Let's Face It We Were ALL Duped

Nothing is beyond belief in this world where so much is questionable. When all the powers that control this world are manipulators and deceivers of demonstrable skill, little will be proved one way or the other until a new power gains the stage that is willing to commit and break a few eggs in the process.

originally posted by: tommyjo

Why is this video still doing the rounds? You do realize that it is fake? Originally made in 2006 using stock footage from a helicopter. The fraudster inserted the "missile" footage into the stock helo footage.

See following links. Note original uploader who created the fake in 2006 and side by side footage demonstrating that the "missile" strike was inserted.

I was taught to question everything, especially the government.

That is what is scary about the movement.

For the movement not to apply the same scrutiny to themselves as they do for what they deem the official narrative and deem trolls is hypocritical.

For them not to police their own movement with the same determination as with the NIST, they will always be open to fraud by their weakness to embrace the next "smoking gun".

a reply to:

The biggest part of the entire day that immediately made me think the whole thing was an elaborate scheme of some sort was when the BBC reported that WTC 7 had collapsed, when it was clearly visible in the background of their reporting. It only collapsed sometime later.

When news is reported BEFORE it happens, it absolutely has to be a planned event, there's no other explanation.

1101">babybunnies

So a news organization getting a story wrong is proof of conspiracy ....?

Its called CONFUSION..... Its called CHAOS.......

BBC was quoting Reuters report, Reuters was in turn quoting a local source

For most of that afternoon word was being put out that WTC 7 was in danger of collapse

At 3PM FDNY ordered area around WTC 7 cleared and collapse zone established in anticipation of collapse

Somewhere along chain things got garbled,,,,,,

a r

Ever seen a fireman run into a furnace? Better question: Ever seen a fireman run into a furnace and then run back out alive?

eply to: Snarl

FDNY made a run at WTC 7 at about 11 AM, following collapse of both towers.

What they found was heavy structural damage on South face from impact of WTC 1

Also found no water pressure in building - standpipes and sprinklers dry as collapse of WTC 1/2 had cut the water mains

Fires were breaking out on numerous floors, small at first, but with no water were unable to fight them

Incident commanders pulled men out around 12:30 PM as with no water was too dangerous to operate inside building

Setup surveyor transit to monitor building conditions ( arriving from Collapse Unit Rescue 3) - by 2:30PM
could see 3 story bulge forming at SW corner of building

This is what convinced FDNY chief Nigro to order collapse zone around WTC 7

How do I know this...? Attended seminar 6 months after 9/11. One of the speakers was the INCIDENT COMMANDER
at WTC 7 (thats person in charge ) who described operation that day at WTC 7

The confusion stems from the fact WTC 7 was showing signs it was going to collapse. Firefighters knew the buildings was lost, so withdrew.

Numerous witnesses give testimony it was failing.

It has nothing to do with CD, but pulling firefighters to safety.

If the government just murdered thousands in the towers with first responders, why would a murderous government worry about and included firefighters in the plot.

It's a shame the movement is so blind to its own inconsistencies. The firefighters knew to pull from WTC 7, but let themselves die in the towers?

inthesetimes.com...

Jones continues: “The word ‘pull’ is industry jargon for taking a building down with explosives.” In fact, a Lexis Nexis search for a three-year period fails to find one American reference to “pull a building” without the preposition “down” when referring to intentional destruction. An alternative explanation would be that given the lack of water and the number of injured and missing firefighters, the NYFD decided to pull workers from Building 7 to concentrate on search and rescue at the fallen towers.

In the end, this kind of undermining of individual “facts,” although relatively easy, is irrelevant for those who base their beliefs on piles rather than chains of evidence.

But the work should be done. Pile conspiracies can be dangerous. Those who deny that HIV is responsible for AIDS, for example, have contributed to unnecessary infections and deaths.

And the 9/11 conspiracy hypotheses distract from the growing chain of evidence documenting how the Bush administration actually manipulated this country to war on a train of lies riding tracks of fear–cynically using the bodies of the 9/11 victims as fuel.

a reply to: AnkhMorpork

A better and realistic video. No propaganda, straight to the point, and all under 4 minutes.


9/11 Debunked: Controlled Demolition Not Possible
youtu.be...

"Multiple" impacts? Have you a source for that?

a reply to: FlyingFox

If you listen to the actual words, it does not say that WTC "was designed for multiple impacts", despite the title of the video.

originally posted by: neutronflux


I was taught to question everything, especially the government.

So why didn't you question the video that you posted? Even a simple search would have shown that you were naive and gullible to fall for a hoax.

a reply to: AnkhMorpork

The buildings were designed to withstand an impact from a 707 making a landing approach to a NY airport. That would be slower and with less fuel remaining on the aircraft than the 757, although it appears that fuel induced fires were not a design consideration. The buildings did remain standing even though the aircraft were much heavier and moving much faster than the design parameters.

a reply to: tommyjo

Ranting about a video you don't like and proving it's a hoax in a logical argument are two different items. Care to define your argument?

The video was short, simple, and to the point. Should be easy to debunk?

I know it's confusing for people used to seeing hours of nothing other than innuendo, sensationalism, videos / photos out of context, and with no real facts.

a reply to: tommyjo

How many views has loose change received?

But the videos of actual WTC steal recovery and inspection has not even been reviewed 3,000 times on YouTube?

Here, have some perspective of the efforts and human costs that went into recovering WTC remains, evidence, and personal effects.

To imply there was no real effort to recover evidence and treat the WTC debris as a crime scene is out of shear ignorance.


m.youtube.com...#

youtu.be...

youtu.be...

youtu.be...

youtu.be...

m.youtube.com...#

m.youtube.com...#

a reply to: searcherfortruth


No-one cares anymore and why should they???

IF it was a inside job then well done because they got away with it.

There is NOTHING you or anyone can do so move on....to something more interesting. Because I just do not care anymore.

I do not care about anything to do with the OS or the thruthers versions. All possible lies. From both sides.

a reply to: reboot23

Actually, there are lots of engineers that are not part of Richard Gauge's nonprofit clique that care very much. A group that is disappointed in the NIST only modeling for and up to a specific instance of collapse. Engineers that openly questioned NIST at NIST open events during the investigations. Engineers very disappointed in the chance of using 9/11 to further building safety more than it has. People that would have worked with Gauge, but .........

Gauge and AE911Truth are exactly guilty of the same accusations they level at NIST.

From the git go, it has to be A CLASSIC CD! AE911TRUTH really boxed themselves in with stating the only way the buildings fell at the witnessed speed was using classic CD to soften each building floor by floor.

Then the movement got uglier once there was no proof of CD. Thermite, fizzle no flash CD, Nukes, lasers, missiles, holograms, drones, dustification.

So many mistakes all around.

originally posted by: FlyingFox
If you listen to the actual words, it does not say that WTC "was designed for multiple impacts", despite the title of the video.

Also that man had nothing at all to do with the design or construction of the WTC...

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: tommyjo

Why is this video still doing the rounds? You do realize that it is fake? Originally made in 2006 using stock footage from a helicopter. The fraudster inserted the "missile" footage into the stock helo footage.

See following links. Note original uploader who created the fake in 2006 and side by side footage demonstrating that the "missile" strike was inserted.

I was taught to question everything, especially the government.

That is what is scary about the movement.

For the movement not to apply the same scrutiny to themselves as they do for what they deem the official narrative and deem trolls is hypocritical.

For them not to police their own movement with the same determination as with the NIST, they will always be open to fraud by their weakness to embrace the next "smoking gun".

You were taught to question everything? Good heavens man, you did not learn what you were taught, judging by your unquestioning belief in the Greatest Tale Ever Told, the official story of 911.

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: tommyjo

Why is this video still doing the rounds? You do realize that it is fake? Originally made in 2006 using stock footage from a helicopter. The fraudster inserted the "missile" footage into the stock helo footage.

See following links. Note original uploader who created the fake in 2006 and side by side footage demonstrating that the "missile" strike was inserted.

I was taught to question everything, especially the government.

That is what is scary about the movement.

For the movement not to apply the same scrutiny to themselves as they do for what they deem the official narrative and deem trolls is hypocritical.

For them not to police their own movement with the same determination as with the NIST, they will always be open to fraud by their weakness to embrace the next "smoking gun".

You were taught to question everything? Good heavens man, you did not learn what you were taught, judging by your unquestioning belief in the Greatest Tale Ever Told, the official story of 911.

Others of us were taught to follow the evidence. "Evidence" meaning real evidence; not innuendo, feelings, guesses, or wishful thinking. So far, there is no evidence for anything other than structural failure due to impact damage and fire.

a reply to: pteridine

Apart from the million tons on the Fresh Kills landfill.

a reply to: searcherfortruth

AND FURTHERMORE, THIS JUST IN>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SOME HAVE CONTINUED TO BE DUPED!