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.

 

9/11: The Pentagon - Jesse Ventura Speaks With Pilots For 9/11 Truth

page: 4
16
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Actually the people who believe in the OS are the tinfoil hat crowd, patiently waiting in the UFO forum for their beloved goverment to disclose about Aliens. I can well imagine you believe the fantastic tale the OS is . When it comes to UFOs bigfoot the OS and reptillians I am a sceptic, but I dont take that as a free card to be passively agressive or downright offensive. Some people create a really hostile enviroment and "bad vibes" I only see on this particular section of the forum.

Too many people on here call people who believe whitnesses who were there, professionals who were there, the many many many professionals outside and inside America who question the official story DESPITE the repercussions it potentially holds, crazy. I resorted to calling the believers tinfoil hat people and nutters as well, partly because they DO believe in a crazy and fantastic story, but mostly hoping they would get the hint. But apparently what works on 5 year olds does not work on them. So I will have to be more blunt.

How would you feel if I would behave that way in the UFO section, the way you and many other 911 deniers behave on here calling people who see many flaws with the NIST report crazy?
edit on 16-12-2010 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


Boy do you have me all wrong... I dont agree with these wars one bit.. I dont agree that we should 1 single soldier on the ground in ANY country.

I have always been clear on my stance..

If we had proof (real proof) that OBL was behind it.. Send in covert ops.. lock his position.. Blow up 50 sq miles around him.. the end..

Iraq- illegal war! period.

Every single soldier needs come home all bases closed.. We no longer police the world.. We keep to our selves.

Results - Korean Peninsula - 6months = Korean Desert! Dont care!
Results - Israel - time to defend yourselves jews! - result - Israel and all surrounding countries obliterated! Dont care!!

The only way this country goes to war in my plan, is if our mainland is attacked by a "country" .. not a group.. Groups are dealt with, with tomahawks!!

When someone finally steps up and attacks us.. We defend.. Then we unleash the full force, no hold barred of the US military and decimate the country...

That country is now ours.. I bet after 1 or 2 of those situations, everyone would leave us alone like we had a bloody nose, while infected with aids and hep c.

All of our soldiers (that we are already paying) would come home.. 1/2 would be released back into society..

The rest can rebuild and advance our infrastructure!



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 


There is no such thing as an "OS". It is a term made up ("coined", actually, just a few years ago) by the so-called "truth movement".

The "TM" has gone off the rails....did so a long time ago.

Evidenced by the fact that Jesse Ventura is JUST NOW (apparently) deciding to get involved. Like many before him, once they are exposed to this garbage that is calling themselves the "TM" and their slew of inconsistent and illogical "theories", HE has fallen hook, line and sinker.....influenced by the pseudo-science that is commonly used in the "questioning" of events of 9/11.

SO FAR, not one assertion, nor innuendo-dropping "question" that has been proposed by those in the "TM" has been based on fact. Instead, it is ALL a compilation of false assumptions, and poor research, combined with a tendency to simply accept what OTHERS have told them...again, accepting rather than researching.

Because, a little unbiased research is all it takes to cut through the crap spewed by the majority in the "TM".

There is ONE potentially valid nugget of "conspiracy" that surrounds the events of that day...and that nugget includes several elements that preceded 9/11....serious missteps, mistakes, grievous disregard for the warning signs. And why? Call it incompetence, hubris, arrogance....a lot of things.

It is most likely the case that THAT is what "smells"....and the few who began all of this, once they sensed it, then went WAY beyond the pale, in ever widening circles of ludicrous "alternative theories"...each more ridiculous than the next.

AND, it is important to note, there are always nutjobs after ever major event, and the Internet encourages them....but, what really sparked the most insane "theories" was because of a French author!! That's right....some French author, hardly well-known at all, decided that HE, and he alone, thought that the Pentagon, and everything else, didn't look "right".

His name? Thierry Meyssan. (and, NO! I am NOT recommending his book! Just describing it...and informing people. Because, I am fairly certain most who "believe" the "9/11 conspiracy" websites are blissfully unaware...)


L'Effroyable imposture (or "The Horrifying Fraud") is the original French title of a highly controversial 2002 book by French journalist and political activist Thierry Meyssan. Its English edition is entitled 9/11: The Big Lie.

The book argues that the attacks of September 11, 2001 were "false flag" operations directed by right-wingers in the U.S. government and the military-industrial complex who sought a casus belli for military action in Afghanistan and Iraq. A publishing sensation in France, the book has also received severe criticism over its factuality in both the French and U.S. mainstream news media. The U.S. government has publicly denounced the book and considers it a significant international misinformation threat. The crux of the criticism emphasizes that the book contradicts much eyewitness and forensic evidence and so cannot be accepted as a factual account.


en.wikipedia.org...:_The_Big_Lie

(BTW...interrupting myself here, with an observation. Take a moment, and review ANY NUMBER of the posts made by ATS members who try to make a case for the "TM". You will notice, hopefully, a pattern: Many common "catch phrases" will be seen, and repeated. Over and over again. Think of them in the same way you would the much-discussed "talking points" that are a trademark of "Fox News"...watch Fox contributors make the rounds on pundit talking heads shows, and listen to the way they ALL follow the same script, on any given day. SAME thing with the "TM"...aka "truthers"...).


What is particularly despicable about "Monsieur" Meyssan is how QUICKLY he trotted out that piece of fifth he calls a "book"!! It was out by the SPRING (early summer, at latest) of 2002!!!

Shows the kind of "in-depth" research he undertook.....


Let's see if this synopsis of this French idiot's claims and assertions, from his book, sound familiar?:


He claims the Pentagon was not hit by a plane, but by a guided missile fired on orders of far right-wingers inside the United States government. Further, he says, the planes that struck the World Trade Center were not flown by associates of Osama bin Laden, but were programmed by the same government people to fly into the twin towers.

What really interests him, though, is what he sees as the conspiracy behind these actions. He contends that it was organized by right-wing elements inside the government who were planning a coup unless President Bush agreed to increase military spending and go to war against Afghanistan and Iraq to promote the conspirators' oil interests.

...(skip)....

A Pentagon spokesman said, ''There was no official reaction because we figured it was so stupid.''


Alan Riding, the NYTimes - June 22, 2002.


NINE years on, and the same old, same old....recycled crap, from people who should take some time to LEARN a few things, rather than just lapping up whatever the "conspiracy" sites spoon-feed them......


Finally, out of ALL the silly "reasons" to "question" the events of that day, the stupidest is this "Building 7" nonsense.

THINK it through, for a minute.....ALL of the other buildings in the vicinity had to be demolished, anyway, as part of the clean-up of "Ground Zero". WTC 3 (the Marriott Hotel), WTC 4, 5 and 6 too. Seven was GOING TO COME DOWN anyway....it was a foregone conclusion, due to the damage inflicted. JUST AS the others were damaged too severly to be worth salvaging!!

WTC 7's unique design resulted in its collapsing on its own, with the amount of damage inflicted by falling debris, and subsequent fires. Just as the two Towers collapsed, in their unique ways (they were both "unique" in the same way...so "unique" isn't hte right word, exactly...but their designs contributed to their ultimate fate).


edit on 16 December 2010 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 



Very riveting and very wrong


What did I say that is incorrect?


I know the truth and that is, the 'truth' is a lie.


So you're admitting defeat...? I win?



One day you'll have an epiphany and will realize how utterly naive and trusting you've been.


How am I naive and trusting about the fact that the terrorists that hijacked the planes subsequently died when said planes hit a giant tower?

You're the one who said "If you want to prove that these 19 hijackers are dead, I will need to hear this from their families with an impartial translator. Not via the newspapers nor TV news. ", so why don't you hire a translator, track the families down, and ask them? I don't even have to take sides in this to see how your statement is the naive one. You're believing they're not dead because you think the news is lying, yet do nothing to verify your position via physical evidence. Do you see the problem here?

Regardless, the hijackers were in a large plane, flew it into a massive building creating a pretty big fireball, had the building collapse onto it and drive it all into the ground. This isn't a die hard movie, they're not just going to spring back up out of the debris screaming allah akbar and engage in a Hollywood style shootout. But of course, if you then respond with a version of the "They weren't the real hijackers" story and whatnot, that would open an entirely new argument that requires a pretty decent amount of evidence, and given your investigative skills digging deeply into the whereabouts of families and whether the accused are deceased or not, I'd have to say you're really not going to be presenting too strong of a case here.
edit on 16-12-2010 by Whyhi because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Yes it has been 9 years. It takes time for the truth to surface, always has. If somebody would have said in 2001 it werent just arabs behind 911 I would have replied, what makes you think so? Anybody can say that.

I think you are so far gone you do not even realize that you are not making any sense. You do not even realize you are siding with the truthers with the post you made. However you are strong with the insults again, calling people who believe the whitnesses on that day and the surviving new york firefighters crazy. Shouldnt you be in the ufo section patiently waiting for disclosure?

And yes I do realize the irony of berating you after pointing out that you ranted in your post, but its really hard not to given your Kinderstube or the lack of it.
edit on 16-12-2010 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 08:19 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


There is no such thing as an "OS". It is a term made up ("coined", actually, just a few years ago) by the so-called "truth movement".


That is completely untrue and you know that.

FACT: The OS was told by the 911 Commission reports NIST reports, FEMA reports, News media, and members in the Bush administration.

We all know how disturbing the truth is, however your constant assault against ATS members who bring evidence and credible sources to the table speak volumes to your fight for the truth.


The "TM" has gone off the rails....did so a long time ago.


FACT: TM has grown.


Evidenced by the fact that Jesse Ventura is JUST NOW (apparently) deciding to get involved. Like many before him, once they are exposed to this garbage that is calling themselves the "TM" and their slew of inconsistent and illogical "theories", HE has fallen hook, line and sinker.....influenced by the pseudo-science that is commonly used in the "questioning" of events of 9/11.


You can’t even back your opinion. Looks to me, it is a few of you that have fallen for the “pseudo-science” that some of you defend religiously, like the NIST report.



SO FAR, not one assertion, nor innuendo-dropping "question" that has been proposed by those in the "TM" has been based on fact.


FACT: This is completely false.


Instead, it is ALL a compilation of false assumptions, and poor research, combined with a tendency to simply accept what OTHERS have told them...again, accepting rather than researching.


You are the one that needs to do some real research. Most people know by now that the OS is a fraud, yet you still defend the “proven lies,” why is that weed?


There is ONE potentially valid nugget of "conspiracy" that surrounds the events of that day...and that nugget includes several elements that preceded 9/11....serious missteps, mistakes, grievous disregard for the warning signs. And why? Call it incompetence, hubris, arrogance....a lot of things.


FACT: Your excuses in defending the Bush administration and the Pentagon are just that. You can’t even prove that your opinion is even true? The government has not given the American people any real answers into 911, and the government never admitted to any incompetence. All we got is their silence.


Because, a little unbiased research is all it takes to cut through the crap spewed by the majority in the "TM".


Fact: If there was any truth to your allegation, you would have posted hundreds credible sources, to back you assumptions.


It is most likely the case that THAT is what "smells"....and the few who began all of this, once they sensed it, then went WAY beyond the pale, in ever widening circles of ludicrous "alternative theories"...each more ridiculous than the next.


Why don’t you show us an example to your opinion? What is really “ludicrous” are people who support the OS, the proven lies, and know better.


AND, it is important to note, there are always nutjobs after ever major event, and the Internet encourages them....


Like those that continue to defend the OS lies, right?


but, what really sparked the most insane "theories" was because of a French author!! That's right....some French author, hardly well-known at all, decided that HE, and he alone, thought that the Pentagon, and everything else, didn't look "right".

The book argues that the attacks of September 11, 2001 were "false flag" operations directed by right-wingers in the U.S. government and the military-industrial complex who sought a casus belli for military action in Afghanistan and Iraq. A publishing sensation in France, the book has also received severe criticism over its factuality in both the French and U.S. mainstream news media. The U.S. government has publicly denounced the book and considers it a significant international misinformation threat. The crux of the criticism emphasizes that the book contradicts much eyewitness and forensic evidence and so cannot be accepted as a factual account.


FACT: Circumstantial evidence supports a false flag attack, because the OS cannot be proven, and there is no evidence to support the OS.
Every piece of information that was told to the American people came from the Bush administration, including the 911 Commission report and NIST, or are you going to deny that simple fact to?

Everyone but you, knows the media is a tool used by our government to keep us misinformed, apparently you have never researched the topic.


(BTW...interrupting myself here, with an observation. Take a moment, and review ANY NUMBER of the posts made by ATS members who try to make a case for the "TM". You will notice, hopefully, a pattern: Many common "catch phrases" will be seen, and repeated. Over and over again. Think of them in the same way you would the much-discussed "talking points" that are a trademark of "Fox News"...watch Fox contributors make the rounds on pundit talking heads shows, and listen to the way they ALL follow the same script, on any given day. SAME thing with the "TM"...aka "truthers"...).


You mean "catch phrases" that are trademarks from people who believe in the OS, like twofers, delusional, paranoid, fantasy world, tin foil hats, daydreams, and the likes.


What is particularly despicable about "Monsieur" Meyssan is how QUICKLY he trotted out that piece of fifth he calls a "book"!! It was out by the SPRING (early summer, at latest) of 2002!!!

Shows the kind of "in-depth" research he undertook.....


Apparently "Monsieur" Meyssan did his homework, why haven’t you? If you didn’t like the book why did you even bothering reading the second chapter, much less the rest of it?


He claims the Pentagon was not hit by a plane, but by a guided missile fired on orders of far right-wingers inside the United States government. Further, he says, the planes that struck the World Trade Center were not flown by associates of Osama bin Laden, but were programmed by the same government people to fly into the twin towers.


And you have absolute proof that none of it is true? Let’s see your evidence and not just your opinions to what you think. We are in here to deny “ignorance” not to embrace it.


What really interests him, though, is what he sees as the conspiracy behind these actions. He contends that it was organized by right-wing elements inside the government who were planning a coup unless President Bush agreed to increase military spending and go to war against Afghanistan and Iraq to promote the conspirators' oil interests.


Funny thing is, many of us believe this too, especially since circumstantial evidence all points to insiders from within the Bush administration. If you want to say none of it is true then prove it is not? You need to prove that Bush and Cheney had nothing to do with this false flag attack since you are the one that is in complete disbelief and complaining.


A Pentagon spokesman said, ''There was no official reaction because we figured it was so stupid.''


LOL what did you expect? Perhaps, some evidence proven they were innocent, funny they never presented any? FACT: Most intelligent criminals don’t react when they are being accused of something.


NINE years on, and the same old, same old....recycled crap, from people who should take some time to LEARN a few things, rather than just lapping up whatever the "conspiracy" sites spoon-feed them......


And yet a few of you are here parroting the same old recycled OS government claims that were proven lies years ago. Talk about spoon fed?


Finally, out of ALL the silly "reasons" to "question" the events of that day, the stupidest is this "Building 7" nonsense.

THINK it through, for a minute.....ALL of the other buildings in the vicinity had to be demolished, anyway, as part of the clean-up of "Ground Zero". WTC 3 (the Marriott Hotel), WTC 4, 5 and 6 too. Seven was GOING TO COME DOWN anyway....it was a foregone conclusion, due to the damage inflicted. JUST AS the others were damaged too severly to be worth salvaging!!


Yet, you cannot prove WTC 7 was damaged severely by the other WTC. A few of you can only give your opinions about a shadow that was photograph and covered by heavy clouds of smoke, because some of you want to believe it is a gash because this might support the OS of WTC 7, these are assumptions, not proven facts.

The “only” hypothesis that supports the demise of WTC 7 is demolition, science does not stand up to the NIST report or any other myths that a few of you can dream up.

edit on 16-12-2010 by impressme because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 08:47 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Well, there was the fact that not all of the hijackers (15 of 19) weren't even Afghan. They were Saudi.
Not to mention reports from survivors of explosions below them seconds before the planes hit above them.
Also, there were thermite remnants from the debris. How do you call that off?

I don't necessarily agree with the Truther's beliefs, or consider myself a Truther, I just know somethings not quite right about this whole thing.

I remember 2 days after the whole incident (my birthday is the 6th, so I can remember this pretty well) that they showed the pictures of the Pentagon attack, it looked more like someone had taken a bazooka and fired a rocket into the side of the building.
edit on 16-12-2010 by Xen0m0rpH because: take a bazooka (wat)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 09:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Xen0m0rpH
 


Yes pilots firefighters engineers achitects chemists, truther scum the whole lot of them
. Butn them at the stake I say.

Okay done. Now who knows how to fly a plane? Cant be that hard :p



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
reply to post by Xen0m0rpH
 


Yes pilots firefighters engineers achitects chemists, truther scum the whole lot of them
. Butn them at the stake I say.

Okay done. Now who knows how to fly a plane? Cant be that hard :p


Well, this tells you how high you are, this tells you how much fuel you have...and this you just move up and down. That's all I need to know right guys?...Right?
edit on 16-12-2010 by Xen0m0rpH because: Bleh



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 09:26 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 



FACT: The OS was told by the 911 Commission reports NIST reports, FEMA reports, News media, and members in the Bush administration.


There's no "official" story, there's information that is being interpreted, coincidentally, none of it points to an "inside job" of any kind. The 9/11 commission report discussed the non-technical aspects that led up to the events that took place on 9/11, NIST displayed what happened to the towers and the reasons for collapse, and the news reports any new revelations about events that is deemed relevant. It's not like they're reading from the same script so to speak, like you make it seem like, they do their specific jobs and report their findings, it's not that hard of a concept.


FACT: TM has grown.


I don't think that's what Weedwhacker meant by "off the rails"...

Regardless, the term truther is so vague and undefined, it can apply to anyone, what you need to do is construct a solid theory and give yourself a new title or something, like 'controlled demolition supporter' or 'hologram theory supporter'. It would be quite humorous considering if this happened, you'd have conspiracy theorists arguing with other conspiracy theorists about which theory is correct.


Anyways, the amount of clueless people that support your position does not effect the evidence. Hell, look at the amount of religious people in your country compared to atheists.



You can’t even back your opinion.


His opinion that Jesse Ventura is just now entering into the truth movement? Isn't that kind of self evident?


FACT: This is completely false.


Name one legitimate question about 9/11 that's been chanted by the truth movement.


Most people know by now that the OS is a fraud, yet you still defend the “proven lies,”


Again, random supports that are as clueless as an average truther really doesn't help your cause. This has already been investigated thoroughly by actual experts in the relevant fields, they seem pretty certain that the information they have displayed support their theory of why the buildings fell, and no, they don't involve super bombs of any kind.

Name one "lie" that's been "proven" to be false.


Fact: If there was any truth to your allegation, you would have posted hundreds credible sources, to back you assumptions.


When he said "unbiased research" he literally meant unbiased, not view various sources with trutherglasses which block and misinterpret anything that interferes with your fantasy.


Why don’t you show us an example to your opinion?


He meant instead of taking information in rationally, they add a conspiracy spin to it, such as misinterpreting blurry video of the planes crashing into the towers and instead of trying to explain it rationally, they take the conspiracy side and basically say, well there's clearly an an anomaly here, which means the plane isn't real which means that it's a missile. Basically, anything that interferes with your inside job belief needs to be explained with a conspiracy bias rather than rationally interpreted


Like those that continue to defend the OS lies, right?


There's no official story, there's information such as technical studies and reports about why things happened as they did. Truthers are attempting to throw out their own theory, which they haven't seem to solidified after 9 years, and surprised that it's receiving scrutiny of their claims. Welcome to the real world.


Circumstantial evidence supports a false flag attack


Such as? Truther evidence is one thing, trying to connect the dots to it being an inside job is an even harder task. Good luck with that.


because the OS cannot be proven


Specifically name which part(s) of the accepted information and accounts about the events on 9/11 has been falsified


there is no evidence to support the OS


NIST seems pretty solid on their stance of what brought the towers down, just to name one. You should try offering your own report which tells them why they're wrong, I'd imagine they'd be more than willing to correct any errors they may have made.


Every piece of information that was told to the American people came from the Bush administration, including the 911 Commission report and NIST, or are you going to deny that simple fact to?


Kind of a silly statement, how else would get information aside from the 9/11 commission report, the NIST reports and government statements? Telepathy?


Everyone but you, knows the media is a tool used by our government to keep us misinformed, apparently you have never researched the topic.


Coincidentally, most 'debunkers' are skeptics and frequent their own sources of information and cirlces, the media is really irrelevant, they're reporting whatever they feel like needs to be reported. So is every major media outlet also in on the cover-up? Or am I misinterpreting your position here?


If you didn’t like the book why did you even bothering to read the second chapter, much less the rest of it?


Debunkers, or skeptics, generally aren't too fond of misinformation and usually combat it in as many ways as they can. If a debunker / skeptic sees a book, realizes it's bunk, said person is probably going to argue against it wherever the issue is being argued.


And you have absolute proof that not of it is true?


Absolute proof? Well, the other theories lack evidence and critical thinking, among other things, so I'll stick with the plane hit it theory unless some other theory of a missile disguised as a plane hit it theory presents evidence and offers it to the rest of the world to be put under scrutiny.

9/11: A Boeing 757 Struck the Pentagon


FACT: Most intelligent criminals don’t react when they are being accused of something.


Fact - any skeptical and rational person isn't going to believe what they saw wasn't actually a plane unless you present some serious evidence. Another fact, a rational person wouldn't think most people would cling onto such stupid ideas, but he'd a appear to be wrong this time...


same old recycled OS government claims


That's just wrong, they're not government claims just because it doesn't fit into your silly belief. It's not our fault the science doesn't agree with truthers on this one.

PS - I don't think that many skeptics / debunkers really liked Bush anyways


these are assumptions, not proven facts.


NIST seems to disagree here.


Yet, you cannot prove WTC 7 was damaged severely by the other WTC.


Remember that time it had a fire raging inside of it, I wonder what caused that...


The “only” hypothesis that supports the demise of WTC 7 is demolition


How so? What evidence supports said hypothesis?



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Xen0m0rpH
 



Well, there was the fact that not all of the hijackers (15 of 19) weren't even Afghan. They were Saudi.


THAT is true. Tenuous, at best, the "justification" for the Afghanistan operation....Intel connected the Taliban as "aiding and abetting" and providing shelter...even training (the combat type, for the "grunts" in the hijacking teams). This does deserve further investigation, and history will tell.


Not to mention reports from survivors of explosions below them seconds before the planes hit above them.


Now, you've moved away from the Pentagon aspect....however, where are some verifiable sources for that? May as well lay them out on the table, eh?


Also, there were thermite remnants from the debris.


And THAT is one of the greatest lies of the entire debate. Check the veracity of those claims, you may be surprised.
edit on 16 December 2010 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 10:23 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


I redact my statement as to the Thermite.


www.debunking911.com...

Seemed plausible when I first invested my time into inquiry but this is what gets me off that bus

"How much mass would be required to produce molten iron from thermite equal to the same volume of molten aluminum droplets shown flowing from the south tower window:.."

And after some math

"Example:

Assume 3000 lbs of aluminum fell from the towers. If it had been molten iron produced by thermite, then 6*3000 = 18,000 lbs of thermite reactants would have been required to produce that same volume of falling mass.

Suppose 10 tons of molten aluminum fell from the south tower, about 1/8th of that available from the airplane. If it had been molten iron produced from thermite, 60 tons of thermite reactants would have to have been stored in Fuji Bank to produce the same volume spilling out of the south tower. The section of floor would have to hold all of that plus the aircraft."

The amount of thermite to be sufficient is beyond a reasonable amount, even to a government like ours. The way the tower fell so perfectly, thermite would have to be planned so impeccibly it's sickening. Too much time and investment for something an explosion could do.

So in the long run, I no longer believe in the Thermite statement. But I've seen plenty of demolitions before, it may just be the size of the towers, but it still looks like a standard free fall.

(offhand topic:Sorry about the quotes, I'll try to fix once I get home. Can't seem to use them correctly here at work.)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 10:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Whyhi
 


There's no "official" story, there's information that is being interpreted, coincidentally, none of it points to an "inside job" of any kind. The 9/11 commission report discussed the non-technical aspects that led up to the events that took place on 9/11, NIST displayed what happened to the towers and the reasons for collapse, and the news reports any new revelations about events that is deemed relevant. It's not like they're reading from the same script so to speak, like you make it seem like, they do their specific jobs and report their findings, it's not that hard of a concept.


Your comments are laughable. No proof of inside job? Why would the government admit to anything being an inside job? Why would the criminals admit they were guilty?

Looks to me you have never researched 911.
You are entitled to your beliefs, but not your facts.
Where have you been? NIST was proven a fraud a long time ago do some real research instead of parroting the same OS lies.


1,389 “verified” architectural and engineering professionals and 10,552 other supporters
have signed the petition demanding of Congress
a truly independent investigation.


www.ae911truth.org...

Oh look! The list has grown, more proof that the Truth movement is still growing.
Now why would all these professionals put their reputations and careers on the line?


WTC 7 NIST Model vs. Reality

www.youtube.com...


NIST Simulation Compared to Video of WTC 7 Collapse

www.youtube.com...



NIST: Incompetent or Deliberately Covering Up Evidence of Molten Steel?


www.abovetopsecret.com...


Originally posted by cashlink
1. Why has Bin Laden never been charge for 911?
2. Why has there never been any time change out parts from any of all the four airplanes crashes provided as proof to belong to said aircrafts?
3. Why didn’t the Government investigate any of the four airplanes that crash that day?
Airplanes crashes are always investigated.
4. Why will the FBI not release the serial numbers to the black box so we can know they belong to said airplanes?
5. Why did NIST lie to the American people saying they did not look in to explosions at the WTC saying there were no eyewitnesses?
6. Why do FEMA and NIST reports contradict each other however, both reports where done by the same writers
7. Why has there never been a video or photo of an airplane hitting the pentagon?
8. Why was G-Bush not whisked away, while Our Country was being attack why was protocol not followed that morning to protect the President?
9. Why was a Federal crime scene at the Pentagon front lawn disturbed with in minutes of the explosions at the Pentagon? Photos of people with garbage bags picking up debris and putting in garbage bags. Talk about disturbing crime scene evidences!
10. Why did BBC announced the WTC 7 had already fell 20 minutes before it fell?
Meaning who told BBC the WTC 7 was going to come down.
11. Why has the media not investigate or ask all these above questions to our Government and demand some answers? Why is the media protecting our Government?


www.abovetopsecret.com...

All the government had to do to dispel all of these alternate stories would be to explain each point truthfully and with absolute verifiable evidence.

I challenge you to answer all eleven questions explaining in great detail to why these questions have not been answered by our government after nine years.

I supposed you like a few others in here, think “government crimes” should be hide behind National Security?


FACT: This is completely false.

Name one legitimate question about 9/11 that's been chanted by the truth movement.


Interesting to how you take snippets to some of my answers to someone else questions and twists it to fit your OS agenda.

Why didn’t you post what I was answering to? Instead you created your own question and added it to my answer, interesting; this speaks volumes to your truth seeking.


Originally posted by weedwhacker

SO FAR, not one assertion, nor innuendo-dropping "question" that has been proposed by those in the "TM" has been based on fact

FACT: This is completely false.

edit on 16-12-2010 by impressme because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Xen0m0rpH
 


Interesting, but scientists are not talking about the uses of normal Thermite.
I don’t support the idea that the WTC were brought down with the use of regular Thermite either. However I do support the idea that a Super na-nothermite could have been used the kind our military uses in bomb making. The unsual Thermite that was discovered by scientist in the WTC dust samples were not of any known thermite to be compared to. The test results showed this particular Thermite to be highly explosive even under low flame testing. The particles grains were very fine, not like regular welding Thermite. That is why Jones said “we are talking about military science now…”
Do you think that our military is going to give us “the civilian population and outside scientist” not working with our military defense secrets, the chemical composition of their highly explosive Thermite, I don’t think so.
edit on 17-12-2010 by impressme because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 11:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Resurrectio
 


Comb his hair ?
Lookin crazy ?


If u dont like the way his hair or he looks then dont f watch him.

1 push of a button can change your channel.....



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 11:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 



Look at this statement above- "Why, with 85 cameras trained at the building, have only five frames been released". This is nothing but innuendo dropping- the plane hit a blank wall that had no main entrance, and all the cameras were/are trained on high traffic areas like entrances, parking lots, security gates, and the like, so there's no sign anywhere except in the mind of the conspiracy people there even is any additional footage.


Isn't there a heliport on that side?
Surely that would have had a decent camera aimed at it..
edit on 16-12-2010 by backinblack because: (no reason given)


Hmm. not answering??
There was definite reason to have security cameras on that side and it's ignored??



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 02:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Now here is a classic case of how the trusters work. * * * *


Ah, come on Dave! Here you go again confusing both yourself and others who haven't learned the jargon yet. You're the Truster. Or did you really mean to be referring to yourself and the others on your side of this issue that way?



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 02:17 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Some of the conspiracy theories about 911 are somewhat 'off the wall'. But none of them - not a one - are as crazy as the official version of events.



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 02:40 AM
link   
Not saying I don't believe the “OS” is full of holes like a cheap hooker's nylon stockings,

but Rob Balsamo ?!

I've stopped listening to him long ago, since I found out he's anti-Semitic, anti-American, terrorist apologist ignorant idiot, yearning for the days he was flying real jets and not playing with flight simulators, surrounded by his Hitler youth gang and keyboard worriers cowards.

For Ventura's sake, I hope he finds other more reliable sources if he wishes to keep his credibility.



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 03:11 AM
link   
When I first heard that Jesse Ventura was into conspiracies, I laughed. I always thought of the wrestler.

Then I heard he was serious, I was grateful. It was good to have a known face tagged to questioning the truth, especially one who held a position in office.

However, I have very little faith in the man ever since I saw his show Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura.

What an over-dramatised show that seems to base its conclusions on random meetings with people who just so happened to want to release Top Secret information for the show on their deathbed etc.

Real shame.

Not to mention the fact that he goes around saying he was a Navy SEAL when he wasn't. I don't want to fall into the trap of slandering him based on one lie he told but he keeps telling it over and over and over again. It is getting embarrassing.




top topics



 
16
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join