911 - an inconvenient truth

page: 3
13
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by thegameisup
Why have all the brainwashed OS'ers not properly addressed the Hoboken video on page 1?

Multiple explosions can be heard just before the collapse, the smoke at the base in undeniable, and multiple explosive flashes can be seen coming from the tower just as the last chopper hovers near to it, literally just before it collapses.

These facts cannot be denied, and they are clearly being ignored by the OS'ers here.

Are you ignoring them because you know it will blow the cover on the OS?

A detailed comment from OS'ers on this video would be a wise idea if you are to retain any credibility. A reply that has detailed points, no lies, no pseudo science, and no ad hominem. Just relevant facts. I cannot see how you deny what you see in that video. It will be interesting to see how you can explain the unquestionable explosions in that video!


It just doesn't make sense to me that the explosions would be silent in the video cameras that were literally right next to the towers. You're talking about mysterious booms taking place almost a minute before the collapse. In literally every demolition, there are loud charges going off, and then immediately the building begins to come down. That's because the point of the explosions is to sever the important parts of the building. Once the explosion happens, the building comes down instantly.

Why is 9/11 the demolition exception to you?


I'm not talking about the other video cameras, I'm talking about this camera footage, that is the topic of discussion, make a thread about the other cameras if you so wish.

They are no mysterious booms, they are low frequency booms that can claerly be heard and the low frequencies can be seen on a spectrum analyser.

You failed to address the smoke that can be clearly seen at the base of the tower just before it collapsed, and the flashes at the top as the chopper hovers by the point of impact.

We are not comparing other demolitions, 9/11 was a unique event, and that is what the topic is about, we do not have access to what tech was used to demolish the towers, NIST did not do any forensics on explosives, and that again is for another topic.

However, as I have stated, we can hear mulitple explosive low frequency booms from this camera recording, and we can see multiple flashes and smoke from the base before it collapses.

There is obviously a connection with the flashes, smoke, and explosive booms to the collapse. This is very obvious.

Please do answer about this video only and this collapse only if you have the answers, I don't think you can deny these things are connected. The video does not lie.

This collapse is no exception to me, the evidence I have mentioned can be seen by all who view the video, and as this website says, deny ignorance. These occurances just cannot be denied by anyone, unless you are deaf and blind?




posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by RoScoLaz
here's an inconvenient stillframe from a BBC broadcast;



That certainly is not a plane nose coming through. They are made of aluminum, which is weak and would not be able to make it through. Also, if anyone has seen an American Airrlines plane before, they would be able to tell that this is no AA nose. Their planes are disinctive in colour, and they have disitnctive coloured stripes.

This looks like, and most likely is a missile. Certainly not a nose cone from a plane. Anyone who has seen an AA plane or knows anything about the strength of aluminum nose cones, will know this cannot be a nose cone.



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by thegameisup
 


You, uh, might want to study up on aircraft construction. You might also want to maybe research which airline that particular jet came from. Here is a hint....it wasnt American Airlines.



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by anoncoholic
reply to post by TrickoftheShade
 


you think this is my first thread? You think your typical replies change from one thread to another? You think I am as weak at the knees as you are because you refuse to face the truth and confront liars?

I have the intestinal fortitude to stand up for you since you are too lame to stand up for yourself. Every time I do though I am attacked for standing at all.

And you wonder how they managed to pull it all off? I would suggest you do some soul-searching and let me worry about mine. My relationship with God is honest, my relationship with people is honest. I can't help it if the truth hurts so much you think I am about inflicting pain on your delicate ego's, I can reconcile my words with God though.

The real hypocrite here is coming from someone who is taking the personal stand rather than the evidence recognition. Perhaps you see yourself as someone who has all the answers too? If so, bring it, I am sure the world would like to know exactly what happened that day without all the smoke being blown up our collective asses.

You guys get your noses out of joint because I am being blunt? I am sure you would prefer I pat you on the back for spreading disinfo and protecting mass murderers too...




This above post is a classic, it says it all and I could not agree more with the poster anon.
Regards, Iwinder



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by thegameisup
 


You, uh, might want to study up on aircraft construction. You might also want to maybe research which airline that particular jet came from. Here is a hint....it wasnt American Airlines.



Why would I need to study up on aircraft construction? I know how strong aluminum is, and I know what happens to aluminum nose cones when they are struck by birds. If the damage from a bird can be quite bad then a collision in to the tower would obilterate it!

Do you know anything about aluminum nose cones?

Yes I got the planes around the wrong way, apologies. Ok, so I should have said United Airlines, which is half white, and the bottom half is blue from one end of the plane to the other. Regardless of making a simple mistake, it still does not look white, or blue, and unless you know something about aluminum nose cones that I don't, then there is no way it should be able to come out the other side of the building. It would have disintergrated on impact, no question.



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by thegameisup
 


Most airliner nose caps, are actually radomes......and made out of composite materials. Not aluminum. And since you did admit you were wrong about which airline, then you should be equally ready to admit it DOES match United's paint scheme.



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 06:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by thegameisup
 


Most airliner nose caps, are actually radomes......and made out of composite materials. Not aluminum. And since you did admit you were wrong about which airline, then you should be equally ready to admit it DOES match United's paint scheme.


Yes, I'm always happy to admit if I am wrong, but it was an easy mistake, no really worth making a meal of, I'm sure others have got the two planes around the wrong way. You knew the point I was making, which was that this thing that you call a nose cap, does not resemble either plane.

If this is supposed to be a UA plane, then why is it not half grey, and half blue? I've blown this image up and it looks nothing like the UA markings.

I'm also not talking about "most airline nose caps", I'm talking about United Airlines flight 175 specifically, which was a Boeing 767-222.

Do you have any data on the exact material used in the construction of the nose for flight 175?

If you do, then we can clear this matter up.
edit on 4-7-2012 by thegameisup because: spelling



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by thegameisup
 


Which, specifically, is made of a carbon composite



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 11:12 PM
link   
reply to post by thegameisup
 



That certainly is not a plane nose coming through. They are made of aluminum, which is weak and would not be able to make it through.


What about a jet engine.....

They are not built from aluminium and hence "weak" according to your comments.....

One landed several blocks away







posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 11:12 PM
link   
reply to post by thegameisup
 



That certainly is not a plane nose coming through. They are made of aluminum, which is weak and would not be able to make it through.


What about a jet engine.....

They are not built from aluminium and hence "weak" according to your comments.....

One landed several blocks away







posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 03:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Iwinder
 


That doesn't really surprise me.

Grotesque millenarianism? Check. Egocentrism? Check. Hypocrisy? Check.

It's like a blueprint for the Truth Movement.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 03:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by thegameisup

Ok, so I should have said United Airlines, which is half white, and the bottom half is blue from one end of the plane to the other. Regardless of making a simple mistake


You're right, that is a pretty simple mistake. And having accused others of ignorance elsewhere I imagine you'll want to apologise for your hypocrisy.

More TM hypocrisy... say it ain't so!



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 06:12 AM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 06:16 AM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by thegameisup
 


Which, specifically, is made of a carbon composite


Like I said, can you post a link to some official data as to what material the nose cone of flight 175 was made of, so I can see for myself. Cheers



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by thegameisup
 



That certainly is not a plane nose coming through. They are made of aluminum, which is weak and would not be able to make it through.


What about a jet engine.....

They are not built from aluminium and hence "weak" according to your comments.....

One landed several blocks away


What do you mean, 'what about a jet engine' ? We are discussing nose cones, it was supposed to be a nose cone/cap in the picture, and looks nothing like an engine, hence why we were discussing plane noses. If you'd like to add something about plane noses then cool.

In this video below it shows a fighter jet hitting a wall at 500mph, and it 'atomises' literally disintergrates, no plane nose goes through the wall, and the wall was only one skin, no steel, or second exterior wall like the 2nd plane on 9/11.

How can this disintergrate when it hits just one wall, and the 2nd plane's nose goes through the tower wall, through steel, through more steel, and through another wall, and is still intact? No plane nose can survive that. However, a missile can, which is a more acceptable explanaition.

I know these are different planes, but this wall in the video is much weakers and the plane still atomised. Applying a small amout of logic, it would seem that there is no way for a nose cone should punch through what it did on 9/11, and still be intact.

F4 Phantom Jet Hits Concrete Wall at 500 MPH



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by thegameisup

Ok, so I should have said United Airlines, which is half white, and the bottom half is blue from one end of the plane to the other. Regardless of making a simple mistake


You're right, that is a pretty simple mistake. And having accused others of ignorance elsewhere I imagine you'll want to apologise for your hypocrisy.

More TM hypocrisy... say it ain't so!


How is someone a hypocrite becuase they got the flight numbers around the wrong way. I knew what I meant and corrected my error. If someone else is ignorant then that is a different matter.

The term 'Ignorance' has nothing to do with the term 'mistake'

Making a typo mistake that you admit to does not make anyone a hypocrite.

I would say you need to familiarise yourself with the Oxford Dictionary!

I will apologise when I see fit, and really I had no need to apologise for a typo, just as you do not have to apologise for being pedantic.

It seems that you are saying that if you yourself are ignorant at any time, then it is a mistake? However, ignorance that I have seen displayed here seems to be deliberate. That is just my opinion, and I'm not here to get into a slanging match, just discuss facts. So please, drop all the snide stuff, it makes people lose respect for you.

I am suspicious of the fact you run down people on here qand on the 7/7 forum, and there are OS people from this 9/11 forum firing ad hominem at folk on the 7/7 & UFO forum. When I and others witness this behaviour, it makes us suspicious because other members seem to manage to debate without ad hominem attacks.

When people like you behave like that it just draws attention to yourself, your strange behaviour stands out, and by this behaviour people will and do come to the conclusion you are covering up for 9/11, 7/7, and UFO's. Why would you do that you believe what the US and the UK government say about n9/11 & 7/7, and if you do not believe in UFO's, again believing the governments that these things do not exist?



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by anoncoholic

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
reply to post by Iwinder
 


That doesn't really surprise me.

Grotesque millenarianism? Check. Egocentrism? Check. Hypocrisy? Check.

It's like a blueprint for the Truth Movement.


denial of God and being devoid of love compassion and respect for others? check

Look the other way in the face of mass murder? check

Persistent refusal to view evidence? check

Point at anything but the evidence? check

hell-bound? checkmate

would you care to address the evidence now ? Or would you rather play these childish name calling games some more?

I never thought you would. Being true to your nature is all you know and you're a liar like your father who was a demon too.

Monstrous assault upon humanity and your kind wants more of the same... no surprise there either.

It is too bad the tag of OS caught on for if we really got down to truth you all should have been branded BS

... truth hurts doesn't it
edit on 5-7-2012 by anoncoholic because: (no reason given)


One need to address their own demons before accusing others and their family of being demons.

Judging a person to hell is what devil worshipers do.

Why do you look the other way in the face of mass murder is what you should ask to yourself before asking others.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 10:20 AM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 11:23 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 





new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join