tells you your theories are wrong then when asked for a reason why they quote MSM or Gov explainations word for word.... Why accept a leaders rule when you can question it. ==Sheeple WakeUp VLR

a reply to: Swills

But i thought everything they said was 100% truth? They promised.....

originally posted by: RevolutionAnon
a reply to: RevolutionAnon

Unfourtunatley many people (by many i mean majority ofc) buy into this rubbish. It does make me laugh when an anti-truther tells you your theories are wrong then when asked for a reason why they quote MSM or Gov explainations word for word.... Why accept a leaders rule when you can question it. ==Sheeple WakeUp VLR

Fricking right dude, couldn't have put it better myself.
Wake the fk up! And tell your friends and family to do the same!

originally posted by: RevolutionAnon
a reply to: Swills

But i thought everything they said was 100% truth? They promised.....

Hehe your sarcasm is duly noted and welcomed. False promises on a daily basis by the man who runs your country, and tells the MSM what they can say.
It's all utter faeces.

a reply to: OpenEars123

This world is screwed up. One of the biggest criminal organizations in the world running everything important from Armys to Finance to Media. People who seem to think "this" Election will make a difference. UK prime ministers are completely worthless, Nigel is the closest thing to a change we have but I'd put money on him following the World Agenda. Americas last president was JFK as far as I'm concerned. Only one worthy of having that title and when Americans come to their sense they should erase the latest ones from presidential history.

So where does that leave us. Revolution? Lets hope so.

originally posted by: RevolutionAnon
a reply to: OpenEars123

This world is screwed up. One of the biggest criminal organizations in the world running everything important from Armys to Finance to Media. People who seem to think "this" Election will make a difference. UK prime ministers are completely worthless, Nigel is the closest thing to a change we have but I'd put money on him following the World Agenda. Americas last president was JFK as far as I'm concerned. Only one worthy of having that title and when Americans come to their sense they should erase the latest ones from presidential history.

So where does that leave us. Revolution? Lets hope so.

Revolution is actually an intelligent option. We can't trust anyone in power, ever. And if we do get a good one, well he'll just end up like JFK. So fuggit, a revolution 'could' be the answer. I'd like to look into some other options first, but revolution could also be inevitable.
Good post, honest

a reply to: OpenEars123

Honestly that is the truth. Whether a president is still alive or not is almost a concrete way to tell whose side they are on these decades. I'm British but JFK one of my hero's without a doubt. Those who know the real story know he died trying to change the world. His family are worth a mention of Honour aswell, sad but not surprising they met the same fate. Well except his father, wouldnt put him in the same "Good Men" Group....

But remember..it was one assassin...who was killed before trial....then came back from the dead....and killed kennedys brother...fact....

a reply to: RevolutionAnon

13. Were the basic principles of conservation of momentum and energy satisfied in NIST’s analyses of the structural response of the towers to the aircraft impact and the fires?
Yes. The basic principles of conservation of momentum and conservation of energy were satisfied in these analyses.
In the case of the aircraft impact analyses, which involved a moving aircraft (velocity) and an initially stationary building, the analysis did, indeed, account for conservation of momentum and energy (kinetic energy, strain energy).
After each tower had finished oscillating from the aircraft impact, the subsequent degradation of the structure involved only minute (essentially zero) velocities. Thus, a static analysis of the structural response and collapse initiation was appropriate. Since the velocities were zero and since momentum is equal to mass times velocity, the momentum terms also equaled zero and therefore dropped out of the governing equations. The analyses accounted for conservation of energy.

www.nist.gov...

I would ask the BBC what is the official story regarding the disintegration of the WTC towers? How can we agree or disagree if there isn't an official story?

(Hint for those who are confused. They don't mean they didn't use the laws of physics in their analysis of the disintegration of the buildings. They didn't investigate the disintegration of the buildings.)

We want a scientific study of the photographic and video evidence showing the disintegration of the buildings, coupled with a respectful study of the remains of the buildings on the Fresh Kills landfill. An official investigation into the disintegration of the buildings. There hasn't been one yet. There has been no official study of the evidence that shows the explosives inside the core walls detonating.

22. Did the NIST investigation look for evidence of the WTC towers being brought down by controlled demolition? Was the steel tested for explosives or thermite residues?
NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel.
The responses to previous questions demonstrate why NIST concluded that there were no explosives or controlled demolition involved in the collapses of the WTC towers.
As for thermite (a mixture of powdered or granular aluminum metal and powdered iron oxide that burns at extremely high temperatures when ignited), it burns slowly relative to explosive materials and would require several minutes in contact with a massive steel section to heat it to a temperature that would result in substantial weakening. Separate from the WTC towers investigation, NIST researchers estimated that at least 0.13 pounds of thermite would be required to heat each pound of a steel section to approximately 700 degrees Celsius (the temperature at which steel weakens substantially). Therefore, while a thermite reaction can cut through large steel columns, many thousands of pounds of thermite would need to have been placed inconspicuously ahead of time, remotely ignited, and somehow held in direct contact with the surface of hundreds of massive structural components to weaken the building. This makes it an unlikely substance for achieving a controlled demolition.
Analysis of the WTC steel for the elements in thermite/thermate would not necessarily have been conclusive. The metal compounds also would have been present in the construction materials making up the WTC towers, and sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard that was prevalent in the interior partitions.

There has been no official testing for explosives, and the emphasis is on the steel rather than the concrete, a simple distraction. The concrete debris is on the Fresh Kills landfill. The average concrete particle size indicates extraordinary demolition.

The Rockefeller brothers built the towers. The two largest parts of their grandfathers business are Exxon and Mobil. Exxon and Mobil joined together shortly before 9/11 then twice made more profit in a quarter than any corporation had ever made before, due to the rise in oil prices following the events of 9/11. There's a tiny bit of motive.

The private security world moved from being a small industry to a massive industry. Still didn't manage to stop Paris though.

There are many lost souls in the private security business who depend on the 9/11 lie for their income.