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.

 

NY's Finest Tour Guide Pokes Major Holes in the CD Theory

page: 8
17
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by talisman
 


Although you may not "like" or "beleive" the NIST report. There is a section dedicated to the airplanes and the damages that they caused.

Try that first




posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 09:16 PM
link   
Wow this video has so many problems. Where do I start?

I'll go in chronological order.



- “Use of explosives in the quantities suggested would have been obvious to everyone at the site, to everyone watching TV, and to every investigator.”

Problems: Nothing is obvious to everyone. The fact that it wasn't obvious to everyone isn't evidence that it happened. The quantities suggested are around 1300 pounds of explosives. In a building that size it is easy to imagine gaining access to the core columns from the elevator shaft, and spacing one of these charges out every couple of floors or so. Investigators were not permitted access that you would expect for an event such as this.



- “Every audiovisual and seismic recording device in the area would have clearly captured these enormous blasts.”

Again, with the use of the word “every”. The fact that all of them didn't isn't evidence. If someone was going to use bombs in these buildings, they would definitely do what they could to cut down on the blast noise, such as explode the building from the core columns outward, so the building itself contained much of the noise. Yet, dozens of witnesses reported hearing blasts, as did some audio equipment. The assumption that a seismic recording would pick up explosions assumes that they are sensitive enough to register them from god knows how many miles away. This assumption may not be true, so cannot be considered evidence.


- “There is a world of difference between the loud noises we call “explosions” and detonations.”

Agreed.



- “There is no evidence that explosives were used on 911.”

A great number of people would argue with that statement. This is simply an unqualified assertion, and depends on what the author considers to be “evidence”.



- “Conspiracies claim people were burned by explosives.”

Perhaps, but one could also say “Conspiracies claim that photographs steal a person's soul.” Stating the inaccuracy of one conspiracy theory does not disprove all of them. I personally don't think that a person being “burned” by an explosive is an important point, no matter if it did or didn't happen.



- “In 1993, terrorists detonated a truck bomb in the WTC. The enormous blast didn't destroy even one column.”

A truck bomb blast expands spherically, and it's pressure drops off as the inverse square of the distance. By the time a blast wave reached a support column, it was too weak to break it.

The shape charges “conspiracy theorists” believe were used are very, very different.

They are small rod-like high explosives coupled to a piece of metal, which, when the explosive goes off, “squeezes” the metal like a tube of toothpaste, shooting it at extremely high velocity into the target. A shape charge only weighs a couple of pounds each, yet is able to cut through several inches of steel due to its focused extremely high pressure zone.



- “Gravity did this.”

You assume! Those 300 ton sections require an awful strong push to get them to travel 400 feet laterally. Gravity pulls DOWN. Where did the energy come from to throw so much material sideways?



- “East wall of south tower buckles inward.”

Why wasn't the core resisting this buckling? The whole top section of the building tilted as though the core running through it didn't exist.



- “No explosions, nothing blasted outward.”

As long as you don't count the explosions severing the core columns during the previous hour, or the obvious explosions which ensue the next few seconds.


- “Some conspiracists claim that these rectangular pieces are steel columns. They are sections of aluminum cladding.”

Yes, they are. But look over to the left, a large section of steel. And don't forget those pieces found buried in the sides of other buildings 400 feet away which you have already acknowledged but blamed on gravity.


- “There isn't a shred of evidence thermate is used at the WTC.”

Sure, as long as you ignore the evidence!


- “Thermate is promoted by incompetents and frauds.”

So Dr. Steven Jones, physicist and professor at Brigham Young University, is an incompetent fraud. If you say so, man... if you say so.

The bright yellow glowing liquid filmed that day cannot be ignored. Blackbody radiation dictates that the temperature of the material can be inferred by its color. Its color is simply too yellow to have been caused by the burning of hydrocarbon fuels. While its impossible to prove just what this stuff is, it is possible to prove what it ISN'T. It is NOT steel heated by jet fuel. It's something much hotter.



- “Not a single piece of steel showed effects of thermite.”

Again, you're making assertions ignoring an educated person's opinion. Steven Jones says that there's no chromium found in the metal tested, but high sulfur and fluorine. Very odd! You don't call that evidence?



- “Belief in controlled demolition theories is not supported by evidence or logic”

Your statements are assertions, not conclusions. A vast number of professionals disagree with you.






Watching the destruction of the twin towers, it is as if the whole building behaves like it is a giant sandcastle... like grains of sand loosely held together just waiting for the right nudge to send the whole things crashing down.

But this building was made of steel and concrete, designed to be stronger than necessary by several orders of magnitude for safety reasons. How can it just tear itself apart all the way to the ground?

As the floor material was pulverized into dust and expanded sideways into an ever-increasing cloud volume, what was left to do the crushing? What large smashing object remained to do the smash down and continue pulverizing the floors all the way to the ground when the outer beams were ejected radially, and the concrete floors turned into airborne dust?

The time of the collapse is very suspicious. How could material from the top of the building reach the ground so quickly with the rest of the building standing in the way?

Lastly, you don't even mention building 7. If a demolition company could bring down a building in the way that building 7 collapsed by simply knocking out a few columns and setting random fires, then why do demolition companies plan their implosions for weeks and use careful placement of shape charges to do the same job?

I think the author of this video is in denial, because believing our government would do this to us opens up a whole new can of worms.

[edit on 17-11-2007 by dionysius9]



posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by GreenFloyd
 


Some differences between me and Rodriguez are:

1) I've never taken money for my 9/11 debunking efforts. I intend to pay my way to the Florida conference, the proceeds of which go to further education in critical thinking: an admirable goal, I'm sure you'll agree.

2) I do not sell autographed photos, videos, or any other merchandise. Neither do I ask for donations on my website.

3) I don't consort with, and promote the work of, disreputable people.

4) I don't lie my ass off.

Clear enough, GreenFloyd?



posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by dionysius9
Wow this video has so many problems. Where do I start?



Problems: Nothing is obvious to everyone. The fact that it wasn't obvious to everyone isn't evidence that it happened. The quantities suggested are around 1300 pounds of explosives. In a building that size it is easy to imagine gaining access to the core columns from the elevator shaft, and spacing one of these charges out every couple of floors or so. Investigators were not permitted access that you would expect for an event such as this.


Your kidding right? Can you please tell me how ACE elevator would allow secret agents access to the elevator shafts?? For those of you that think ACE elevator was a crooked company... SEVERAL employees of ACE elevator were hired from OTIS elevator. The original elevator company at the WTC.I have worked in many large buildings (not as large at the WTC towers) and I can tell you with 100% cetainty that NEVER has anyone gained access to my elevator shafts to do ANYTHING.






If someone was going to use bombs in these buildings, they would definitely do what they could to cut down on the blast noise, such as explode the building from the core columns outward, so the building itself contained much of the noise. Yet, dozens of witnesses reported hearing blasts, as did some audio equipment. The assumption that a seismic recording would pick up explosions assumes that they are sensitive enough to register them from god knows how many miles away. This assumption may not be true, so cannot be considered evidence.


Can you please tell me how the building would cut down on the noise??IT was an office building that was I believe, 80% AIR! Please presnt the witnesses that heard "blasts." Some stated hearing explosions...and we all know that does not mean it was a "blast".







- “There is no evidence that explosives were used on 911.”

A great number of people would argue with that statement. This is simply an unqualified assertion, and depends on what the author considers to be “evidence”.


please provide said evidence that supports CD theory





Perhaps, but one could also say “Conspiracies claim that photographs steal a person's soul.” Stating the inaccuracy of one conspiracy theory does not disprove all of them. I personally don't think that a person being “burned” by an explosive is an important point, no matter if it did or didn't happen.


Mr. Roberts intention here was not to disprove all the conspiracies by debunking only one. It is an important point the proves that those that were burned were burned by jet fuel fires ...not by a bomb. In Mr, Roberts papers he has detailed information on the injuries obtained by the fireballs.






A truck bomb blast expands spherically, and it's pressure drops off as the ........

They are small rod-like high explosives coupled to a piece of metal, which, when the explosive goes off, ...........zone.


What Mark was trying to show is that the 93 bomb was only 3/4 of a ton of TNT. This did zero damage to the columns. He was showing a comparison as to what the sound levels would be and the shock waves that would have been witnessed. Your small rod like explosives...are they silent bombs too? What type of explosive is this?


- “Gravity did this.”

You assume! Those 300 ton sections require an awful strong push to get them to travel 400 feet laterally. Gravity pulls DOWN. Where did the energy come from to throw so much material sideways?


Perhaps you should watch the video again, it is explained pretty clearly.




- “East wall of south tower buckles inward.”

Why wasn't the core resisting this buckling? The whole top section of the building tilted as though the core running through it didn't exist.


ask Griff.... it has somthing to do with the hat trusses. (i dont want to butcher the explanation)



As long as you don't count the explosions severing the core columns during the previous hour, or the obvious explosions which ensue the next few seconds.


This statement needs to be backed up with some proof.



Yes, they are. But look over to the left, a large section of steel. And don't forget those pieces found buried in the sides of other buildings 400 feet away which you have already acknowledged but blamed on gravity.


please confirm the 400ft claim and the the weight of this steel.



- “There isn't a shred of evidence thermate is used at the WTC.”

Sure, as long as you ignore the evidence!


please provide the evidence





So Dr. Steven Jones, physicist and professor at Brigham Young University, is an incompetent fraud. If you say so, man... if you say so.

The bright yellow glowing liquid filmed that day cannot be ignored. Blackbody radiation dictates that the temperature of the material can be inferred by its color. Its color is simply too yellow to have been caused by the burning of hydrocarbon fuels. While its impossible to prove just what this stuff is, it is possible to prove what it ISN'T. It is NOT steel heated by jet fuel. It's something much hotter.


This is old...time to catch up. Jones is no longer at BYU. We was terminated. His paper was REJECTED by his peers in the review process. In regards to your yellow glowing liquid... this has been explained many times over. I actually started a thread about it:

Molten Metal ?




Again, you're making assertions ignoring an educated person's opinion. Steven Jones says that there's no chromium found in the metal tested, but high sulfur and fluorine. Very odd! You don't call that evidence?


He looked into it...and why dont you ask Mr. Jones how and where he obtained the steel.



Your statements are assertions, not conclusions. A vast number of professionals disagree with you.


professional What?


I think the author of this video is in denial, because believing our government would do this to us opens up a whole new can of worms.



This is what is called a STUNDIE...



posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 10:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by GreenFloyd
Back to impeaching the source of this thread...

If indeed Mr. Roberts is New York's "Finest Tour Guide," he's taking people on a Magical Mystery Tour.

After scanning Google for NY tour operators and related businesses, the only Mark Roberts I turned up who might be the same person is listed at www.infohub.com..., in association with The Chicago to New York Concierge, Inc.(ph#:773-665-9897).

I have sent inquires to several tour operators asking about Mr. Roberts and his claim of superiority.

Also, if Mr. Roberts is hiring himself out as an official NY "tour guide" he is doing so illegally. Of the 266 licensed guides listed at www.newyorkcitytourguides.com..., Mr. Roberts is not among them.

Of course, as often is the case, the truth can sometimes be found among the lies. I have to admit Mr. Roberts did focus my gaze at the tilting inward of the outer walls as one of the towers began to fall. Perhaps I'm way off here, yet I thought to myself, "an explosion to create an implosion." Create a vacuum and everything gets sucked into it.


He says an explosion occurred seven seconds before the first plane hit the towers, and came from below, not above, said William Rodriguez.
wweek.com...


By the way, there is a great deal more information on Mr. Rodriguez. He has a colorful past and he seems to me to have a certain simple charm and sincerity about him. I respect the fact he turned away from the Republicans and appears determined to make his voice on this matter heard - even though he "hates" doing it and does not appear to be making much, if any, money related to his current occupation.

I wonder if Mr. Roberts could make the same claim from his hotel suite in Florida as he dines with The Amazing Randi.

It would certainly be a hoot if some how the ATS powers that be could get Mr. Rodriguez over here. He might even be able to recreate those blueprints from memory; a memory built from nearly 2 decades at the WTC. Nobody knows a building like the janitor.


Newyorkcitytourguides.com is a private organization and is not the licensing body for the 1300+ tour guides in NYC. The New York City Department of Consumer Affairs is. Feel free to check with them regarding my license status. To avoid making an ass of yourself by making false accusations, do your homework.

Fair enough, GreenFloyd?

As for William Rodriguez "showing up here," you'll find that he has posted at the JREF forum – and fled every single time the questions got tough. He has told me that he will not be responding to my critique.

And as for him "knowing the building," he certainly knew his way around. However, he has repeatedly stated that when he was on the 39th floor, the north tower floors collapsed above him from the 65th floor to the 44th floor: an event that went unnoticed by everyone in the world, particularly by the people on those floors.

What do you think about that, GreenFloyd? Do you think that sometimes "I was there" does not mean "I understand what happened"?

[edit on 17-11-2007 by Mark Roberts]



posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 10:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
Mr. Roberts intention here was not to disprove all the conspiracies by debunking only one. It is an important point the proves that those that were burned were burned by jet fuel fires ...not by a bomb. In Mr, Roberts papers he has detailed information on the injuries obtained by the fireballs.
Indeed. I state at the beginning of the video that it's a companion to my "Open letter to John Schroeder," and is meant to elaborate on specific points in that letter.



What Mark was trying to show is that the 93 bomb was only 3/4 of a ton of TNT. This did zero damage to the columns. He was showing a comparison as to what the sound levels would be and the shock waves that would have been witnessed. Your small rod like explosives...are they silent bombs too? What type of explosive is this?

Yup. William Rodriguez (and those who support him) isn't claiming that cutter charges went off in the basement. They're claiming that a bomb(s) were planted there to weaken the columns. That's an absurd assertion, and it's one that Rodriguez didn't begin making until 2005: remember that his 2004 lawsuit makes no mention of basement explosions, and in his 2004 statement to NIST he spoke of the fireball that came down the freight elevator shaft. Even Rodriguez said he smelled kerosene after the blast there.

There is absolutely no indication of any high explosives detonating at the WTC on 9/11. No evidence is consistent with the use of high explosives. None.


- “Gravity did this.”
You assume! Those 300 ton sections require an awful strong push to get them to travel 400 feet laterally. Gravity pulls DOWN. Where did the energy come from to throw so much material sideways?
The piston effect of the collapsing building provided plenty of force, and the steel sections that were propelled the farthest only had to have an average velocity of about 35 mph. By the way, those sections weren't 300 tons. The conspiracists get that wrong by a factor of 10 .

The enormous amount of explosives needed to achieve the same effect would have been noticed by everyone for tens of miles around, and would have projected lighter debris at high velocities for great distances, in advance of the heavier steel. If you take the time to actually watch my video, you'll see that that is abundantly clear: the lighter debris is trailing the heavier falling debris.

Next, I strongly suggest that you watch the part of my video that shows the inward buckling of the south tower's east wall. It is obvious that no explosion causes the collapse initiation.

Please read Ryan Mackey's paper, which explains in detail, with calculations, why explosives did not cause the effects that I show in my video. I believe page 97 would be a good place to start if you're short on time.

wtc7lies.googlepages.com...


[edit on 17-11-2007 by Mark Roberts]

[edit on 17-11-2007 by Mark Roberts]



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 12:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by GreenFloyd
Peter Tully, president of Tully Construction of Flushing, New York, told AFP that he saw pools of "literally molten steel" at the World Trade Center. Tully was contracted on September 11 to remove the debris from the site.


I have e-mailed Tully Construction to ask them some questions but they stated they could not answer my questions due to the 9/11 lawsuits.



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 01:28 AM
link   
well, i for one, as someone with a lot of experience working with explosives didnt find the video's statements too far off base in regards to explosives in general if not specifically about 911.

of particular value to those that have an interest in learning about explosives so that they can decide for themselves if the evidence actually fits a CD theory or not were the clips of the various sized charges going off on video.

now, if you click here you'll find a debate i had over in the h2h forums on this very topic (explosives used in the wtc buildings or no) this spring. some of youve possibly read it, other probably not. in said debate i did some calculations as to how much HE it could have taken (calcs based off best available data and NOT the actual blueprints as the official copies arent avaialable to the general public) so, whether you agree with me or not, there is some information in tehre that would be good general knowledge for anyone who does believe it was a CD and its all verifiable if you care to check it out on your own.

now in this thread i outlined some of the problems i have with prof jones' theories and research methods and a really open minded person from either side of the debate really has to admit i raise some good points. jones is not the end all be all and his research papers should be taken with at least a SMALL amount of skepticism but at the same time should be read with an open mind.



reply to post by CaptainObvious
 


Your small rod like explosives...are they silent bombs too? What type of explosive is this?

he's describing linear shape charges. silent? no, but significantly quieter than say...a sachel charge. an LSC typically is made of an RDX based explosive and to cut up to 40mm of steel they are loaded to around 425g/m. now, that doesnt sound like much but using the "leaked" copies of the wtc blueprints i calculated that it would take 172lbs/floor worth of LSC's (HE yeild not gross weight) to sever all 47 core columns. so yeah, still going to be a noticable boom to most of manhattan, but i did outline all of this in the debate thread i linked to above.

so, CO, not trying to pick on ya or side with the CD theorists (cuz by now im sure we all know what i think of the theories) but in the spirit of a fair open minded debate i thought id field that question. i may not agree with the cd theories but i do try to maintain an unbiased stance when discussing explosives. for more info on LSC's click the link in the debate thread. it takes you to a manufacturers website. (which oddly no one has been able to provide me for "thermite cutter charges")

thats my thoughts, take them FWIW.



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 04:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Taxi-Driver
Hypothetically, had the aircraft been say...Japanese Zeros (single propeller aircraft) instead of multi engine Jetliners about 20 times larger.. Do you think the Zeros would have done as much damage as the larger, heavier, faster 767?
(video)
If aircraft flying at high speeds are so mundane and impotent, why would these WWII sailors even bother shooting at them? Why would 30 U.S.N. ships be destroyed by these "minimal" threats? Did the USA make WWII battleships out of cheap aluminum or flimsy balsa wood? Or was it Steel? Did you get the serial number on that steel? Have you reached your breaking point? Did you jump ship?


Of course, one of the points about Kamikaze planes is that they were:

'usually laden with explosives, bombs, torpedoes and full fuel tanks'

(from en.wikipedia.org...)

so maybe it's not a great comparison. Of course, I think some Truthers have said that the 9/11 planes were packed with explosives or some such, but obviously they're morons.



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 06:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Damocles
 


Damocles ~

thanks for the info. Please tell me in comparison to other typical explosives (TNT) sound wise. If we have 42 cutter charges going off pretty close to the same time... in your opinion, would these "bombs" be picked up by news cameras? And by saying 47, would it be safe to assume there would be 94 of them for WTC 1&2? (we can add WTC7 later)

I find it highly unlikely they would go undetected.

Thanks again

CO

[edit on 18-11-2007 by CaptainObvious]



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 06:46 AM
link   
GreenFloyd ~

Although I highly doubt you will be back to this thread, here is a link that PROVES Mr. Roberts is a tour guide in New York City. And a damned good one at that:

www.nyc.gov...

You will notice that he has a * next to his name. That means he scored over 120 on the exam given to all Tour Guides. If you do your research, you will find that at the time Mark was given his exam, he recieved the highest score ever. So, the Title of this thread is justified.

Now, instead of worrying about his tour guide status, lets look into his video.

Please get your facts straight prior to calling someone a liar.

[edit on 18-11-2007 by CaptainObvious]



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 09:07 AM
link   
reply to post by CaptainObvious
 


Dear CaptainObvious,

Thank you for clarifying Mr. Roberts' tour guide status and just to put your doubts at ease, I'm not going anywhere.

I apologize to you, Mr. Roberts, if I was too hasty in doubting your tour guide status. I was apparently wrong and I hope you can forgive me my momentary indiscretion. Congratulations on your high test score.

At any rate, I hope we can put this particular matter behind us and move forward. I look forward to your replies to the several excellent questions that so many people are now asking about CD and its possible role in bringing down the towers and WTC7.

There is a new ATS thread here that is moving in parallel with this one and with additional documentation that's informative.

Regardless what any of us think, there seems widespread agreement that it is odd, troubling or downright suspicious for 3 steel frame buildings to collapse as they did, when they did. Especially in light of the 100 year history of steel buildings withstanding fires for long periods of time yet never falling down...

The seismic records from Palisades Park, NY, seems to collaborate a CD theory.

I'm here because I have doubts and I care enough to express them and hope that others can help sooth them with answers that make sense or at least fit a plausible pattern, pre and post 9/11.

Ultimately, I guess, it's a political question with terrible implications. Incompetence or conspiracy?



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
I find it highly unlikely they would go undetected.


I don't understand how you could say they went "undetected". Many people reported them that day. Maybe you meant to say there are alternative theories surrounding these explosions?

We can _see_ the towers explode. (www.youtube.com...)
We can _hear_ the towers explode. (video.google.com... - video.google.com...)

here's another excellent lecture on the evidence for explosives:

Engineer Gordon Ross MEng. at the Indian YMCA, London on the 8th June 2007 analyses the destruction of the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center on September 11th 2001.
video.google.com...

So by no means did they go unnoticed, there are alternative explanations for these explosions, as there are for any part of the story. That does not equate to the absence of evidence for explosives.



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by GreenFloyd
 



I hope we can put this particular matter behind us and move forward


No worries on my side. Thanks for sticking around.



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Shroomery
 


Shroomery ~

we are talking close to 100 or so of these bombs to slice through the columns? Thats only for WTC1 &2. I am still waiting to hear how loud these are. Our in house guy here states that all of manhattan would have heard them. This is clearly not the case.

I am trying to find some videos of these "cutter charges" and seeing how they go off.



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 12:47 PM
link   
I thought this quote was interesting. Another hero no longer with us.
Link

"Right after the first World Trade Center tower collapsed, at 9:59 a.m. on September 11, 2001, Father John Delendick--one of New York Fire Department's chaplains--ran down a ramp to below the nearby World Financial Center, so as to escape the dust cloud. There he met with Deputy Chief Ray Downey, the head of the FDNY's Special Operations Command. Delendick asked Downey if the jet fuel from the plane had blown up, thus causing the South Tower to collapse. According to Delendick, Downey "said at that point he thought there were bombs up there because it was too even." [1]

Coming from a senior firefighter, this claim is significant enough. But it is even more so because Downey was no ordinary firefighter. Prior to 9/11, he had "commanded rescue operations at many difficult and complex disasters, including the Oklahoma City Bombing, the 1993 World Trade Center Bombing, and many natural disasters worldwide." [2] As the chief of the FDNY Special Operations Command, he'd pioneered techniques for urban rescue and responding to terrorist attacks. "He was so respected, so beloved," according to CBS News, that "his men nicknamed him 'god.'" [3]

Of most importance is that one of Downey's areas of expertise was building collapses. 9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer referred to Downey as a "very, very respected expert on building collapse." [4] Robert Ingram, a battalion chief in the New York Fire Department, has called him "the premiere collapse expert in the country." [5] And Fire Chief Mike Antonucci, who was a best friend of Downey's, said he "was probably the most knowledgeable person on building collapses there was. That was his [hobby], to study building collapses--what affected the engineering of buildings, how they [would] weaken and how he could respond and stay safe." [6]

And this 39-year veteran of the New York Fire Department, who was the most highly decorated firefighter in its history, initially believed the South Tower had come down due to explosives, because the collapse had been "too even." Unfortunately, Ray Downey is not with us today, as he was killed when the North Tower collapsed at 10:28 a.m."

There are many eyewitnesses who heard including building collapse expert Ray Downey.



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 02:12 PM
link   
I would be curious to get Damocles take on this video.



[edit on 18-11-2007 by Leo Strauss]

[edit on 18-11-2007 by Leo Strauss]



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 02:18 PM
link   
no explosions? ok whatever because i could have sworn watching 911 eyewitness that there were several explosions heard from across the river.
Just because this guy wants to hide his eyes from reality doesnt mean i have to. Add it all up dispite this mans opinion

Thermite drips from tower

Several explosions heard

yes their was soundwave recordings of timed explosions

Hes not showing the other angles of the building which show the blasting out the windows bleow the "collapse", also its likely this was planned and they had planned it to look like an attack as much as possible so they would get sentenced to death for treason, which they should be.

Compare the 3 towers that fell to the pyramids of giza, any relationship in size perhaps?

Consider also the sphere that rotated and mimicked the muslim yearly ritual in the middle of the towers. why would muslims destrroy something that payed homage to them? oddly enough...

Consider the design of the towers, the exact life of the towers, and how long they left the lights on that replaced the fallen towers.

Look at the interviews between firemen who claim explosions and forknowledge was eluded to.

Consider the fact the the US government has treated its citizens as criminals for the last 100 years thanks to the well justified by the closet fascist so called religiously concerned people..the war on drugs which has decimated the blacks in this country turning them more violent and sending them on a path of thuggery and self destruction. same with the white youth, they all go to jail to get raped..its all sick.

realise the bush family and clintons have both been investigated numerous times and each time they are called nothing happens, suspiciously still remain linked, but nothing happens in the end. Payoffs? threats? innocence?-i doubt that seriously.

consider the fact amendenijad believes he can summon through violence and chaos a demonic figure of totalitarian moronic genocide. You dont think our western cults believe similarily. And could have designed the towers as giant batteries that charge with human energy as part of a spell ritual to summon something big, and deceptive?? Or is that too insane because you cant even admit bush was criminal before he even got elected by the sham 2000 elections. And that the very churches you go to, dont ever make a connection between revelations and today. Or when they do, its all fluffy white bunnies to follow.

This video is a good attempt, by who i dont exactly know if the guy had relations to any specific agency..but im getting a feeling like he doesnt really believe what he says in this video.






[edit on 18-11-2007 by mastermind77]



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86

And WHAT buildings have EVER ' fallen down ' in history from fire and gravity?


The I-35W bridge in Minneapolis? And no fire either, just gravity. Although there are plenty of conspiracy theories on that disaster as well.

All I know is the WTC theories and claims have gotten out of hand, and the book needs to be reopened. There needs to be a comprehensive, hard-nosed, and respected establishment of fact.

If we're not careful the truth WILL be lost.



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by gb540

Originally posted by eyewitness86

And WHAT buildings have EVER ' fallen down ' in history from fire and gravity?


The I-35W bridge in Minneapolis? And no fire either, just gravity. Although there are plenty of conspiracy theories on that disaster as well.

All I know is the WTC theories and claims have gotten out of hand, and the book needs to be reopened. There needs to be a comprehensive, hard-nosed, and respected establishment of fact.

If we're not careful the truth WILL be lost.


the two arent the same no matter what, i 35 was suspicious in that bridge collapses typically havent happened by normal load/heat stress as they are built to handle..or should be. I was in mnpls that day, it was hot so im 50/50 on what to believe. But read above you post on what i wrote, maybe youll be intrigued, maybe not.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join