Hollywood to Challenge Official Version of 9/11: Sheen, Asner and Harrelson to Star in Film., page 7


Pages: <<  4    5    6    7    8    9    10  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 53 times


reply posted on 22-10-2012 @ 03:31 PM by InfiniteConsciousness
For those of you who doubt underground nuke detonation isn't a possibility take a look at these pages.

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

A thesis on controlled nuke demo of WTC 1 and 2 from an anonymous physicist.

wtcdemolition.blogspot.com...

A wikipedia entry on SADM "Special Atomic Demolition Munition"..

en.wikipedia.org...

You can see, clearly, that this has been an option and for the first time, used on 9-11, IMHO. Now if you can refute what's being said in these articles, be my guest. If, however, you take the "tack" of General Radek et al., well, you've already lost the argument. And even more evidence is apparent after most of the cleanup took place and you see huge pits cut out of the bedrock beneath each tower. How can you explain this?




reply posted on 23-10-2012 @ 09:55 AM by maxella1
reply to post by GoodOlDave




The "expert piloting skills" those damned fool conspiracy web sites are touting to make everything sound more spooky-scary than it really is are in reality little more than knowing how to use the automatic pilot and how to fly in a circle. Regardless of where anyone stands on the conspiracy debate, we can all agree that it doesn't take any skill whatsoever to crash an airplane. I'm sure you could do it without even trying.


Turning off the auto pilot at 500 mph and navigating into something as thin as the towers were takes expert skills just like navigating into something as low as the Pentagon does. Now crashing into a field that's another story, although i personally believe it didn't crash but was shot down based on the debris fields and that the order was actually given.
edit on 23-10-2012 by maxella1 because: (no reason given)
edit on 23-10-2012 by maxella1 because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 23-10-2012 @ 11:35 AM by maxella1
reply to post by GoodOlDave




a) It doesn't take expert flying skills for a pilot to see something really, really big and then aim his plane right at it, as proven by all the ships hit by Japanese Kamikaze pilots. They even had it easier than Japanese Kamikaze pilots becuase the towers weren't moving.


Kamikaze were trained to fly the same type of an airplane they were going to fly. Were these terrorists trained to to fly 767 ?

If a student driver practice for his first road test in cars with automatic transmission, would he pass the test in a car with a manual transmission?

Try driving into a parking space a little wider than your car at a hundred mph and let me know how that works out for you...


b) It's already been documented in the 9/11 Commission report ten years ago that Bush did issue a shoot down order for flight 93 and it was relayed by Cheney. Did you even know that?


Did you know that the Commission report also documented that they were unable to find anybody To back it up? Not a single person in that room with Cheney or Bush heard that conversation even though they were taking notes regarding all other communications?

You love showing evidence don't you? Show me any thing other than Bush and Cheney promising that it took place...
edit on 23-10-2012 by maxella1 because: (no reason given)
edit on 23-10-2012 by maxella1 because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 23-10-2012 @ 11:48 AM by TrickoftheShade
Originally posted by InfiniteConsciousness
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
reply to post by homervb


You think we take comfort in conspiracy theories? What kind of ass backwards psychology are you studying? Wow. Unreal.


Subconsciously, yes. The world's a frightening place and conspiracy theories provide a comforting framing narrative to contextualise it all.

They also usually offer the chance of redemption and deliverance - look at all the posts here that talk about the day when "the truth will come out" and the "traitors will have to answer for their crimes". It's a judgement day. And the CTs are just religion in another guide, with all the comfort that religion gives.
edit on 23-10-2012 by TrickoftheShade because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 23-10-2012 @ 12:13 PM by GenRadek
Originally posted by homervb
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
I will merely point out that the conspiracy movement have gotten literally nowhere with suckering the general population with this "the gov't is plotting to murder us all" abject paranoia in the last ten years, so history is already showing who has the last laugh.


Do you really believe if an independent investigation was done, the results would be the same as what is published in the 9/11 Commission Report?


Really? What exactly is the truth movement looking for with an "independent investigation"? The "truth" about what? You are confusing two different investigations into two different aspects of 9/11. What exactly is this movie suppose to be about? The truther version? Which is, what exactly? Secretly planted explosives/thermites/nukes/death rays done by teams of secret CIA/NSA/FBI/Illuminotti/Bilderber/Rothschild/Rockerfellers/Bush-Cheney Death Squad ninja assassin demolition teams, all under the control of Bush-Cheney/Silverstein/Illuminotti/Reptillians/Wall Street Bankers/Mickey Mouse Club organizations that secretly control this entire planet and have control over every NYPD, PA, FDNY, CIA, FBI, NSA, NTSB, NIST, FEMA, ASCE person that was in, on and or around the Ground Zero area before/during/after 9/11 and faked the plane crashes and screwed over everyone else? Ya, thats gonna be one hell of a comedy. Just as funny as the Loose Change movies, or Sept. Clues.

Or is the movie going to investigate into the intel failures and @$$ covering done by all levels of our leadership?

9/11 Truthers are only interested in finding explosives and a grand mega conspiracy that implicates half of this planet. They dont care how implausible or convoluted it is, that is their ultimate goal. And if that magical "independent investigation" finds the same thing NIST, FEMA and the 9/11CR discovered, and it does not conform with their preconceived notions, they will still not be satisfied.


reply posted on 23-10-2012 @ 12:17 PM by maxella1
reply to post by TrickoftheShade


Subconsciously, yes. The world's a frightening place and conspiracy theories provide a comforting framing narrative to contextualise it all.


Is it because it's a lot less scary to think that our government attacked us because we can protect ourselves from them, but we can't protect ourselves from the terrorists?
edit on 23-10-2012 by maxella1 because: Spell checker called in sick today, sorry
edit on 23-10-2012 by maxella1 because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 23-10-2012 @ 12:42 PM by GoodOlDave
Originally posted by maxella1
reply to post by GoodOlDave

a) It doesn't take expert flying skills for a pilot to see something really, really big and then aim his plane right at
Kamikaze were trained to fly the same type of an airplane they were going to fly. Were these terrorists trained to to fly 767 ?


Why is this relevent? They didn't need to know how to take off since the original pilots did that. They didn't need to know how to land because it was a suicide attack. They didn't need to know how to communicate with air traffic controllers since they wanted to be undetected. Pus, they obviously didn't need to care about flight training that maintained the safety of the passengers. The only thing they needed to know how to do was to use the auto-pilot and general steering principles. There is a huge difference between "being able to fly securely" and "being able to fly at all".

Try driving into a parking space a little wider than your car at a hundred mph and let me know how that works out for you...


I see the problem right away- you are introducing artificial restraints to inflate the process of the attack into appearing more complex and difficult than it really was. I would strongly recommend that you review the impact videos several more times to get a proper appreciation of the size differences between the buildings and the planes. Plus, you should also review just how the plane actually hit the building to see it was anything but a perfectly lined up strike.

Besides, your concern wasn't what expertise the hijackers actually had. Your concern was whether they had the expertise enough to crash a plane into a really big target that wasn't moving. History as well as miles of video footage from every angle is clearly showing that they did.


Did you know that the Commission report also documented that they were unable to find anybody To back it up? Not a single person in that room with Cheney or Bush heard that conversation even though they were taking notes regarding all other communications?


You are changing your story to suit your purposes now. You previously said you believed the order was given to shoot down flight 93 and I told you the order was in fact documented in the 9/11 commission report so it's not anything you need to speculate on. Now to be argumentative you're saying there's no evidence of any such order given. Do you believe an order was given to shoot down flight 93 or not?


reply posted on 23-10-2012 @ 01:04 PM by homervb
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
I have no idea what a supposed "independent investigation" will yield because I have yet to see a single person promoting "independent investigations" to clarify just what an "independent investigation" actually is. Anyone with expertise on crash site forensics will be with the FAA. Anyone with detailed knowledge on how the WTC security as handled will be with the NY Port Authority. All the information concerning military defenses will need to come from NORAD, while the leading experts on building construction are going to be with NIST. Obviously, any intelligence briefings or law enforcement reports will be coming from the FBI or CIA.



That's a good point, and I can't 100% clarify that, but to me an independent investigation would consist of
ALL evidence being released to the public, nobody covering for anybody else, George Bush testifying under oath as well as Dick Cheney, etc. After all, if this was all just one giant intelligence failure, as proposed by the 9/11 Commission report than there's no reason for:

1 - Bush & Cheney would need to testify together and NOT under oath
2- The managers at the FAA to cut up the recordings of the controllers that day
3- The 9/11 Commission blocked all information of Saudi Arabia's government funding of the hijackers
4- The excluding of the dancing Israelis from the report
5- The excluding of WTC 7 in the report as well
6- The destruction of the able danger files
7- The excluding of several eyewitness testimonies that report seeing Flight 93's engines smoking before crashing as well as military jets within range (whether true or not)
8- Mike Bellone's experience with FBI agents finding the black boxes at ground zero (could be further investigated by people OTHER than the FBI and CIA)

The list goes on and on.

Up until now, the conspiracy proponents have developed for themselves a cottage industry of excuses for why we can't believe a single thing that any of these agencies tell us. Even a guy from El Salvador watering the lawn spontaneously becomes an unbelievable witness simply because he's a "Pentagon Employee".


I don't know what exactly you're referring to as "excuses". If you're talking about things such as The Gulf of Tonkin, Pearl Harbor, and Bush's 935 lies in reference to not being able to trust words of the government, well I don't see them as excuses. Those are pretty serious occurrences in which the government had straight up lied to the American people. Do you really consider these examples no big deal? These lies led us to war, which led to a lot of blood shed which in turn left us with NOTHING but that. Do you really call them "excuses"?


reply posted on 23-10-2012 @ 01:56 PM by maxella1
reply to post by GoodOlDave




Why is this relevent? They didn't need to know how to take off since the original pilots did that. They didn't need to know how to land because it was a suicide attack. They didn't need to know how to communicate with air traffic controllers since they wanted to be undetected. Pus, they obviously didn't need to care about flight training that maintained the safety of the passengers. The only thing they needed to know how to do was to use the auto-pilot and general steering principles. There is a huge difference between "being able to fly securely" and "being able to fly at all".


Why do you make me treat you like a child? I know that you know that navigating a huge 767 requires a lot more skills than navigating a cessna. do I really need to explain to you that 767 is a lot heaver, bigger, and faster ? You can drive a car all your life but try driving a bus without any real practice and you'll have issues with something as simple as making the same left tern you have made hundreds of times in the past sriving a car.



You are changing your story to suit your purposes now. You previously said you believed the order was given to shoot down flight 93 and I told you the order was in fact documented in the 9/11 commission report so it's not anything you need to speculate on. Now to be argumentative you're saying there's no evidence of any such order given. Do you believe an order was given to shoot down flight 93 or not?


I guess i misunderstood what you were asking me.. Yes i believe the order was given but i don't believe Bush had anything to do with it.


reply posted on 23-10-2012 @ 02:14 PM by homervb
Originally posted by GenRadek
Really? What exactly is the truth movement looking for with an "independent investigation"? The "truth" about what? You are confusing two different investigations into two different aspects of 9/11. What exactly is this movie suppose to be about? The truther version? Which is, what exactly? Secretly planted explosives/thermites/nukes/death rays done by teams of secret CIA/NSA/FBI/Illuminotti/Bilderber/Rothschild/Rockerfellers/Bush-Cheney Death Squad ninja assassin demolition teams, all under the control of Bush-Cheney/Silverstein/Illuminotti/Reptillians/Wall Street Bankers/Mickey Mouse Club organizations that secretly control this entire planet and have control over every NYPD, PA, FDNY, CIA, FBI, NSA, NTSB, NIST, FEMA, ASCE person that was in, on and or around the Ground Zero area before/during/after 9/11 and faked the plane crashes and screwed over everyone else? Ya, thats gonna be one hell of a comedy. Just as funny as the Loose Change movies, or Sept. Clues.

Or is the movie going to investigate into the intel failures and @$$ covering done by all levels of our leadership?


I agree with you on the fact that there are 2 truth movements.

1.) Those who want to know FULL OUT what happened that day

and

2.) Those who want the government to come out and say it was all an inside job.

I am with choice number 1, the real truth movement.


9/11 Truthers are only interested in finding explosives and a grand mega conspiracy that implicates half of this planet. They dont care how implausible or convoluted it is, that is their ultimate goal.


This applies to Truth Movement # 2 as stated above.

And if that magical "independent investigation" finds the same thing NIST, FEMA and the 9/11CR discovered, and it does not conform with their preconceived notions, they will still not be satisfied.


Several members of the 9/11 CR have come out and said the investigation was flawed, someone was always covering for someone else, time restraints, materials redacted, etc. How bout the full out truth? If it was all a failure of the government then just tell us already. No redacted statements/evidence, no classified materials (in reference to the 5 dancing Israeli's who's police report will be classified until the year 2035), no covering for Saudi Arabia involvement...we just want the TRUTH. If 19 men armed with box cutters managed to take down 3 sky scrapers, penetrated a side of the pentagon, and killed 3,000 people while in the process then there should be nothing classified or redacted. And as far as I'm concerned, the NIST failed themselves. They could only theorize what initiated the collapse, they couldn't offer ANY theory of a total collapse. If you can't offer at least one theory of total collapse than who's to say the NIST did their job? Whatever, this isn't my main point, just going on a rant, apologies lol


reply posted on 24-10-2012 @ 08:33 AM by homervb
Originally posted by hellobruce
Originally posted by crawdad1914
his question as to why building 7 was not addressed in the report.


Well, if you had looked at the report you would have seen

"Our mandate was sweeping.The law directed us to investigate “facts and
circumstances relating to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,” including
those relating to intelligence agencies, law enforcement agencies, diplomacy,
immigration issues and border control, the flow of assets to terrorist
organizations, commercial aviation, the role of congressional oversight and
resource allocation, and other areas determined relevant by the Commission"

So where does the collapse of a building fit in there? And it is funny how truthers seem to ignore WTC 3, which was also destroyed in the collapse of the WTC towers.


Considering the fact that this "terrorist" plot managed to "indirectly" take down a building consisting of the CIA, FBI, Secret Service, Emergency Management etc. I'd say it's important to the OS. But then again, if there as some shady activity going on within WTC 7 I'd say it'd be in their best interest to leave it out:


Report: CIA Lost Office In WTC

A secret office operated by the CIA was destroyed in the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, seriously disrupting intelligence operations.

The undercover station was in 7 World Trade Center, a smaller office tower that fell several hours after the collapse of the twin towers on Sept. 11, a U.S. government official said.

The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that immediately after the attack, a special CIA team scoured the rubble in search of secret documents and intelligence reports stored in the station, either on paper or in computers. It was not known whether the efforts were successful.

A CIA spokesman declined to comment on the existence of the office, which was first reported in Sunday's editions of The New York Times.

The New York station was believed to have been the largest and most important CIA domestic station outside the Washington area.



The largest and most important CIA office outside of the Washington Area and yet it's not worthy of mentioning in the official report? Hmmmmm....
Pages: <<  4    5    6    7    8    9    10  >>    ^^TOP^^



Why the Pentagon?
  Posted 3 days ago with 12 member flags
NEVER FORGET 9-11….Maybe we SHOULD forget.
  Posted 11 days ago with 11 member flags
Personal Theory on The Twin Towers Plane Pilots
  Posted 0 days ago with 8 member flags
The 9/11 Hijackers: Fraud in Official Video Exhibits Uncovered
  Posted 1 days ago with 7 member flags
Note from trapped workers surfaces 10 years after 9/11
  Posted 1 days ago with 6 member flags
Where were you when the world stopped turning...
  Posted 2 days ago with 4 member flags