100% PROOF of Controlled Demolitions @ WTC, page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 12 times


reply posted on 16-1-2008 @ 08:55 AM by IvanZana
Thank you. The video link is now fixed.



reply posted on 16-1-2008 @ 09:14 AM by Reality Hurts
There is something I really want to know-

Why are threads titled "100% Proof" always a rehash of old information and/or poor quality youtube vids?

None of this is new and all of it has been discussed to death already. It may be "proof" for some, but for others its merely debris falling ahead of the collapse and causing blowouts. This is not tangible proof.

Tangible proof is not an idea, a theory, or a feeling. It needs to be solid, viewable, and its existence and relation to the event need to be verified. For example, "Loose Change" is not a proof, nor are Dylan Avery's conclusions. Neither are the videos of others. They are all theories, without merit, i.e. without proof.

In regards to all of the 9/11 theories, proof is a memo from Dick Cheney to the owner of the WTC. Proof is an internal DoD document linking the government to the attack. Proof is a piece of Tomahawk wreckage from the Pentagon. Proof is a Sidewinder tailsection embedded in the ground someplace near Shanksville. Proof is a undetonated demolition charge found in the WTC debris. Proof is one senior Bush Administration official going on camera and saying, "We did this, and my conscience can't take it anymore".

Thus far, not one of those things has happened. conspiracy theorists have not one single tangible piece of evidence to back up their claims.

Before you go ballistic on me, understand that I personally believe that there was some form of 911 related conspiracy. However, I can say that it is a belief and theory, it is not fact. It is the responsibility of people like me to obtain and present empirical, tangible, and demonstrable proof, which has not happened yet.

Sorry to break it to you, you can believe all you want, but without something solid in your hand, you have absolutely nothin'.


reply posted on 16-1-2008 @ 12:19 PM by GUICE2
reply to post by Reality Hurts



What the hell are all those flashes dammit?
What about those....forget about the puffs of smoke you can mark that up to preasure and thats fine. Yet what about the hundreds of flashes you see when you slow it to 1/4 speed? You didnt see them?!?!!


reply posted on 16-1-2008 @ 12:20 PM by Reality Hurts
reply to post by gottago


I'm dealing with fact and reality, nothing more. I'm objective and realistic.

To state that you've "discovered something important" is self deluding. You watched a video, you didn't "discover" anything. You watched something that someone else edited, thats it. You have nothing in your hand that you can shows to others that would conflict or drastically alter the perception of the official story.

Please understand that what follows is not any form of attack, merely constructive criticism. I can see that you are emotionally attached to this. By reading your response to me it is plain to see that you are already acting snide, sarcastic, and superior, and that your contempt is thinly veiled. Distance yourself emotionally from this topic. Take a step back and look at it objectively without letting your feelings, opinions, and emotions run rampant. Much like those who zealously follow the official story, your bias taints your argument.


And for the record, I am going to again state my position so that I'm not labeled as one of those people who buy into the official explanation for 9/11:
I personally believe that something is drastically wrong with the official 9/11 story. There are glaring misrepresentation of facts. Many things do not add up or make rational sense. However, to state an opinion as absolute fact, without the presence of tangible evidence, does not make your "feeling" real. It remains an opinion, not fact.



[edit on 16-1-2008 by Reality Hurts]


reply posted on 16-1-2008 @ 12:22 PM by Reality Hurts
reply to post by GUICE2


I don't know what they are.

I also don't know if the videos were altered.

Thus is the problem with what you find posted on the internet.


reply posted on 16-1-2008 @ 01:09 PM by Insolubrious


watch this video, it had me convinced. If you listen carefully you will hear dozens of explosions.

Here is a hint. What looks like a demolition, sounds like a demolition, feels like a demolition and smells like a demolition most likely is a demolition.


reply posted on 16-1-2008 @ 01:14 PM by Reality Hurts
reply to post by GUICE2





Why might they alter the videos?

To be right.


Don't underestimate a person's determination to win an argument on the internet. So many people today will invest hours, sometimes dozens of hours, just to create something that may improve their standing in what ever internet community that they are a part of.

I am a conspiracy theorist. I have been for decades. However, I am also dedicated to finding the truth, not winning an argument or "being right". I'm not trying to make anyone "look bad" in this thread, only to get them to understand that "feelings" and "opinions" aren't fact. Listen, I've been wrong before, and I will be again, I accept that, but these videos aren't any sort of proof, they're just videos that people have cut and edited again and again.

If you want to really find proof, really make a difference, read my first post. There are ways to obtain proof, they just aren't easy. But they are waiting to be found. Unfortunately, it involves effort, which is one thing that the Conspiracy Theory community has gotten lazy about lately. Everyone wants to "discover" something on youtube instead of getting off their butt and going someplace. For example, over the years, I personally have been to Dealey Plaza where JFK was killed, Kecksburg & Shanksville PA where a ufo was sighted and a supposedly hijacked plane went down, and (years ago) I talked personally with respected ufo researcher Stan Gordon, visited the curator of the NJ State Police Museum to review the Lindberg Kidnapping case, and had several other adventures.

Point being that I've gone to these places and looked around with my own 2 eyes, I've seen the sights, smelled the smells, talked to people, and touched things with my own 2 hands. Did I discover anything? No, but I tried. And not to toot my own horn, but in the 1980s I was telling anyone that would listen that a guy hiding in the water drain in Dealey Plaza could have off'ed the President and gotten away. While wearing a black business suit, I actually laid down in the gutter of Elm Street (while traffic was still moving) and with a tape measure took the dimensions and depth of the thing....and this was 10 years before I watched a Discovery Channel special that proposed the same thing.

Problem is, nobody does that sort of stuff any more. Everybody wants to sit at home and create their own myths about stuff that other people have developed. THen they defend their biased, entrenched positions to the death, accepting no countering evidence or theories, in an effort to "be right", even if they know they're not.

Bottom line is this- I don't like it when people try to show me "proof" when it isn't proof. Go get some proof and I'll jump for joy, even if it disagrees with what I think happened. Just don't give me rehashed crap.




[edit on 16-1-2008 by Reality Hurts]


reply posted on 16-1-2008 @ 01:20 PM by GUICE2
reply to post by Reality Hurts



Your right my friend....i understand the overwhelming need for some people to be "right". However you have to question who will benefit and what is benefitted. You cant say that they just want to be right for personal satisfaction when speaking of issues with such tremendous implications. That is one sick and twisted human being, actually it would have to be many many sick and twisted human beings. Even the 9/11 commission would have to be in on it....how would these people gather all the tapes and alter them correctly? Wouldnt you be able to tell if a video file has been edited over and over again?
What about videos of interviews which refer to people hearing multiple explosions on several floors? Were those dubbed over or something?
There are somethings you just cant edit man.....and the freedom of information act gets you no where in this country. You are all too right when you say that people just want to be be right in an argument and arent worried about the truth but for something like this dude?



reply posted on 16-1-2008 @ 01:56 PM by Reality Hurts
Originally posted by GUICE2
the freedom of information act gets you no where in this country.

And its worthless for gathering evidence.

You will not find much through the FOI. To find proof, you need to get out there. Remember "The X Files" motto? The Truth is Out There, meaning that you have to go find it. FOI isn't going to give up much, they get to redact anything they want and keep it from you.

Want to know where find proof?

If it was a controlled demolition, someone did it. Someone paid for it. Payments can be tracked and traced, even if it was cash. The cash came from somewhere, an account, a safe deposit box, but it did come from someplace. That means someone stored it, and some one handled it. A bank, a personal account, a government account, the proof of the funding is there, with dates and times of withdrawal.

And someone had to lay the explosives. More than 1 someone, most likely. And someone needed to plan it, you don't just stick C4 in a building and hope it comes down, if this was a demolition, this took someone with a background in not just explosives, but structural engineering. So someone to plan, some few to emplace the explosives. Who were they? Who saw them? Where did they stay? Where did they eat while doing this? Did they drink? Did they get drunk and accidentally spill the beans to their spouse?

See where this is going? IF this was a controlled demolition, THAN someone knows about it. that same someone will have physical evidence as well, not just a tale to relate. They'll have bank statements, left over diagrams, they'll have something, somewhere to corroborate their story.

Find them.

And find their funding.

That will be proof.

Internet videos are NOT proof.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 13 days ago with 14 member flags
9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 6 days ago with 12 member flags
Wikipedia categorizes 9/11 truth as \'denialism\'
  Posted 17 days ago with 11 member flags
Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 14 days ago with 6 member flags
new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
  Posted 8 days ago with 6 member flags

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Anonymous hacks CIA
  Breaking Alternative News, Posted 14 hours ago, 109 replies
Free Psychic Readings
  General Chit Chat, Posted 10 hours ago, 94 replies
Hollow Earth Theory New Evidence.
  General Conspiracies, Posted 9 hours ago, 61 replies
Free will
  Philosophy and Metaphysics, Posted 12 hours ago, 50 replies