reply to post by zorgon
It simply does not matter anymore what anyone says on this case Zorgon. The 'official' believers are set in stone and quote 'facts' from
government institutions and the 'truther's' still ask for an independant investigation yet get SHOT DOWN for even questioning the official story
that is backed by the 'facts' provided to us by the government backed institutions.
Who do we feel has a heavy hand in this event? The GOVERNMENT! So why would they allow their own institutions to incriminate them?
Okay, I'm preaching to the choir on this one and preaching to the blind on the other side. All we are asking for is a REAL investigation. Not a
half ass attempt that is riddled with holes and blatant withholdings.
So keep up the good fight my friend but you have to know that the 'official' believers will never budge due to their 'facts'.
USA Military Officers Challenge Official Account of September 11, page 5
privacy
reply posted on 3-6-2008 @ 04:44 PM by thefreepatriot
reply to post by menguard
No need for E.T technology..for this job... The explanation for steel being melted after so long is thermite\therm ate.. Which is a chemical reaction that causes 4,000 F plenty enough to melt steel.. And is used in cutter charges so when the charges go off the thermate rips through the steel like a knife though butter.. Conventional charges would not have worked with a steel building such as WTC or would have been extremely difficult.. Evidence of therm ate residue has been found on WTC steel.
[edit on 3-6-2008 by thefreepatriot]
[edit on 3-6-2008 by thefreepatriot]
[edit on 3-6-2008 by thefreepatriot]
No need for E.T technology..for this job... The explanation for steel being melted after so long is thermite\therm ate.. Which is a chemical reaction that causes 4,000 F plenty enough to melt steel.. And is used in cutter charges so when the charges go off the thermate rips through the steel like a knife though butter.. Conventional charges would not have worked with a steel building such as WTC or would have been extremely difficult.. Evidence of therm ate residue has been found on WTC steel.
[edit on 3-6-2008 by thefreepatriot]
[edit on 3-6-2008 by thefreepatriot]
[edit on 3-6-2008 by thefreepatriot]
reply posted on 3-6-2008 @ 05:38 PM by toasted
reply to post by thefreepatriot
"" No need for E.T technology..for this job... The explanation for steel being melted after so long is thermite\therm ate.. Which is a chemical reaction that causes 4,000 F plenty enough to melt steel.. "
Cutting the steel is one thing, but that does not address what vaporised damn near everything!!!!!
It was freaking POWDER!!!!! WTF????!!!!
I'm sorry, but I find it hard to believe cutter charges and thermite DID ALL THAT! hello!!!
There is way more to them bldgs going down, than any of us here will ever be able to figger out
without the info being leaked....
and Alien?....mmmmmwell, I consider the aliens to be the fallen angels,
it's the only thing that makes sense. So, it sure could be.
"" No need for E.T technology..for this job... The explanation for steel being melted after so long is thermite\therm ate.. Which is a chemical reaction that causes 4,000 F plenty enough to melt steel.. "
Cutting the steel is one thing, but that does not address what vaporised damn near everything!!!!!
It was freaking POWDER!!!!! WTF????!!!!
I'm sorry, but I find it hard to believe cutter charges and thermite DID ALL THAT! hello!!!
There is way more to them bldgs going down, than any of us here will ever be able to figger out
without the info being leaked....
and Alien?....mmmmmwell, I consider the aliens to be the fallen angels,
it's the only thing that makes sense. So, it sure could be.
reply posted on 4-6-2008 @ 02:27 AM by MidnightDStroyer
Ah, but let's take a look at the Constitution's definition of Treason...After all, Bush did
swear a legally-binding Oath (as well as all Federal & State Officers in all three Branches) to obey it:
Therefore, by the Supreme Law of the Land, Merriam-Webster's (modern) definition does not apply...Because the Framers of the Constitution would have used either the prevailing definition of their time or would have specified their own definition for legal purposes. This is the precedent used when the Supreme Court & sanctioned Constitutional lawyers "interpret" the Constitution...If the issue is still in doubt, they look back on legal cases in history & try to find cases that may have already set the precedence.
At least, that's the way it's supposed to work...The way that Bill Clinton & Bush Sr. & Jr. have stacked the courts, the Shrub seems to have "self-qualified" himself to act as Legislative, Executive & Judicial all in one Office. All done illegally, of course. The Constitution designates that Congress has the full power of Legislation...Which means that Bush can't legally use "signing statements" or even make use of any Executive Orders. Just the fact that he does so...And enforces non-legal "laws" against his Constitutional Oath...Regardless of any responsibility of "conspiracy" involving the 9/11 attacks, Bully Boy Bush & his Corporate Crony Gang are already criminals of extreme magnitude.
Even so, please notice that the Constitutional definition does not include attacks against the Federal Government. Thus, in the case of a revolt against the Federal Government, it's not considered to be Treason...But if the Federal Government attacks the States or the People, it's still defined as Treason. It may be up to the Supreme Court (under the full terms as described for due process of law) to pass judgment, but it's up to Congress to declare the punishment.
Are you also aware that Bush has been doing a bunch of fund raising for McCain's campaign (also a DIGG link here)? So guess who's most likely to get "levered into Office" this time around?...And how fast the USA is going to keep spiraling down?
Article 3, Section 3
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
Therefore, by the Supreme Law of the Land, Merriam-Webster's (modern) definition does not apply...Because the Framers of the Constitution would have used either the prevailing definition of their time or would have specified their own definition for legal purposes. This is the precedent used when the Supreme Court & sanctioned Constitutional lawyers "interpret" the Constitution...If the issue is still in doubt, they look back on legal cases in history & try to find cases that may have already set the precedence.
At least, that's the way it's supposed to work...The way that Bill Clinton & Bush Sr. & Jr. have stacked the courts, the Shrub seems to have "self-qualified" himself to act as Legislative, Executive & Judicial all in one Office. All done illegally, of course. The Constitution designates that Congress has the full power of Legislation...Which means that Bush can't legally use "signing statements" or even make use of any Executive Orders. Just the fact that he does so...And enforces non-legal "laws" against his Constitutional Oath...Regardless of any responsibility of "conspiracy" involving the 9/11 attacks, Bully Boy Bush & his Corporate Crony Gang are already criminals of extreme magnitude.
Even so, please notice that the Constitutional definition does not include attacks against the Federal Government. Thus, in the case of a revolt against the Federal Government, it's not considered to be Treason...But if the Federal Government attacks the States or the People, it's still defined as Treason. It may be up to the Supreme Court (under the full terms as described for due process of law) to pass judgment, but it's up to Congress to declare the punishment.
Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Have you been paying attention to who Rupert Murdoch has been giving money too in regards to the Presidential Election? I think not.....
Are you also aware that Bush has been doing a bunch of fund raising for McCain's campaign (also a DIGG link here)? So guess who's most likely to get "levered into Office" this time around?...And how fast the USA is going to keep spiraling down?
reply posted on 4-6-2008 @ 09:07 AM by SlightlyAbovePar
reply to post by Anonymous ATS
May I offer an opposing view?
I find the label "debunker" is used more and more as a slur meant to minimize what someone 'brings the table'. Meaning, if someone is so-called "debunker" then they are to be ignored. The charge of being a debunker, on these forums, is right up there with 'dis-info agent', 'paid government spook', etc (and equally laughable).
Truthers are so emotionally invested in the conclusion of their various theories they see any critique of their “work” as a personal attack. This should serve as a huge red flag. Truthers can not separate themselves from the subject matter. They are (IMO) so closely tied to the conclusions they are literally unable to see what’s right in front of them. IMO, die-hard truthers think the “movement” is as much about them as it is the subject matter. Truthers don’t understand that they should be embracing skeptics, not separating themselves. Then again, truthers (IMO) don’t care what skeptics think. To them, 9-11 being a conspiracy is a forgone conclusion. That’s why there is such a negative, hostile reaction from truthers when you critize the far too easy contradictions. That is, they know what they know, they don’t need facts to come to the (to them) obvious conclusions and how dare you say something about their theory! Remember, it’s as much about them, as it is the subject matter.
Do yourself a favor and research the various leaders of this sham "movement". These are the same fear pimps that have been making the rounds on Coast to Coast and various conspiracy-type symposiums for years and years.
9-11 is just another alarm bell these con-artists use to support their income made from dealing in conspiracies, paranoia, "us versus them" mentality, the NWO, the illuminate, etc, etc, etc. IMO, the only people debating, are truthers and those that enjoy engaging them. The “average Joe” doesn’t buy into the various conspiracies. This “debate” has never been a debate and only exists with those sad individuals (all five or six of them) that ‘protest’ at ground zero every Saturday, in internet forums and on various radio shows. The idea there is a raging debate among serious people is a total sham. Sure there are busy threads on internet forums, like this one, but consider the audience when compared to available population.
It’s been seven years. The time to bring forth real, credible evidence (any!!) is long gone. For goodness sake, this is why theories like “hologram projectors” are talked about with a straight face. That is, the so-called movement has failed so miserably to provide absolutely anything that can be considered proof they are left to create fantasies as to how the buildings were “demolished”.
I mean this with no nastiness: I think the whole movement is truly sad. I respond to these messages because if I can prevent just one person from being sucked into this kind of nonsense, it will be worth it.
[edit on 4-6-2008 by SlightlyAbovePar]
May I offer an opposing view?
I find the label "debunker" is used more and more as a slur meant to minimize what someone 'brings the table'. Meaning, if someone is so-called "debunker" then they are to be ignored. The charge of being a debunker, on these forums, is right up there with 'dis-info agent', 'paid government spook', etc (and equally laughable).
Truthers are so emotionally invested in the conclusion of their various theories they see any critique of their “work” as a personal attack. This should serve as a huge red flag. Truthers can not separate themselves from the subject matter. They are (IMO) so closely tied to the conclusions they are literally unable to see what’s right in front of them. IMO, die-hard truthers think the “movement” is as much about them as it is the subject matter. Truthers don’t understand that they should be embracing skeptics, not separating themselves. Then again, truthers (IMO) don’t care what skeptics think. To them, 9-11 being a conspiracy is a forgone conclusion. That’s why there is such a negative, hostile reaction from truthers when you critize the far too easy contradictions. That is, they know what they know, they don’t need facts to come to the (to them) obvious conclusions and how dare you say something about their theory! Remember, it’s as much about them, as it is the subject matter.
Do yourself a favor and research the various leaders of this sham "movement". These are the same fear pimps that have been making the rounds on Coast to Coast and various conspiracy-type symposiums for years and years.
9-11 is just another alarm bell these con-artists use to support their income made from dealing in conspiracies, paranoia, "us versus them" mentality, the NWO, the illuminate, etc, etc, etc. IMO, the only people debating, are truthers and those that enjoy engaging them. The “average Joe” doesn’t buy into the various conspiracies. This “debate” has never been a debate and only exists with those sad individuals (all five or six of them) that ‘protest’ at ground zero every Saturday, in internet forums and on various radio shows. The idea there is a raging debate among serious people is a total sham. Sure there are busy threads on internet forums, like this one, but consider the audience when compared to available population.
It’s been seven years. The time to bring forth real, credible evidence (any!!) is long gone. For goodness sake, this is why theories like “hologram projectors” are talked about with a straight face. That is, the so-called movement has failed so miserably to provide absolutely anything that can be considered proof they are left to create fantasies as to how the buildings were “demolished”.
I mean this with no nastiness: I think the whole movement is truly sad. I respond to these messages because if I can prevent just one person from being sucked into this kind of nonsense, it will be worth it.
[edit on 4-6-2008 by SlightlyAbovePar]
reply posted on 4-6-2008 @ 11:11 AM by Lightworth
reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar
Strange how certain "debunkers" can write so eloquently with only emotion/opinion against those interested in (actual) 9/11 truth, whereas those interested in truth tend to cite physical/scientific realities that don't mesh with the government/media (propaganda) spiel. Btw, pseudoskeptics (or reactionary doubters without sound science or facts to substantiate their claims) should always be referred to as "debunkers" with quotation marks. Otherwise ACTUAL debunking is always a good thing.
1. There's NO physical evidence of a plane crash at the Pentagon or Shanksville... or a GROSSLY insufficient amount of wreckage to believe the rest just "vaporized" (to quote the NIST Report). Or IF they really did "vaporize," it was done with technology FAR beyond that which is known/revealed. That's just REAL physics.
2. The twin towers came down with a physical force FAR in excess of what a tank full of jet fuel can accomplish in such an incredibly short amount of time (if really any amount of time considering the towers were built specifically to withstand a jet impact). I suggest watching 9/11 Mysteries. Search it on Google Video. It's a rather spellbinding 1.5 hours.
Strange how certain "debunkers" can write so eloquently with only emotion/opinion against those interested in (actual) 9/11 truth, whereas those interested in truth tend to cite physical/scientific realities that don't mesh with the government/media (propaganda) spiel. Btw, pseudoskeptics (or reactionary doubters without sound science or facts to substantiate their claims) should always be referred to as "debunkers" with quotation marks. Otherwise ACTUAL debunking is always a good thing.
1. There's NO physical evidence of a plane crash at the Pentagon or Shanksville... or a GROSSLY insufficient amount of wreckage to believe the rest just "vaporized" (to quote the NIST Report). Or IF they really did "vaporize," it was done with technology FAR beyond that which is known/revealed. That's just REAL physics.
2. The twin towers came down with a physical force FAR in excess of what a tank full of jet fuel can accomplish in such an incredibly short amount of time (if really any amount of time considering the towers were built specifically to withstand a jet impact). I suggest watching 9/11 Mysteries. Search it on Google Video. It's a rather spellbinding 1.5 hours.
reply posted on 4-6-2008 @ 11:48 AM by Maxmars
reply to post by Lightworth
I must respectfully correct you on your point number 2. The towers were, according to the architectural designers, designed to withstand MULTIPLE impacts from jetliners.
I must respectfully correct you on your point number 2. The towers were, according to the architectural designers, designed to withstand MULTIPLE impacts from jetliners.
reply posted on 4-6-2008 @ 12:41 PM by Maxmars
reply to post by Seymour Butz
Thank you for your correction. I was unaware he wasn't part of the original design team (or rather, he never specified such - although I admit he wasn't directly asked.)
Interestingly, it seems you have some sources you might want to share here too.
Thank you for your correction. I was unaware he wasn't part of the original design team (or rather, he never specified such - although I admit he wasn't directly asked.)
Interestingly, it seems you have some sources you might want to share here too.
reply posted on 4-6-2008 @ 12:59 PM by menguard
reply to post by zorgon
Hey Zorgon,
What better weapon then to focalize the suns energy into a beam. I had a person in one of my threads that had done some secret work, with underground projects in New York. There was somebody that said this area is of interest. I was talking about 'energy vortices' at that time. I will locate it the time period.
Now to direct that energy from space to an underground conduit of some type could hold some stability.
The supposed tremors a few minutes before would explain some type of energy being directed from underneath.
The Technology being used is foreign to the common society, but I do know we are having some underground wars between nations. What better way to be at war then beneath the surface.
I'm sure every Nation has all there good stuff underground or on some other planet.
Sound technology
Sound creates form and destroys it. A high pulsed beam of energy up the building might do it.
Remember there are people all across the World that will perform a function to disrupt our LINEAR WORLD. A lot of contactees, experiencers, abductees, hidden sleepers and unhidden ones.
There is two sides to that coin, those that want to embrace it and those that want to do away with it.
Bush talked a lot about Space Wars, knocking sattelites out with other remote recievers and laser guided weapons on sattelites.
also I would like to point out, that if you want to keep society in a three dimensional grid, you will put an electrical fence around it. That being our internet, fiber optics system. Every home if full of radiation or some type of electrical discharge, not seen on the eye level.
(A.)You do this to keep a barrier up so others can't come in, an electrical fence to keep others out, a hands off policy. (No other aliens welcome).
(b.)You setup the world with a three dimensional grid that only allows those beings into this Dimension.
(c).Putting up three dimensional grids up keeps us locked in this dimension.
(d)You modify the world to your own enviroment. This of course being extraterrestrials.
Just food for thought.
[edit on 4-6-2008 by menguard]
Hey Zorgon,
What better weapon then to focalize the suns energy into a beam. I had a person in one of my threads that had done some secret work, with underground projects in New York. There was somebody that said this area is of interest. I was talking about 'energy vortices' at that time. I will locate it the time period.
Now to direct that energy from space to an underground conduit of some type could hold some stability.
The supposed tremors a few minutes before would explain some type of energy being directed from underneath.
The Technology being used is foreign to the common society, but I do know we are having some underground wars between nations. What better way to be at war then beneath the surface.
I'm sure every Nation has all there good stuff underground or on some other planet.
Sound technology
Sound creates form and destroys it. A high pulsed beam of energy up the building might do it.
Remember there are people all across the World that will perform a function to disrupt our LINEAR WORLD. A lot of contactees, experiencers, abductees, hidden sleepers and unhidden ones.
There is two sides to that coin, those that want to embrace it and those that want to do away with it.
Bush talked a lot about Space Wars, knocking sattelites out with other remote recievers and laser guided weapons on sattelites.
also I would like to point out, that if you want to keep society in a three dimensional grid, you will put an electrical fence around it. That being our internet, fiber optics system. Every home if full of radiation or some type of electrical discharge, not seen on the eye level.
(A.)You do this to keep a barrier up so others can't come in, an electrical fence to keep others out, a hands off policy. (No other aliens welcome).
(b.)You setup the world with a three dimensional grid that only allows those beings into this Dimension.
(c).Putting up three dimensional grids up keeps us locked in this dimension.
(d)You modify the world to your own enviroment. This of course being extraterrestrials.
Just food for thought.
[edit on 4-6-2008 by menguard]
reply posted on 4-6-2008 @ 02:11 PM by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by Seymour Butz
The buildings WERE made to withstand plane crashes. ALL tall skyscrapers are. It would be foolish to ignore the possibility that a plane could hit the tower you are building.
Now, apparently WTC wasn't designed to hold together after long exposure to extreme heat caused by jet fuel.
This of course is still in questions because:
1. If they are designed to withstand a crash, the fact is that most likely they would consider fuel starting fires as thats inevitable with such a crash.
2. Alot of engineers still claim that it wouldn't melt the steel.
Anyways heres a source for the original statement:
community.emporis.com...
The buildings WERE made to withstand plane crashes. ALL tall skyscrapers are. It would be foolish to ignore the possibility that a plane could hit the tower you are building.
Now, apparently WTC wasn't designed to hold together after long exposure to extreme heat caused by jet fuel.
This of course is still in questions because:
1. If they are designed to withstand a crash, the fact is that most likely they would consider fuel starting fires as thats inevitable with such a crash.
2. Alot of engineers still claim that it wouldn't melt the steel.
Anyways heres a source for the original statement:
community.emporis.com...
reply posted on 4-6-2008 @ 03:16 PM by Seymour Butz
Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
The buildings WERE made to withstand plane crashes. ALL tall skyscrapers are. It would be foolish to ignore the possibility that a plane could hit the tower you are building.
Anyways heres a source for the original statement:
community.emporis.com...
No, they weren't, and your source doesn't say that they were DESIGNED to survive a hit. If I missed it, please point it out. Thx.
Here's the original statements:
scott-juris.blogspot.com...
Robertson took the time to calculate how well his towers would handle the impact from a Boeing 707, the largest jetliner in service at the time. He says that his calculations assumed a plane lost in a fog while searching for an airport at relatively low speed, like the B-25 bomber.
One architect working for the Port Authority issued a statement to the press, covered in a prominent article in The Times, explaining that Robertson's study proved that the towers could withstand the impact of a jetliner moving at 600 miles an hour.
There were only two problems. The first, of course, was that no study of the impact of a 600-mile-an-hour plane ever existed. ''That's got nothing to do with the reality of what we did,'' Robertson snapped when shown the Port Authority architect's statement more than three decades later.
US Consulate Whistleblower Says 9/11 Hijackers Passports were issued by the CIA
Posted 19 days ago with 21 member flags
Posted 19 days ago with 21 member flags
An Overview and Debunking of the AE9/11T\'s List of Demolition Signs
Posted 15 days ago with 12 member flags
Posted 15 days ago with 12 member flags
new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
Posted 8 days ago with 6 member flags
Posted 8 days ago with 6 member flags
Final Decision: Court sanctions lawyers behind September 11 conspiracy case
Posted 8 days ago with 6 member flags
Posted 8 days ago with 6 member flags
Newest topics, updated in real-time:
President of Kalmykia tells of his invitation to an alien spaceship
Aliens and UFOs, Posted 4 minutes ago
Aliens and UFOs, Posted 4 minutes ago
Occupy Wall street, we are witnessing social revolution.
Social Issues and Civil Unrest, Posted 1 hours ago
Social Issues and Civil Unrest, Posted 1 hours ago
Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:
Google accidentally released Maine election results early!
2012 US Elections, Posted 6 hours ago, 29 flags
2012 US Elections, Posted 6 hours ago, 29 flags
Threatened by a Ron Paul victory in Maine, GOP (insider spills beans) adds last minute caucuses.
2012 US Elections, Posted 11 hours ago, 26 flags
2012 US Elections, Posted 11 hours ago, 26 flags
Current Potential Habitable Worlds - Update February 2012
Space Exploration, Posted 13 hours ago, 22 flags
Space Exploration, Posted 13 hours ago, 22 flags
Egypt: Muslims attempt to purge village near Alexandria of its Christian population
Middle East Issues, Posted 16 hours ago, 17 flags
Middle East Issues, Posted 16 hours ago, 17 flags
Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:
BREAKING rumour: Kim Jong-Un assassinated?
Breaking Political News, Posted 15 hours ago, 174 replies
Breaking Political News, Posted 15 hours ago, 174 replies
Most Canadians want the death penalty back
Breaking Alternative News, Posted 14 hours ago, 97 replies
Breaking Alternative News, Posted 14 hours ago, 97 replies
Egypt: Muslims attempt to purge village near Alexandria of its Christian population
Middle East Issues, Posted 16 hours ago, 83 replies
Middle East Issues, Posted 16 hours ago, 83 replies
EWTN (Catholic TV Network) Sues Obama Admin Over Mandate
US Political Madness, Posted 17 hours ago, 72 replies
US Political Madness, Posted 17 hours ago, 72 replies
Google accidentally released Maine election results early!
2012 US Elections, Posted 6 hours ago, 67 replies
2012 US Elections, Posted 6 hours ago, 67 replies
The Above Top Secret Web sites are a
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www3.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.002 seconds
Page processed in: 0.298 seconds
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www3.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.002 seconds
Page processed in: 0.298 seconds
