Let's Face It We Were ALL Duped

originally posted by: Kester
a reply to: pteridine

Apart from the million tons on the Fresh Kills landfill.

All that is evidence of gravity.
If you have ever been involved in demolitions, the trick is not to blow things "up." One kicks the slats out and gravity does the rest.

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 Originally made in 2006 using stock footage from a helicopter.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.

Like to present a more logical and scientific theory than inward bowing and collapse?

www.metabunk.org...

m.youtube.com...#

The day the truth movement died?

When it tried to push photos of vertical columns cut up by ground zero cleanup crews using thermal lances as proof of thermite.

People still get conned by those out of context photos.

The movement has gone down hill from then on.

a reply to: neutronflux

Apologies. I thought that I was replying to the poster that originally posted the fake Pentagon missile video.

originally posted by: pteridine

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 Originally made in 2006 using stock footage from a helicopter.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.

Ah! I see. You mean government approved, government issued evidence.

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

OK, got it! When it comes to evidence that you accept, you accept only government approved, government issued evidence.

Thank you for making that clear.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: pteridine

OK, got it! When it comes to evidence that you accept, you accept only government approved, government issued evidence.

Thank you for making that clear.

OK, got it! When it comes to "evidence" that you accept, you accept only idiot approved, youtube and blogger issued innuendo, doctored videos, feelings, misinterpretations, and fraudulent nonsense by A&E and cohorts.

Thank you for making that clear.

a reply to: pteridine

You're welcome! Now we understand each other--you're the gubmint man, I'm the AE911 Truth man.

How many Richard Gauge box boy talking points did the fire in Tehran debunk?

Tehran fire: Twenty firemen killed as high-rise collapses
www.bbc.co.uk...

The foremost talking point debunked! The potential energy from the upper 30 to 40 percent of a failing building is insufficient to destroy the remaining static 70 to 60 percent.

The other talking point. A building only can fall straight down due to CD. Just ask the two firefighters on extended ladder buckets that made it through the collapse in Tehran.

Far out! 15 years after WTC, a building in Iran built before WTC was built, collapsed after a fire.

This event--the collapse from fire of a modern high rise building--is truly unprecedented. It will be interesting to see how the investigation proceeds. Maybe the Iranian government will request assistance from NIST?

originally posted by: Salander
Far out! 15 years after WTC, a building in Iran built before WTC was built, collapsed after a fire.

This event--the collapse from fire of a modern high rise building--is truly unprecedented. It will be interesting to see how the investigation proceeds. Maybe the Iranian government will request assistance from NIST?

Actually, it isn't unprecedented. WTC 1, 2, and 7 also collapsed by fire.

a reply to: Salander
And you used a whole paragraph to say nothing?

Sorry, AE911Truth has been discredited and has even dropped the thermite theories!

a reply to: pteridine

No, they collapsed from other sources than fire. They collapsed so hard they blew massive structural pieces hundreds of feet sideways. There was fire, yes, but fire did not cause the collapses. Some kind of explosive was used, maybe several kinds.

a reply to: neutronflux

I'll grant you A&E is timid at times, but they understand they were deceived in the beginning. So that makes them OK by me.

They have not been discredited in the classical meaning of the word. They present a most distasteful truth, but it is truth nonetheless. As an adult, I prefer to know the truth. For that AE911 deserves credit and support.

a reply to: Salander

AE911TRUTH timid? The are over the top and care only about narratives that channel money to their org.

The claims of AE911TRUTH that there is credible evidence of demolitions at the Tehran Plasco Building collapse is laughable and right down fraudulent.

AE911TRUTH plays on people's misconceptions, not real documented events or captured evidence.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: pteridine

No, they collapsed from other sources than fire. They collapsed so hard they blew massive structural pieces hundreds of feet sideways. There was fire, yes, but fire did not cause the collapses. Some kind of explosive was used, maybe several kinds.

There was no evidence of explosives. If you have any, you should make it known.

What explosives were used and where were they placed?
Why did they not show up on video and audio? How were they triggered?
How were they set up to start from the impact area of the aircraft?
Why did they wait to set the explosives off from the top down? Wouldn't it have looked better to have the buildings collapse immediately?

a reply to: pteridine

There was ample evidence, scads of evidence, of the use of explosives. Much of it was revealed in FEMA photos taken in the days afterwards. Recall that FEMA was conducting a "training exercise" that day called Operation Tripod. How ironic.

Recall that the FEMA photographer is now "in exile" from the US in South America somewhere. Kinda like Snowden in exile in Russia for his truth telling.

Many of the FEMA photos released initially were soon withdrawn from public view, a move consistent with the rest of the coverup by the government.

Pulverization of concrete, massive pieces blown hundreds of feet, strangely burned vehicles in the hundreds, body parts in small pieces recovered, explosions reported by many present, including FDNY men.

One must open one's eyes and be curious to see it, but the evidence for explosions is abundant.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: pteridine

There was ample evidence, scads of evidence, of the use of explosives. Much of it was revealed in FEMA photos taken in the days afterwards. Recall that FEMA was conducting a "training exercise" that day called Operation Tripod. How ironic.

Recall that the FEMA photographer is now "in exile" from the US in South America somewhere. Kinda like Snowden in exile in Russia for his truth telling.

Many of the FEMA photos released initially were soon withdrawn from public view, a move consistent with the rest of the coverup by the government.

Pulverization of concrete, massive pieces blown hundreds of feet, strangely burned vehicles in the hundreds, body parts in small pieces recovered, explosions reported by many present, including FDNY men.

One must open one's eyes and be curious to see it, but the evidence for explosions is abundant.

Who has the FEMA photos and what do you think they revealed?

Falling 1000 feet would pulverize concrete and the construction of the buildings would cause the outer shell to peel away and fall well out from the base of the building. We have gone over this many times. There is no evidence of explosives [different from explosions of transformers and fire extinguishers, etc. and different from noise of collapse].

originally posted by: Salander

Recall that the FEMA photographer is now "in exile" from the US in South America somewhere. Kinda like Snowden in exile in Russia for his truth telling.

That would be Kurt Sonnenfeld and it appears he's not in exile, he's fighting extradition to face the charge of murdering his wife. I'm not trying to discredit him - he's doing a magnificent job of that all by himself. There's a lot to suggest he's using this claim of secret evidence as a bargaining tool to aid his quest for sanctuary from justice in the USA.

About 200Mb or more of his ground zero pics were made available for download many years ago before his personal scandals and I've seen them. All they show is pretty much what you'd expect to see after 2 of the world's tallest buildings in one of the densest populated cities were struck by high speed heavy airliners, burned and collapsed to the ground (horrific & spectacular but we have no precedent for such an event on this scale)

a reply to: Salander

But no demolitions shrapnel recovered with the bodies.

The "witnesses" that heard "explosions" were not injured by demolitions shrapnel. They suffered no hearing loss, nor had their ear drums ruptured from a blast.

The cars were close enough to get scorched by a blast, but were not flipped over, shredded by demolitions shrapnel, nor the spilled over blast didn't damage nearby buildings and injured witnesses.

And the most independently recorded building collapse never captured the sound waves of charges setting off, nor any evidence of resultant pressure waves.

Metallurgical failure analysis of fail floor connections and steel showed no signs of steel being worked on by demolitions.

There is no evidence of demolitions charges nor blasting charges!