It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Jury Trial !!! NO PLANES *ever* hitting *any* WTC & directed energy weapons used in WTC distruction.

page: 2
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by impactstyles
but my bro tells me for sure without a shadow of a doubt that it was a plane that crashed into the building.


Could you ask him about secondary explosions also? Thanks. I'd like to hear his testimony.




posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 01:40 PM
link   
Without a doubt. We have talked about 9/11 numerous times and just a few months ago had a very heated debate with my other 2 bros who live out of state, and although I dont think we specifically talked about secondary explosions (I will ask next time I see him most likely within the week) he is of the opinion that "something" other than those planes brought the towers down, hearing him explain the twisted metal and the collapse into its own footprint is really very eye opening, brings the whole thing to life as sad as that is to say.



posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by johnlear
 


Noted John. To clarify a little, I believe the point I was getting at is that even if everything asserted in the case were to be factually verified, the claims, so far from the general populations perception of reality, effectively dissolve the Truth movements credibility with the general public.



posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 01:57 PM
link   
Originally posted by impactstyles





but my bro tells me for sure without a shadow of a doubt that it was a plane that crashed into the building.



Thanks for the post impactstyles. I think what your brother meant to say was that 'for sure without a shadow of a doubt he saw a plane crash into the building." Stating that a plane crashed into the buiding is another matter entirely and is without merit, proof or substantiation.

To my knowledge nobody has yet proven that a plane actually crashed into the building. Yes we have a lot of hysterical posters with many interesting theories and insults but as yet we do not have one single shred of evidence that any Boeing 767 ever crashed into either the north tower or the south tower.

We have no wings, tails, engine cores, center setions, wing planks or portions there of, no flight recorders no voice recorders, no wheels, tires, hubs, stringers, ribs or portions thereoff, no hydraulic cylinders, no oxygen cylinders, no aft pressure bulkheads, no forward pressure bulkheads, no keel, no acutators, no pilot's windshields, no Jeps, no nothing that might prove that a Boeing 767 ever penetated the north or south towers, and was found in the footprint of the collapsed towers.

Not a block away, not two blocks away. Not on top of a building close by. Found in the footprint of the building itself.

Its just like it was Majic.


Thanks for the post.



posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 02:16 PM
link   
reply to post by johnlear
 


I understand your point sir, but with all due respect, he knows what he saw (he never claimed it was a boeing 767 or not) and not that this has much credence I know what I saw that day on television. We also know the recovery operation was quickly taken over and all evidence hastily removed from NYC. But are you of the opinion that it was CDs or laser beams that brought these towers down and absolutely no planes at all were involved, due to the fact that no evidence has surfaced of plane wreckage from the towers.

I'm not here to prove or disprove this theory, in fact it reminds me of my new problem with the whole 9/11 truth movement, which has been stated here before, to get to the bottom of this I think the focus should be removed from Manhattan (as quality scientists are on both sides of this argument which makes for a never ending circular debate) and should center around PA, the pentagon, and the money trail. Just my opinion, thanks for responding, I mean no disrespect and truly enjoy this site



posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 02:37 PM
link   
Originally posted by impactstyles




But are you of the opinion that it was CDs or laser beams that brought these towers down and absolutely no planes at all were involved, due to the fact that no evidence has surfaced of plane wreckage from the towers.


Correct. Controlled demolition with directed energy weapons (high energy lasers) with holographs simulating airplanes crashing into the towers.


I'm not here to prove or disprove this theory, in fact it reminds me of my new problem with the whole 9/11 truth movement, which has been stated here before, to get to the bottom of this I think the focus should be removed from Manhattan (as quality scientists are on both sides of this argument which makes for a never ending circular debate) and should center around PA, the pentagon, and the money trail. Just my opinion, thanks for responding, I mean no disrespect and truly enjoy this site


Just remember that whenever you hear somebody saying, "All thats doing is ruining the real 911 truth movement (about a particular line of thought or inquiry)" that person is a government shill or totally uninformed.

You can be sure that if the govcernment sees research on 911 going in the direction they don't want it to it will be, "That's going to ruin the whole truth movement."

Yeah, right.



posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 02:58 PM
link   
Well good luck in court with this one.
I honestly wish the guy luck,he is going to need it.

The thing I do not understand,is why bring this "theory" to court?
Why pick one of the hardest and least likely to prove?
Why choose the hardest one to sell to the average person?
They should have gone in court arguing/investigating one of the countless other points.Something the public would be more likely to look at.
Things like...

1.WTC 7(Controlled demolition)
2.The Pentagon(All those tapes,and only so few released?)
3.The Stock options put on the airlines
4.NORAD/The stand down order
5.Molten steel at the WTC sites
6.Flight 93
7.The testimony from the fire fighters about bombs going off,that werent allowed in the comission report.
8.Operation Northwoods
9.The drills that were going on that day
10.Traces of Thermite found
Theres more,but you get the point.
To jump into court using one of the hardest theories to sell seems like a 9/11 truth "jumping the shark" moment.
I think this court hearing could have been put to better use.


[edit on 13-9-2007 by Black_Fox]



posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Black_Fox
Well good luck in court with this one.
I honestly wish the guy luck,he is going to need it.

The thing I do not understand,is why bring this "theory" to court?
Why pick one of the hardest and least likely to prove?
Why choose the hardest one to sell to the average person?
They should have gone in court arguing/investigating one of the countless other points.Something the publis would be more likely to look at.
Things like...

1.WTC 7(Controlled demolition)
2.The Pentagon(All those tapes,and only so few released?)
3.The Stock options put on the airlines
4.NORAD/The stand down order
5.Molten steel at the WTC sites
6.Flight 93
7.The testimony from the fire fighters about bombs going off,that werent allowed in the comission report.
8.Operation Northwoods
9.The drills that were going on that day
10.Traces of Thermite found
Theres more,but you get the point.
To jump into court using one of the hardest theories to sell seems like a 9/11 truth "jumping the shark" moment.
I think this court hearing could have been put to better use.


This is what I was trying to get at, but couldnt put it into words, thank you Black_Fox. While there is nothing wrong with any theory Black_Fox's last line sums it up perfectly.



posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by impactstyles



Correct. Controlled demolition with directed energy weapons (high energy lasers) with holographs simulating airplanes crashing into the towers.



Interesting theory. BTW I'm very honored to be talking to a celebrity, and would love to ask a million questions but back to this. Two points I would like to raise;

1) How did you come to this conclusion, it's not that I doubt it in any way I would just be VERY interested to read some material on this, and;

2) If we apply Occum's Razor to this situation would it not stand to reason that planes did in fact crash into the towers? (again I'm not so sure about PA and DC I'm only referring to NYC)



posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 06:04 PM
link   
black fox did find some good points.

and one more:
if the 100.000 tons of debris of the twin towers would had fallen on the´bathtub´under neath, this would have gotten much more damage as it actually got .
but..it didn´t . and that means, that the destroyers of the towes did know that, because then, the Hudson River would have flodded whole Mahattan.

and that would have been a littul bit´ too much´.

it didn´t. it was pulverized.



[edit on 13-9-2007 by anti72]

[edit on 13-9-2007 by anti72]

[edit on 13-9-2007 by anti72]



posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 06:07 PM
link   
I wanted to add one more point that deserves to be argued in court,especialy with Rudi running for president.

Why would Rudi ship the debri to China so fast?
Seeing as WTC was a crime scene,wouldnt it make sense to keep the evidence?



posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear


Correct. Controlled demolition with directed energy weapons (high energy lasers) with holographs simulating airplanes crashing into the towers.



John, in response to your post above about there not being a single shred of evidence that a Boeing aircraft crashed into either tower,
with all due respect John, where is the evidence to support your alternative
theory i.e. high energy lasers / holographs etc. etc. ?

Thanks,pm.

[edit on 13-9-2007 by pmexplorer]



posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 07:36 PM
link   
I cannot answer for John Lear, but allow me to try and give my take on your question. The proof, to me, that a directed energy weapon was used is the characteristics of the ' collapses ' as seen in so many photos. The complete DUSTIFICATION of the Towers, both in the same manner despite the differences in damage, screams out a high energy source.

Normal explosives that would cause the effects we see would have resulted in massive and continuous, and not ignorable, explosions and thunder claps of sound as the Towers fell. That did not happen. There were several major BOOMS as the core supports were no doubt severed, but not enough explosions of merit to explain the total dustification of all of the concrete, people, etc. Anything that had a water/carbon base was turned to dust instantly; the steel also evaporated in many areas and was smoking and buring as it fell in great sections, as seen in many pics.

Nothing can cause that type of heat, instantly, but a high energy weapon. Mr. :ear is right about that. There is NO OTHER logical and LIKELY alternative given the current evidence . Only a weapon that can dissolve elements in a split second could account for the effects seen.As we watch the Towers fall, turning to dust in front of our eyes, we see the outward projection of the materials as they explode from the inside out. All it woul;d take would be a sweeping set of beams of that energy over the complex and the effects we see would be the same.

Remember the Judy Woods pics of the ' holes ' or cookie cutter type circles in the various buildings? That cannot be a fluke; that is the mark of a high energy weapon affecting material right to the ground level. As far as no planes go, I am still wavering; I am ready to believe that there were no planes but not without a better grasp of holographics during daylight and the fact that the associated sounds of jets were heard and recorded at the time of the strikes. How could the sounds have been done?

The fact remains that only people at the VERY highest levels of our political/military/industrial bureaucracies could have pulled this off; no doubt Cheney was the inside man in all this; the Code Angel fiasco was meant to keep George under wraps and not interfering while Poppa and the old time shadow govt. boys made sure that profts would flow and war would never end and the much anticipated war against the Muslims could commence, thereby fulfiling the mandates for the beginings of the religious scenarios that the Neocon right wing rapture crazy millenialists crave so desperately.

John Hagee and his Israel worshipping sheep are beside themselves promoting strikes against anyone who will insure that the great Armageddon comes as soon as possible. They actually believe that all this evil they do is a necessary part of the end time scenarios and that they are the herald of the new man; the fact that they will get most of us killed in the process is nothing but a minor matter to them;' collateral damage ' is the price that WE pay for sleeping while our nation was highjacked by the Neocon/Israel maniacs; as long as Monday Night Football keeps playing, the average American drooler will never hear the clarion calls until they are beating down their own doors.

If in fact there were no planes, and the state of holography is such that full daylight events can be staged with appropriate sound effects and coordinated damage at the sites ' struck ' then what can we believe any more? NOTHING, thats what. And that also means that we are all on our own, either collectively or as a man taking a lone stand; but we are literally finished as a free nation and a democracy if the 9-11 event was indeed a staged affir down to the level of holographs; thats astounding. Why do I find it not so hard to believe when taking the obvious corruption that our leaders display.

More study needed, open minded appraisal a necesssity, and I will keep pondering the issue. But for now we can safely assume that at LEAST the complete and TOTAL DUSTIFICATION of BOTH Towers was far beyond the capabilities of any known and common demolition method and is indicative of only a high energy source, and the only ones that we have of those are in the arsenal of the military and perhaps the private contractors that service the departments that use such weapons. Directed energy weapons are the ONLY logical choice given what we have seen so far, that much is sure.

Remember the pictures of the steel core standing after the ' dustification ' took place? The so called " Spire "? Well, the ONLY thing that could possibly have turned those incredibly robust solid steel supports into dust, right in front of us. Dust from steel at an area not even near any fires. Dust. That means energy beyond any known to exist in the physics of collapse or the bag of tricks of the common demolition expert. This is the creme de la creme of the destruction trade, and applied well, but not perfectly, as so many obvious clues tell us. Only someone in denial can fail to see the obvious lack of an alternative energy source in these events.



posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by eyewitness86
 



Thanks for taking the time to respond and in such depth, i would also love to hear this from John's perspective also.

My next question as has been posted here in so many other threads
over the years is:
as you believe in the no planes theory , are you therefore of the opinion
that these flights simply did not exist or that they took off only to
be flown elsewhere where the people on board were either disposed of
or taken somewhere else?

what of the cctv of the alleged hijackers at the airports?
what about the families in mourning?
what of the dead passengers?
the black box recordings?
the passengers who made calls to their loved ones?

Please bear in mind my questions are sincere,and in no way condescending, I am here to learn, I have gained a lot of knowledge since joining ATS and whilst I believe that 9/11 involved high ranking complicity, I am on the fence as regards the perpetrators of the actual physical attacks as I'm sure many others are but I live in hope that the truth will out eventually.



posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 08:56 PM
link   
The courts have the right to throw out a case if it is likely to prove a waste of court time and not be in the public interest. If it is clear that this guy won't win against an army of expert witnesses (as I guess is the case here) then as has been written above, they're doing it to discredit the truth movement. If it actually looked like he had a chance, we wouldn't even hear about it.

Whoever was behind 9/11 is powerful to the point that the real truth will never come out.



posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 08:58 PM
link   
It's probably all designed to make a fool out of conspiracy theorist. Bring out the wacko, have the country laugh at the story, which will definitely go national, meanwhile reinforcing the 'official story'. I really wish the wackos would just shut it to give the real theories about 9/11 some light. If the truth movement gets too involved with whackjobs, the whole movement will suffer.



posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 09:14 PM
link   


Correct. Controlled demolition with directed energy weapons (high energy lasers) with holographs simulating airplanes crashing into the towers.



And the conspiracy theorists wonder why they cant be taken seriously.

If the 9/11 CT's are looking for credibility, they had better get their act together and shun nonsensical rantings like this one.

Stuff like this just adds fuel to the fire (sorry for the pun) for people to discredit and bury any progress they are trying to make.

While I read, research, and listen to alternate theories, fantasy fiction only gets people to turn away from some of the more plausible arguments.

Now I dont know if these high energy lasers came from the people on mercury or Dr. Evil on the moonbase but I think the most likely explanation is that they came from Mr. Lears imagination in order to perpetuate his "status" as the one stop know it all for government cover-ups.

What comes to mind when I read outlandish theories is the overused term "keep it real." Well if you want others to listen to 9/11 alternative theories, then keep it real CT's.



posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 09:41 PM
link   
The interesting thing about all that negative aspersions and refusal to examine the more far out theories is that the peole who call some others crazy never manage to explain the DUSTIFICATION of all those elements.

Why have we not heard a LIKELY and PROBABLE alternative to the directed energy theory? What ELSE could account for the total pulverazation of all of the material we see clouding the skies and filling the streets with inches of fine dust; dust like flour, it is so fine. NOTHING approaching gravity can account for that and so if the people who cannot imagine such a weapon being used would please tell us what WOULD exhibit the same characteristics that we see in abundance in the Towers literal evaporation.

The official lie says that giant engines made of titanium evaporated at the Pentagon and also the Towers, since no proofsa or parts have ever been authenticated or shown, but we can see the Towers be virtually evaporated right in front os us and so many people say " Gee, thats weird but must be from fire and gravity..or from explosives." And neither can fit the pattersn we see in the films.

No, there is NO OTHER plausible explanation I have heard yet, and the silence from the opposers is telling, is it not? When people cannot give a better explanation than the one proffered, at least they should show it some respect, at least until they can come up with a better way of explaining the event. Tell us HOW 100 story buildings turn to DUST, including the steel, in an instant, from any source OTHER than a directed energy weapon and I am sure that many will be convinced. But without more than a sneer and an assurance of being right, not many thinking people will be convinced.

ONLY directed energy weapons can explain what we see. Simple.



posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86


ONLY directed energy weapons can explain what we see. Simple.


If it was that simple and the ONLY explanation, why would people waste their time trying to expose demolition-conspiracies and the such?

You say it's simple, because in your mind, that is the only way the buildings could have come down. You've convinced yourself of this and no other option.

It could be even more surprising than you would think.



posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 09:59 PM
link   
Originally posted by mirageofdeceit



The courts have the right to throw out a case if it is likely to prove a waste of court time and not be in the public interest.



If Reynold's complaint had no merit, the court would have it dismissed. They did not.

Instead, they unsealed it, and the Plaintiff's attonrey, Jerry Leaphart, is now serving the Dfendants with notice of the complaint.

Since the US district court did not dismiss the complaint as frivolous. they obviously find ample evidence supporting the theory that no planes hit the towers and that directred energy weapons were used for the tower's destruction.

It is worthy to note that the Plaintiff (Dr Reynolds), representing the USA, is demanding a Trial by Jury.


I couldn't have said it better myself mirageofdeceit and since that was on the first page it is unlikely that you took the time to read the complaint at all.


If it is clear that this guy won't win against an army of expert witnesses (as I guess is the case here) then as has been written above, they're doing it to discredit the truth movement. If it actually looked like he had a chance, we wouldn't even hear about it.


Since you obviously haven't read the complaint I don't know what could be clear to you mirageofdeceit. And until you DO read the complaint you are trying to discuss something about which you know absolutely nothing.


Whoever was behind 9/11 is powerful to the point that the real truth will never come out.


I respectfully welcome your opinion and you may be correct. But there is always hope.

My opinion is that directed energy weapons are highly directional (thus the name) they had to be operated from directly over the World Trade Center. The heat of that directed energy is what caused the molten mess at the base which couldn't be extinguished and/or cooled for weeks.

Thus the weapon was obviously fired from space. And it was probably fired from one of the secret space stations that apparently exist and which Progress, Buran and the Shuttle are servicing and supplying.

The directed energy weapon was fired intentionally into the top of the World Trade Center either by those in the secret space station or remotely by somebody on the ground.

But whoever fired the directed energy weapon was directly responsible for the deaths of 3000 in the World Trade Center and by implication was reponsible for at least part of the disaster.

We have a very limited selection of culprits and those culprits are those who had the authority and technolgy to launch, orbit, supply and equip a secret space station with a directed energy weapon that was used to destroy the World Trade Center and murder 3000 innocent Americans for reasons known only to them.

It is as simple as that. And that is my opinion.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join