The video that 9-11, OS movement cant handle and rather pretend it dosnt answer EVERYTHING!

reply to post by charlyv


The smoking gun as the big # up for there whole operation. Yes I believe it was rigged before and then taken down. If silverstein didn't want his precious insurance money it would be a lot harder to believe 9/11 was a conspiracy.

Wow. I see that 911 files is not an OS beleiver, yet your screen name is 911files? Go figure? Having done electrical construction for 29 years, I have a say. I am by no means a professor or engineer but I do know a little about building codes. And simply looking at the way the buildings were built, say's the OS is BS.

Any building with mutiple floors as follows, a good rule of thumb is for every floor in height, each floor should support the weight of the five floors above it. Meaning, as the building rises, the support colums, size and strength get smaller, meaning the top 1/3 of the building is the lightest. So tell me 911files, just how does the lightest 1/3 of a structure crush down thru the path of most resistance ( The other 2/3 of the building) which is way more stronger? With out the aid of something removing the floors below it? It don't.

It never has, and it never will happen with out the aid of explosives. The crushed down theory has been laid to rest, so many times it's unreal. You can't have an event, and try to change the LAWS OF PHYSICS in order for your version to work. It don't work that way. IMHO, The fact that the Pentagon only had a 16 ft hole after the plane with the fold-up wings & fold-up tail hit it, say's that's an anomaly, so If one part say's it's fiction, it's all fiction. Ask yourself 911files. Why can't there be any public access T.V. shows about 911, nation wide, Federal law prevents it. Why? I also would lke to point out all the hi-rise fires worldwide, where the muti storie buildings burnt complete, yet did not collapse. Strange huh, And please dont say Planes did'nt hit those buildings. The Towers were built to withstand the impact.

reply to post by Varemia

Varemia based on all of the time you have spent insulting those that believe differently than you and all the supposed research you have done I would strongly suggest that you leave your basement today and buy 3 different lottery tickets . I suggest this based on your remarks that discount the basic law of averages. I guarantee YOU WILL WIN ALL 3 top prizes from those lottery tickets. Have fun spending your millions.
Sorry in case you or any others didn't understand what I just said . I am referring to the point that its is logically impossible for 3 entirely different sets of formulations to have identical results not only in such close proximity but also within hours WITHOUT having a common "demo" nomiter.
There is far more to this story than just the buildings.

ps the OS Official Story is also a "conspiracy theory". The fact that a bunch of cave dwellers with some dollar store knives can bring the entire United States to its knees is highly suspicious.

Just some of the best information regarding 911 being an inside job follows.
IMO
If you watch and read all of this and still think otherwise, you are BLIND!

A CONSPIRACY THEORY:




11 Remarkable Facts about 911:
www2.ae911truth.org...

9/11 Quick List: The Twin Towers and Building 7
www.lookfromabove.com...

"EXCLLENT SUMMARY" of unanswered 9/11 questions!!


9/11 Families Ask You to Watch “9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out”

It is obvious TPTB have started their war on information against those spreading the truth.

"We are in an information war and we are losing."
-Hillary Clinton


Over a decade later, those people just now realizing this reality that their government is corrupt to the core find it difficult to admit it but, they do wake up. This being said, any unable to see and feel the truth slapping their face MUST BE getting paid to convince people something is white when they see it is black with their own eyes.
TPTB have taken this 'information war' seriously and have now hired a boatload of shills to come in and discredit FACTS that are waking those sleeping up.

Since they can not take (at least not yet) over the internet they must come at 'truthers' head-on. Why else would someone deny such OBVIOUS truth?

"Planes knocked the fire proofing off" is a laugh. A beam without fire proofing could sit all day long in burning jet fuel and it not be weakened. Arguing such LAME LAME theories such as that could only mean, they are plants IMO.

During the past 10 years I have not met a single individual who, after doing research on the subject, switched from questioning the official narrative of the events of 9/11/2001 to believing the official narrative of those events.. It is always the other way around. Why do you think that is? There are good reasons for this, and I will try to explain this phenomenon right now.

The term "conspiracy theorist", perhaps the most misapplied description in our vernacular, is often used to describe 9/11 truthers. Perhaps that term does apply to a segment of the 9/11 truth movement. But in most cases a more accurate description of 9/11 truthers is probably "expert", or "scholar", or "researcher." You see, much of the doubt cast on the official narrative of the events of 9/11 has not come in the form of speculated accusations, or "theories." In fact, it has come in the form of questions that have been raised after a careful study of the official and undisputed events and details.

FULL ARTICLE: tvnewslies.org...

As long as we have the Internet as an open venue they can never commit their genocides openly.
Any who do even 30minutes of research regarding 911 WILL see the truth.

Originally posted by openyourmind1262
Why can't there be any public access T.V. shows about 911, nation wide, Federal law prevents it. Why?

Where is the source for this? I can only find info like this...

Watch our TV show, "Investigate 9/11" every Tuesday at 1:00pm on Seattle Community Media public access television (formerly SCAN TV), Comcast cable ch. 77 and Broadstripe ch. 23

www.911truthseattle.org...

.......and someone back there could get their facts right, thermATE, doesn't rhyme with a word for a little insect.....is the high security substance chemical analysis has found, read Linda Howe's article about that in her earthfiles archive......."which should only have been available in high security American military compounds....." That's a rough quote......
Interesting what this electrician has said, infact they were being extra careful in new engineering projects ever since the Titanic.......the fact that that there actually IS a recorded instance from 1945 of a plane hitting a New York skyscraper doing relatively little damage, no-one was hurt, and the engine was flung out of it by the impact then it clunked down the staircase.......there are too many adduceable facts which make me doubt the authorities.......& that some posters on Above Top Secret might be government gophers is something I thought unlikely initially myself, but I have actually seen government documents which tell the reader the military & police force are asking very many more people to do them favours/keep their mouths shut than we thought......which Ufo Magazine editors (the one originated by Don Ecker & co) would like to see, because they do receive very weirdly antipathetic letters in abundance, while it's just a really useful little magazine in my opinion.......I am going to try to display these docs sometime......people illegally squatting derelict buildings have to be good electricians & plumbers on top of that, intelligent people plumbers......type into the Above Top Secret search engine martin_heth & look at points made with that pseudonymous log in.

reply to post by TDog400


I guarantee that if the towers fell differently, people such as yourself would be saying that the difference in nearly identical circumstances is proof of a conspiracy. Your evidence is purely in your mind, and that is why the conspiracy will never reach the mainstream. That's what I keep stressing. Bring real evidence to the table with real facts, not these pseudo facts that your conspiracy idols invent.

Pseudo-facts include, but are not limited to:
- Fire doesn't bring down steel buildings
- Office fire doesn't melt steel
- Thermite was found in the dust
- The towers were turned into dust

All of those are demonstrably wrong given the conditions of the towers. The main factor is that the damage to the towers exposed the structural steel directly to fire. That doesn't happen in the average fire.

ok for one osama has been dead for years, it was a ploy by obama ok, but the presidential election is rigged are government has been infiltraded by illuminti and the new world order, its all connected, the pentagon '' got hit by a plane"" it was a short range missle coverd up the hit the pentagon where all the money records were kept, while being investigated by the irs. the new world order is coming and coming soon, the file on builderberg group with these plans from 1967, the g20 summit there are taking our rights away, fema camps are coming power to the resistence.

its going down there are keeping us scared from terrorism im not saying the taliban had nothing to do with it but they worked with the cia, the georigia guidestones, the last revalations are coming true, iv head the culling is coming and coming soon,

immortal techniqe is on the run because he hacked the pentagon, than wrote a song about it, i may be crazy but, illuminat/the elite,nwo/builderberg. all that # is connected in somway or another and symbolism is a big part of the nwo, just waiting to see what there next big move is

reply to post by GiodanoBruno



Seem to suffer from problems with reading comprehension.....

Did you miss the part saying how Sleigh looked up at the steelwork AFTER the aircraft impact had
destroyed the office

Previous to that the office ceiling was covered up with a drop ceiling with tiles

Concussion from aircraft impact dropped the ceiling tiles and lattice grid down on Sleigh - he had to dig himself
out of the debris

Looking up then notice the steelwork was bare of fireproofing

Again reference CITY IN THE SKY - authors go into detail concening the failing of the fireproofing

As for Code Enforcement - Port Authority is bi-state public agency which is EXEMPT from local building codes

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by TDog400

 

I guarantee that if the towers fell differently, people such as yourself would be saying that the difference in nearly identical circumstances is proof of a conspiracy. Your evidence is purely in your mind, and that is why the conspiracy will never reach the mainstream. That's what I keep stressing. Bring real evidence to the table with real facts, not these pseudo facts that your conspiracy idols invent.

Pseudo-facts include, but are not limited to:
- Fire doesn't bring down steel buildings
- Office fire doesn't melt steel
- Thermite was found in the dust
- The towers were turned into dust

All of those are demonstrably wrong given the conditions of the towers. The main factor is that the damage to the towers exposed the structural steel directly to fire. That doesn't happen in the average fire.

Beams without Fire Proofing could BURN ALL DAY LONG and NOT weaken steel beams. Period, End of Story!

Here is a FLIR camera shot that proves the Jet Fuel Fires BURNED OFF within the first ten minutes.

As if burning jet fuel could harm steel without fire proofing anyway.

Here's a simple experiment proving the Fuel did NOT weaken the steel


It's completely astounding people still believe and defend the NIST report. All those on the commission were hand selected to botch the report as they did with the OK City bombing.

It is clear to me, you and any defending NIST are paid to do so. Fact being, you are smart enough to turn a computer on and even the dumbest person when presented with FACTS would have realized they were wrong by this point.

9/11 Commission Report Was A Criminal Coverup To Avoid An Open Public Investigation

Originally posted by easybreezy
reply to post by 911files

 

The OS movement is those that blindly believe in the ORIGINAL STATEMENT, (hence OS abbreviation).

edit on 24-6-2012 by easybreezy because: (no reason given)

I always thought OS stood for "Official Story".

But I hate throwing blanket terms around, it's annoying like when someone calls me a "truther".

There are so many opinions that run the gambit from utter nonsense (holographic planes) to people that believe the 9/11 Commission Report as if it were their bible. Both sides have their quacks imo, maybe one a little bit more than the other but that's to be expected.

So the holographic plane, or "no planer person is a truther. But so is the LIHOP person who believe everything the government said about 9/11 and how the towers came down and the people they believe hijacked the planes. But believe the government ran all those hijacking simulations at the same time. Vigilant Guardian ect in order to Let It Happen On Purpose. (LIHOP). So two EXTREMELY different theories, but both would be labelled and blanketed as "truthers".

I'm sure the "OS" people have some differing theories, maybe not to the extreme like I posted in the above example, but still different enough not to be blanketed under the term "OS'ers".

As for the OP. That video is ancient why are all of these old 9/11 videos and theories being rehashed all of the sudden over this past week or two? It's not even near September yet

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by GiodanoBruno

 

Seem to suffer from problems with reading comprehension.....

Did you miss the part saying how Sleigh looked up at the steelwork AFTER the aircraft impact had
destroyed the office

Previous to that the office ceiling was covered up with a drop ceiling with tiles

Concussion from aircraft impact dropped the ceiling tiles and lattice grid down on Sleigh - he had to dig himself
out of the debris

Looking up then notice the steelwork was bare of fireproofing

Again reference CITY IN THE SKY - authors go into detail concening the failing of the fireproofing

As for Code Enforcement - Port Authority is bi-state public agency which is EXEMPT from local building codes

My comprehension and logic is well intact,,thank you for worrying.

I don't have a single ounce of blind faith. So there is no way I can believe some dude noticed the lack of anything(fireproofing) after a 767 is pulverized-itself just above the floor where he was positioned at. Its so ridiculous it confirms your intellect to believe this crap you read(and advertise here on ATS).... You blindly believe in eyewitness accounts. Hell just switch over to the UFO threads. They will welcome you with open arms.

reply to post by GiodanoBruno


I love your signature line.

"2 ALUMINUM JETLINERS WEIGHING 392TONS(fuel included) CANNOT PULVERIZE 3 STEEL/CONCRETE TOWERS WEIGHING 1 200 000TONS...swallow that OSers"

A good comparison would be something like this..
The core structure of the Towers would compare to the immoveable wall in this video.



If ANYTHING.. The core structure would have been left standing tall and not "CUT" into perfect length sections ready for transport as they were.

NOTICE THE CUT BEAMS:


Large Chunks would have remained..

PANCAKE EXAMPLE:


Instead they were PULVERIZED to dust.. Impossible without explosives period, end of story!

JET FUEL DOES NOT DO THIS:

hello people,
I just want to add my two cents to this thread. This post is entirely my opinion. You obviously don't know me, but I hope you'll believe me when I say that I am a very reasonable person. Possibly the strongest feature of my character is my ability to see all sides in a conflict, and to remain impartial. I don't consider myself a truther, patriot, conservative, liberal, gullible, or perfect. I am an individual. I am intelligent, and I recognize my strengths and weaknesses.

It is my opinion that if you watch this video with an open mind, and understand the concepts involved, you must conclude that the three towers could not possibly have fallen the way the OS claims. In fact, it becomes obvious without question, that towers 1 and 2 were exploded by something other than a weakened structure. I'm not going to get into the details in this post, but I would be happy to explain why I feel this way, If anyone is interested.

I'm not writing this to debate anyone, but rather, to encourage everyone who hasn't already, to view this video, understand the concepts, and consider the implications. Then try to decide what to do about it, which is what I am in the middle of now.

To me, this video contains proof of controlled demolition. To you, it may not.
I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

Thanks to the OP for bringing up this video again.

reply to post by 911files

However, I do agree that the WTC7 collapse seems particularly odd. I would not agree that demolition is the ONLY viable explanation for the collapse, but it certainly seems to have about as much merit as the NIST explanation does (to me anyways). But, without direct evidence to support either, I reckon it is just a matter of which makes more sense to a particular individual.

Then I suggest you do the following. Go read the NIST report even just the summary of findings and the Q&A for WTC7:

NIST report

NIST Q&A WTC7

Some of the things in that Q&A are, even to me, stunning. Also keep in mind that all the time that the NIST report says there is no evidence or thermite or any controlled demolition explosives, that they never actually TESTED for them, because they felt no need to.

Anyways, here's some choice tidbits from the Q&A:

Is it possible that thermite or thermate contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?

NIST has looked at the application and use of thermite and has determined that its use to sever columns in WTC 7 on 9/11/01 was unlikely.

Thermite is a combination of aluminum powder and a metal oxide that releases a tremendous amount of heat when ignited. It is typically used to weld railroad rails together by melting a small quantity of steel and pouring the melted steel into a form between the two rails.

To apply thermite to a large steel column, approximately 0.13 lb of thermite would be needed to heat and melt each pound of steel. For a steel column that weighs approximately 1,000 lbs. per foot, at least 100 lbs. of thermite would need to be placed around the column, ignited, and remain in contact with the vertical steel surface as the thermite reaction took place. This is for one column . presumably, more than one column would have been prepared with thermite, if this approach were to be used.

It is unlikely that 100 lbs. of thermite, or more, could have been carried into WTC 7 and placed around columns without being detected, either prior to Sept. 11 or during that day.

Ahh, so ignoring the fact that they didn't actually test for explosives, that sounds pretty reasonable doesn't it? No. It doesn't. Why on earth would they think you need to melt every pound of steel in that column?

You place it in a shape charge at an angle against the core beam and it slices through like a knife, and the core structure is now unattached. If you do this in a timed fashion throughout the building, you can create a gravity fueled collapse.

A few pounds of homemade thermite can cut though a steel I beam, similar to the ones use in the WTC, in a matter of seconds. No need to coat the entire beam in it, no need to pour tons of the stuff, you only need to weaken the core structure.

Now this one is my favorite:

An emergency responder caught in the building between the 6th and 8th floors says he heard two loud booms. Isn't that evidence that there was an explosion?

The sound levels reported by all witnesses do not match the sound level of an explosion that would have been required to cause the collapse of the building. If the two loud booms were due to explosions that were responsible for the collapse of WTC 7, the emergency responder-located somewhere between the 6th and 8th floors in WTC 7-would not have been able to survive the near immediate collapse and provide this witness account.

Now see the trick there? They don't deny they were explosions, they simply say, if they were the explosions responsible for the towers coming down, the responder would be dead. But he isn't, and reported the explosions, and the NIST report already states that planes and fires and magically thermal expansion brought the towers down, so there you have it.

It's a neat trick, neither confirming or denying. Sure, he heard explosions, we won't deny that, but instead of investigating that, we'll just say they couldn't have been the explosions that took the buildings down.

But in the same report they state explosions didn't take the buildings down.

I swear, the more you read this sucker and the other info, it's like trying to read the tax code. I can't help but feel like my intelligence is being insulted.

Originally posted by 911files
reply to post by kwakakev

 

Do you know who you are talking too? I don't trust government or the media. Just because you guys have not made your case for any of the alternatives does not reflect on me, it reflects on you. I've watched the video record, listened to the eyewitness accounts. To me it looks just as I described. I don't see evidence of anything else.

Don't blame the audience when you fail to make your case.

I didn't get the feeling he was blaming the "Audience", i felt he was describing the fact that too many people believe they are taking cynicism to a new level, when all they have done is expound to the rest of us, how utterly myopic SOME people can be.
You Obviously are not our "Audience", You obviously Don't consider YOURSELF as part of the 9/11 woowoo target audience, so why say we are trying to blame you, the audience?, why use a bait and switch argument?.
There is no point in people knowing the truth, if the truth is so bad it requires action, to have those that know the truth for what it is, sit down and do nothing.

So you are saying: The evidence shows nothing more than the official account?, your belief is wackier than a large majority of the conspiracy movement.
You really have not tried very hard at all to do anything except maintain your rose tinted view of the world, good luck with that, i pray your sense of indifference maintains itself long enough to protect you from the real world, and i hope the real world doesn't come along in all its malevolency and begin chewing you up.

reply to post by easybreezy
Not one star for your thread.
Interesting.

reply to post by easybreezy
Sorry, wrong person.
That was meant for 911Files.
Was getting confused with all the back and forth comments.
Peace.

hi all

longtime lurker 1st post

just 1 question

why did osama bin laden admit to 9/11? you guys never address this

but theres videos of him proudly admitting that they planned and executed 9/11

but there is no videos of obl saying the american government was behind it

why would he become the most wanted and hated man in the world if he didnt do it

it makes 0 sence

Originally posted by goou111
hi all

longtime lurker 1st post

just 1 question

why did osama bin laden admit to 9/11? you guys never address this

but theres videos of him proudly admitting that they planned and executed 9/11

but there is no videos of obl saying the american government was behind it

why would he become the most wanted and hated man in the world if he didnt do it

it makes 0 sence

edit on 25-6-2012 by goou111 because: (no reason given)

Videos were clearly faked. This is and has been admitted.


I realize this is so far out there it will be deemed a "Nut" theory but, it does not take away from the fact it is true. The sooner people realize how corrupt the GOV is the sooner we can take back the country.

Find more here: www.youtube.com...