Let's Face It We Were ALL Duped

originally posted by: Blaine91555
ATTENTION:

Rude comments about each other and personal jabs are not tolerated in this forum. This is not the Mud Pit and you will be Posting Banned.

Keep the conversation to the topic and debate with evidence. If you can't do that, move on.

This will be the only warning.

Do not reply to this message.

I only wish to express my apologies to those I may have offended.

Season's greetings.


Thanks for the thread OP.

Excellent thread
I'm glad people are still willing to speak about it . why were the American people never allowed to see the Pentagon footage? All Americans should be outraged yet not shockingly aren't. They would rather their gubment explain it to them.

a reply to: searcherfortruth

I don't even believe a controlled demolition team could collapse the 2 towers---I'm still sticking to the Directed Energy Weapons theory

and my mega post just vanished whilst i tried to post. that is just plain odd. glitch? yeah right.

took me ages to write if i have the energy and time i shall try again another time to have my say.

originally posted by: superluminal11
a reply to: searcherfortruth

I don't even believe a controlled demolition team could collapse the 2 towers---I'm still sticking to the Directed Energy Weapons theory

The evidence is the buildings collapsed near free-fall speed. Buildings collapse this way during a controlled demolition. You would think the towers and WTC 7 would not have collapsed perfectly into the footprints. You would think columns would not all collapse synchronously. Especially WTC 7 where all 23 steel reinforced columns all collapsed at the same time. It's just not plausible for the entire building to collapse at free fall speed. Sorry, I just can't accept it.

In terms of energy weapons, we have no evidence such weapons exist. But we have plenty of video showing what controlled demolition looks like. When I watch the videos of the WTC buildings collapsing it looks like controlled demolition.

Taken from someone's blog post:

"Take, as an example, this question of how the explosives were planted. How could the security apparatus of the World Trade Center Complex, which was presumably highly sophisticated after the 1993 bombing, allow or not notice the laying of the explosives that supposedly felled the buildings? Well, upon investigating this security apparatus at the WTC, we quickly stumble into the fact that Marvin Bush, George W.'s younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom (now Stratesec), the very company in charge of security at the WTC in 2001. Again, it is important to note that the author is not making this up. "Marvin P. Bush, the president's younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport." And not to be outdone by this fact, we also learn that "from 1999 to January of 2002 (Marvin and George W.'s cousin) Wirt Walker III was the company's CEO.""

a reply to: superluminal11

The towers were built for the event. Explosives within the reinforced concrete infill panels in the core walls did much of the destruction. The various other methods also used created confusion amongst researchers.

Follow the money:

www.youtube.com...

What amazing coincidences!!!

originally posted by: muSSang
I love it how all of a sudden everyone's on here is a structural engineer haha.

I don't believe the narrative that's was told to us but I also don't make ludicrous claims without proof.

Its on video.

originally posted by: Nickn3
My friend, in your opening line:

"Never in the history of steel enforced buildings, has one of them ever collapsed due to structural damage from fire, EVER. "

You completely lost me. Fire brings down a metal building somewhere in the world about ever day. I am not saying that I swallowed the official story, but some of your blanket statements are just plane wrong. I have been a contractor for over 35 years and I have seen them fall. They fall from fire, they fall from being over loaded, and they fall from structural damage. In the case of the twin towers they suffered from all three.

I am suprised the towers stood as long as they did. I don't know about building 7.

In that case you should have thousands upon thousands of examples for us.

When are you going to post your first 50 for us ?

originally posted by: imjack
Notice him strike straight down with the molten steel, that is 300 Degrees hotter than Jet Fuel in the Engine?

What I noticed was from where he plucked that red-hot piece of steel?

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

Did we see firemen working their asses off at the WTC? Did we see living people jumping from the buildings? These things tell me that the interior temperatures of those building were a big FAT unknown. It's all Main Stream Media manipulation. It's all a controlled narrative. What we 'saw' cannot be disputed.

The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) states that the upper limit of human temperature tenability is 212°F, well below temperatures found in most significant structure fires that are beyond the growth (incipient) stage. In today’s fire environments, temperatures higher than 500°F can be easily obtained within three to four minutes. Flashover, which occurs at approximately 1,100°F, can develop well under five minutes.2 If a space isn’t tenable for firefighters, trapped victims aren’t likely to survive either.

The researchers concluded: “Thermal injury takes place quickly,” with death occurring at temperatures of 350°F within three minutes. The experiment notes that fire temperatures rise to more than 1,200°F within five minutes; therefore, the survival outcomes for victims are further limited.

Source If my link doesn't work for you, run a Google search with the phrase "can a human survive 350 degrees farenheit?" and look at the cached version of the Google link @ www.fireengineering.com

And as far as that dude's shop is concerned. Look around at the background. Is it a shop, or is it a stage?

Another really good 9/11 video:

www.youtube.com...

a reply to: fusiondoe


Something as big as this had to be well organised ,the end result was a war, that has never ended. I posted this in another thread but its relevant here. What you see is , what they want you to see. www.youtube.com...

So somebody the other day brought up 9/11 in casual conversion and I told then my honest assessment.
This is what I personally believe.
Rogue elements within the American, Israeli, Saudi Arbian and Pakistani governments, contributed to this complex op, I don't think the others new 100% what the other teams brought to the table until the event happened.

WTC 7 is the key....

And we may never know the whole truth, my guess someday somehow we might.

The alt-right generally believes that 9/11 was an inside op and their guy is in power so they my push him on it, who knows what Trump will do, he is unpredictable.

Most folk on this part of the forum would feel they were not duped, to this day the so called simulation by NIST to prove how the towers fell is still classified, we are NOT allowed to see their so called data and algorithms so they are are BS, the towers did all fall, maybe not exactly in to their own foot print (which is the part the believers love to use) but the point is that they ALL fell despite being fortified against a plane crash in to them.

No, I wasn't fooled, it stank to high heaven in every direction, the so called coincidences are so stacked high that you could more likely win the lottery 20 times in a row compared to the likelihood these coincidences were real. The excuses the so called report, all nonsense set to cover over the feeble story. The one that really gets me is that a lot of Americans still believe their own government would not do this to their own people, seriously people, apart from the fact that we KNOW for SURE they had planned to kill their own navy during the Gulf Of Tonkin incident just to shift power in the area should be all you need to know but still others refuse to accept that we as humans are just mere pawns to be used by the high and powerful in their games, we are worth NOTHING to them, they barely look after those in need, instead they fund war with a HUGE budget and its not a war to protect YOU.

The only thing we don't know for sure is who was in on it, the Saudi's, the Jews, who...That's the real bit we don't know but you can be 100% sure the US was complicit with it, there's far too many people suddenly unavailable, moved, killed, removed from standard duty and multiple other irregularities for them not to know.

There is however a lot that can be explained but its so on the periphery of the main events that they are pointless to debate.

So yes, some were fooled but many smelt the stink straight away..

Paul...

PS, please please don't use Popular Mechanics as a fact check, lots of the so called solutions are warped and proved unsound by actual experts and lets not forget that Popular Mechanics is media owned..Fact enough..

Btw, Merry Xmas folks...

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: Nickn3
My friend, in your opening line:

"Never in the history of steel enforced buildings, has one of them ever collapsed due to structural damage from fire, EVER. "

You completely lost me. Fire brings down a metal building somewhere in the world about ever day. I am not saying that I swallowed the official story, but some of your blanket statements are just plane wrong. I have been a contractor for over 35 years and I have seen them fall. They fall from fire, they fall from being over loaded, and they fall from structural damage. In the case of the twin towers they suffered from all three.

I am surprised the towers stood as long as they did. I don't know about building 7.

If you see an image of the destruction from above, it becomes clear why building 7 fell. It was in the impact zone of a colossal debris field. Multiple buildings were gutted -- buildings no one ever mentions -- because ten ton bombs of metal and concrete rained hellfire on them from above.

Building 7 was weakened enough that it fell eventually.

All of the other buildings were damaged at least 10 times worse...were closer...and never fell...and building 7 had just been "strengthened" and was the strongest of all.

originally posted by: Nickn3
a reply to: Greggers

I am not surprised, building construction usually is based on a latticework steel structure. If the lattice is damaged it will fail under its own weight.
If one I beam twist or bends from side loading it could loose 90% of its structural integrity, thus creating additional stress on additional framing.

How does the lack of debris...pile no taller than a man and thousands of videos of the chunks of the building never hitting the ground factor into all that?

Steel does not vanish into thin air because fires and gravity.

a reply to: stealthyaroura

It happens.