C-SPAN getting calls day after day after day about 9/11 (Great Video Compilation)

This video compiles several members of Congress receiving live calls from citizens across the country asking about the conclusions of the...ahem...9-11 Commission and NIST regarding the World Trade Center demolitions. It is infuriating the way the guests never once directly answer the questions that were asked. Equally as maddening is the way the hosts attempt to negate the caller's concerns and several times actually cut the callers off.

At the end of the video it lists the three numbers that you may call in live as well as the hours of the show. Perhaps this could become a trend.

Only one question needs to be asked: why did WTC7 collapse in its own footprint? We all know it was never struck by an airplane. So why the free fall speed? The truth will come out one day.

You know your government is stonewalling when:

A) Your government officials do not answer the questions posed to them by the public
B) Your government officials refuse to answer the questions posed to them at all

ATS members. please feel free to add to the list, lol.

reply to post by GrantedBail


the congress persons seem to be being fed their answers. They are obviously reading a teleprompter.

Originally posted by Oannes
Only one question needs to be asked: why did WTC7 collapse in its own footprint? We all know it was never struck by an airplane. So why the free fall speed? The truth will come out one day.

WTC7 did not collapse at free fall speed.

WTC7 did not fall neatly into its own footprint:

The neat, tidy arrangement of the debris of Building 7 is another characteristic of controlled demolitions that is claimed by the conspiracy theorists. WTC7.net states that "The pile was almost entirely within the footprint of the former building."

In fact, Building 7's debris field was neither tidy nor well-contained within the footprint. The videos of the collapse are all from far away and show only the top portion of the building before it disappears behind the skyline. Lower down, the collapse become much more chaotic.

Two nearby buildings were nearly destroyed by it. The Verizon Building suffered $1.4 billion in damage from the collapse of Building 7, but was able to be repaired. Manhattan Community College's Fiterman Hall building, however, was not so lucky, and suffered such major damage that it could not be saved.

What remains of it is still being deconstructed piece by piece.

(Source).

Watch this video.

Then this one.

That woman has sold her soul.

Period!

I find the whole thing absolutely amazing.

If they can demo a huge office building right in its own footprint and blame it on "debris" from the other two buildings that fell in THEIR own footprint from getting hit by a plane then......well,


they can pretty much sell us anything now can't they?

I am convinced that "they" can convince the functionally retarded American public that Barney the purple dinosaur was the mastermind behind the world trade center attacks IF they wanted to. Sound funny?
I wasn't joking. YES, they could!

We quite simply believe what we're told because it is WAAAAAY more convenient and comfortable than the horrible truth. We, collectively are "Lovers of lies". They make us feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

We are going to pay dearly for our contribution to this whole mess one day.
The complete unwillingness to deal with the truth head on, coupled with the sick desire to fully embrace anything and everything spoon fed to us by our masters is going to one day catch up to us. Oh what a heavy price we are going to pay.

reply to post by Sankari


damn my lyin' eyes.

reply to post by Sankari


Really? Watch this video and then get back to me:

Originally posted by GeneralChaos
reply to post by Sankari

 

damn my lyin' eyes.

You obviously didn't read the article or watch the videos.

Originally posted by GrantedBail
reply to post by Sankari

 

Really? Watch this video and then get back to me:

Neither did you.

By the way, 3 hours of nonsense is still nonsense. Mossad? Don't be ridiculous.

reply to post by Sankari


I wish I were able to "UNsee" what I saw on that day.
What I "saw" were three buildings fall straight down, really fast, into their own footprint.


You either didn't see it or,
saw it and were able to UNsee it.

OR

You are a paid shill which are pretty common on this site.


Either way, that is a luxury I do not posses.
I'll try harder to ignore my lyin' eyes.
They are persistent.

Originally posted by GeneralChaos
reply to post by Sankari

 

I wish I were able to "UNsee" what I saw on that day.
What I "saw" were three buildings fall straight down, really fast, into their own footprint.

Why did they destroy the whole city block then? If they landed in their own footprint what destroyed 30 West Broadway?

You are a paid shill which are pretty common on this site.

You didn't even bother to read the rules, this will get you banned.

reply to post by Sankari

Mossad? Don't be ridiculous.

Operation Susannah

double post

Originally posted by exponent

Originally posted by GeneralChaos
reply to post by Sankari

 

I wish I were able to "UNsee" what I saw on that day.
What I "saw" were three buildings fall straight down, really fast, into their own footprint.

Why did they destroy the whole city block then? If they landed in their own footprint what destroyed 30 West Broadway?

You are a paid shill which are pretty common on this site.

You didn't even bother to read the rules, this will get you banned.

Actually, I don't know if that counts as name calling. That is to say, I'm not certain he meant to just make an accusation of shilling. First of all, there are three conditions there. Either A, or B, or otherwise C.... where C is the shilling. He did not plainly state it was C. Further, that may have been meant in the general sense. I use pronouns like this sometimes.

Worded another way, this could look like: I'd guess a person making that claim, maybe didn't see X, or maybe a person was able to un-see X, or maybe that person could be a shill......

I have used "you" in this general sense before, where I really meant "a person" and not specifically that person, if you follow what I mean.



Either way-- as of now 3 people have starred it. I wonder how all those people interpreted it.

reply to post by Sankari


Did you watch the video I posted?

There were obviously a few intelligence agencies that had a heads up. The video documents clearly the fore-knowlege of these organizations.

As well as pre-planted explosives. You can't get past that.

Not to mention the subsequent cover-up. Who had the capacity to cover up the crime of the century?

Originally posted by Sankari

Originally posted by GeneralChaos
I find the whole thing absolutely amazing.

If they can demo a huge office building right in its own footprint

WTC7 did not fall right into its own footprint.

and blame it on "debris" from the other two buildings that fell in THEIR own footprint from getting hit by a plane then......well

The other two buildings did not fall into their own footprints.

There is extensive video evidence showing debris from the other two buildings hitting WTC7 and extensive video evidence showing the huge damage to WTC7.

Watch this video.

Then watch this one.

The collapse did not take the path of least resistance either which is a law of physics if i am not mistaken.

Spending my whole life in construction I cannot express enough how vacant a mind must be in order to believe that that the top 20-30 stories or so had enough energy to completely pulverize the 140 or so stories beneath it with out its weight being forced off to the side where resistance is less.... a lot less.

We don't build high rises with crumple zones sillies. Its all about weight displacement and there is no reason under the sun that would cause weight to chose to force its way through that much construction just to avoid a path of least resistance. as was the case with WTC1&2, possibly 7 but there is not enough photograph evidence to see how much damage it sustained. Regardless a complete collapse is IMPOSSIBLE!!!!

reply to post by Sankari


Your source is just nist? which i may add its a government owned results?

Anyone with Flightline Experience will be able to tell you, Jet fuel needs to be Atomized to be flameable, otherwise you can put out a ciggerette out in a bucket of it without harm.

Now look at the place the jet hit, Not sure about you, but with gravity bringing jet fuel down, and fire burning up, geez that's a big step to say that jet crashing into the top of that building caused a fire so hot that it melted enough building to pancake itself so much to cause a chain reaction with other floors reinforced and not harmed in anyway.

You really have to be an idiot to believe what was told, but we do have a billion dollar sports industry distracting, a holywood illusion painting the way to be and think so yeah I completely see why this messed up reality takes place.

Sorry to say, but majority of this planet's population is dumber than a box of padlocks. The even sadder part of that statement is that 95% of that majority have access to healthcare, schooling, jobs, resources in general and still amount to piles of selfish, exploiting little shats.