Here it is! The final ad for the 9/11 global campaign!

reply to post by DeeKlassified

but you're only saying all this to make it more dramatic, because anyone with a bit of sense knows no plane hit the pentagon.

Yah, it was pretty dramatic.

It was hit by a missile, there is not one bit of evidence to prove a 757 hit the pentagon. Just some dubious witnesses, to contradict the real witnesses who said it was a missile, and some plane parts used as props to make it look like there was a plane.

Evidence of a plane is like you said, parts. Where are the missile parts? Discounting all the forensics by calling witnesses "dubious" and "some plane parts-- props" really makes all that evidence just go away, does it?

The hole is not big enough, there is plenty of video inside the pentagon and not one shows any plane debris inside it, one of the most secure buildings cannot even come up with one video of it, and the exit hole was made with a 'rapid wall breaching kit' (RWBK).

It was breached all right. There is some evidence as in parts inside the building and some video too...

but you got to watch the "hole" thing...

Originally posted by DeeKlassified

Richard Gage is about finding the truth, and NIST is about hiding the truth, i.e. telling lies.

You've been lied to by NIST & co, and I'm surprised you cannot see that. You attack RG so easily, and for no reason, but the NIST cover up is so obvious, and for someone who tries to give off the impression they are all knowing, I am shocked at your ignorance.

You mean Richard "Boxboy" Gage?

Richard Gage makes Bush seem like a saint. I have read AE911T many times. The amount of lies they put on that site makes it seem like a copy of the Onion gag newspaper. Pyroclastic flows? Really? Or the "no deformations visible on WTC7 prior to collapse?" Boy I can take all day counting all the lies they have on their website.

I'd like to see what exactly NIST is "covering up" according to you. What is it exactly? Cause the only lies I have seen come from (ironically ) the "Truth" Movement. Please explain this.

Originally posted by SimonPeter
reply to post by hellobruce

 

YES RUMNSFELD DID SAY THAT 2.3 TRILLION WAS NOT ABLE TO BE TRACKED IN THE FIRST VIDEO . THAT MEANS IT IS MISSING

I want you to put up the exact quote where he specifically states that 2.3 trillion dollars is missing. The entire quote.

I'll wait...............................

reply to post by GenRadek


A video of Rumsfeld talking about the 2.3 Trillion dollars is on page 7 of this topic posted by New Covenant at 9:16 and the 1st video .
I can not believe the people who can not remember the stink about the missing Pentagon trillions that went away after 911 due to the now lack of evidence along with other landmark cases lost in the SEC files .

reply to post by JuniorDisco



Plane or no plane, the question remains, considering the mountains of evidence pointing in that direction, was it intentional and perpetrated in collusion with parties from within the US who might have had a much larger agenda and more to gain than Al Qaeda?

Who made enormous profits off these wars?

George Bush is in oil. The first thing he did was seize oil interests there and sack the Iraq Museum. Rumsfeld had interests in among other questionable industry, RAPISCAN that sold Xray scanners that suddenly became REQUIRED in every airport. Cheney's is a defense contractor himself. Halliburton is a military industrial firm in defense equipment and also handled much of the subcontracting in Iraq (remember the soldiers killed in showers from shoddy electrical work?) He also had connections to Blackwater -the shamed independent security services sent to guard diplomats, taking these jobs from soldiers and costing unnecessary amounts of money to taxpayers footing the bill. Add the Patriot Act and removal of citizens Constitutional protections and everything that was stored in Building 7 and you have to do some reasonable deductions. 9/11 was a false flag attack.

Originally posted by GenRadek

Originally posted by SimonPeter
reply to post by hellobruce

 

YES RUMNSFELD DID SAY THAT 2.3 TRILLION WAS NOT ABLE TO BE TRACKED IN THE FIRST VIDEO . THAT MEANS IT IS MISSING

I want you to put up the exact quote where he specifically states that 2.3 trillion dollars is missing. The entire quote.

I'll wait...............................

Here it is!

The technology revolution has transformed organizations across the private sector, but not ours, not fully, not yet. We are, as they say, tangled in our anchor chain. Our financial systems are decades old. According to some estimates, we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions. We cannot share information from floor to floor in this building because it's stored on dozens of technological systems that are inaccessible or incompatible.

www.defense.gov...

You really have to hear it yourself in context to understand the meaning and impact of this statement. I can tell by your patiently waiting, even if it is in front of you, you will need to hear it from the horses mouth to believe it. When I first heard him say it, I said "holy sh_t!" but you may say something else. Listen to the video. It is not too long. Hopefully it does not exceed your attention span, uh... General. Meanwhile I will try to locate a transcript for you. Cheers.

reply to post by intrptr


All you have posted is video that shows planted plane parts, I'll have to find the video again of the inside of the pentagon, which shows all the areas inside, and not one plane part in site, nada, nothing. I thought I'd bookmarked it, but haven't, so will post it once I find it again, but I don't really want to take the thread too far off topic.

You're video is just part of the propaganda, but OS promoters are immune to propaganda.

Originally posted by JuniorDisco

Originally posted by DeeKlassified

anyone with a bit of sense knows no plane hit the pentagon.

It was hit by a missile, there is not one bit of evidence to prove a 757 hit the pentagon. Just some dubious witnesses, to contradict the real witnesses who said it was a missile, and some plane parts used as props to make it look like there was a plane.

Nonsense. There's huge amounts of evidence. There are dozens and dozens of perfectly reliable witnesses who said they saw a plane. And plane parts that can be sourced from the identified aircraft. In addition there's no viable window of time to plant fake debris and it's absurd to think that enough witnesses could be planted in one of the busiest road routes in the world during rush hour.

The hole is not big enough,

For what? It's certainly big enough for the plane.

there is plenty of video inside the pentagon and not one shows any plane debris inside it,

That's simply wrong. The briefest internet search can uncover pictures of plane and passenger debris inside. Some of the material is quite unsettling.

one of the most secure buildings cannot even come up with one video of it,

Except there is a video of it. It just happens to be a standard security video. As one would expect.

There are witnesses that say there was a plane in the area, but all the real witnesses say the plane did not crash into it. All the real witnesses say it was more like a missile. Believe who you want, that is your choice, but I'm with the real witnesses on this, not the planted witnesses.

Are you really that naive to think that during the mayhem a few plane parts could not be strategically placed?!
Jeez, you are sucked in hook, line and sinker! Anyone can fabricate plane numbers on fake plane parts, think outside the box every once in a while.

Just happened to be 'standard' security, as one would expect! Haha! Maybe as you'd expect, but it the Pentagon, not a grocery store! Even banks have better CCTV than the Pentagon on 9/11 it seems! As if!
Security is paramount at the Pentagon, do you realise the importance of the Pentagon?!

I've seen all the 'pictures' they're fake. I'll search out the video of inside not long after it happened, and there is nothing to indicate a plane hit it, because no plane did hit the pentagon.

Originally posted by GenRadek

Originally posted by DeeKlassified

Richard Gage is about finding the truth, and NIST is about hiding the truth, i.e. telling lies.

You've been lied to by NIST & co, and I'm surprised you cannot see that. You attack RG so easily, and for no reason, but the NIST cover up is so obvious, and for someone who tries to give off the impression they are all knowing, I am shocked at your ignorance.

You mean Richard "Boxboy" Gage?

Richard Gage makes Bush seem like a saint. I have read AE911T many times. The amount of lies they put on that site makes it seem like a copy of the Onion gag newspaper. Pyroclastic flows? Really? Or the "no deformations visible on WTC7 prior to collapse?" Boy I can take all day counting all the lies they have on their website.

I'd like to see what exactly NIST is "covering up" according to you. What is it exactly? Cause the only lies I have seen come from (ironically

) the "Truth" Movement. Please explain this.

edit on 6/5/2013 by GenRadek because: spellings

I know you are trying to discredit Richard Gage deliberately, most of the OS'ers here are obsessed with trying to discredit him, and I know why, because he shows your precious official story to be the lie that it is..

You can try and act dumb, but it just weakens your empty argument.

Originally posted by DeeKlassified

Richard Gage is about finding the truth, and NIST is about hiding the truth, i.e. telling lies.

You've been lied to by NIST & co, and I'm surprised you cannot see that. You attack RG so easily, and for no reason, but the NIST cover up is so obvious, and for someone who tries to give off the impression they are all knowing, I am shocked at your ignorance.

Give me an example of one single coverup Gage ever exposed that NIST was involved in. I don't know what Gage is telling you the NIST report contains but the NIST report I read specifically says on page one that their summary was an educated guess based upon the available information and should not be considered canonical. I myself base my opinion on eyewitness accounts like deputy Fire chief Peter Hayden who specifically reported the fires were burning out of control which throws all of Gages accusations into the trash right there. He was there. Gage wasn't.

...and yes it's very easy to attack Gage for lying. Pretty much everyone I know does know that a third building fell which by itself pretty much marks Gage's story telling as propaganda. We both know you're simply defending him because that damned fool conspiracy web site of his is the one you stumbled across first, otherwise you'd be in here railing instead about nukes in the basements or cruise missiles hitting the Pentagon.

Originally posted by DeeKlassified
Just happened to be 'standard' security, as one would expect! Haha! Maybe as you'd expect, but it the Pentagon, not a grocery store! Even banks have better CCTV than the Pentagon on 9/11 it seems! As if!
Security is paramount at the Pentagon, do you realise the importance of the Pentagon?!

You forgot to mention "It's in the most restricted airspace in the world". If you're just going to be blindly repeating the conspiracy myths those damned fool conspiracy web sites have been repeating ad nauseum for the last ten years then you might as well mention them all.

FYI I've been to Washington D.C. and I know for a fact it's rubbish. Planes are constantly streaming by the Pentagon on their way to land at Reagan all day.

The question.

Originally posted by GenRadek


I'd like to see what exactly NIST is "covering up" according to you. What is it exactly? Cause the only lies I have seen come from (ironically

) the "Truth" Movement. Please explain this.

Your response.

Originally posted by DeeKlassified

I know you are trying to discredit Richard Gage deliberately, most of the OS'ers here are obsessed with trying to discredit him, and I know why, because he shows your precious official story to be the lie that it is..

You can try and act dumb, but it just weakens your empty argument.

On page 5 of this thread you said to me

Originally posted by DeeKlassified

I see you're another OS promoter that only answers some of the questions posed to them!

Are you going to answer GenRadek question?

reply to post by intrptr


Here you go, just for you, I found the video..

If you're interested in 9/11 then watch all of this 5 min video, but if you want to just see the inside of the Pentagon, then you can see from about 2mins onwards that there is nothing inside the Pentagon that remotely resembles a plane.

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by newcovenant

 

Outstanding post. Thanks for bringing those videos. Gotta love the way Rumsfeld (conveniently) announces his concerns about missing boatload of money One Day Before 911.

Can't keep the creditors off our back? Lets manufacture an emergency. "One day, there was a fire."

The poor military. Nobody will ever raise those questions again.

Have they? Nope.

Edit to add: That is a good place to begin reopening investigations. We won't find the smoking gun in the ashes of the buildings either. It will be in the malignant minds of people like Rumsfeld, Bush and Cheney.

edit on 5-6-2013 by intrptr because: additional...

Did you JUST NOW see the light? I guess better late than never. I thought no amount of explaining, no amount of videos, no amount of anything would help some folks. But I am not really known for my patience in making long posts that are super explanatory either.

There will never be any investigation. They would kill all three of those puppets you mentioned just to keep the official story alive.

Originally posted by waypastvne
The question.

Originally posted by GenRadek


I'd like to see what exactly NIST is "covering up" according to you. What is it exactly? Cause the only lies I have seen come from (ironically

) the "Truth" Movement. Please explain this.

Your response.

Originally posted by DeeKlassified

I know you are trying to discredit Richard Gage deliberately, most of the OS'ers here are obsessed with trying to discredit him, and I know why, because he shows your precious official story to be the lie that it is..

You can try and act dumb, but it just weakens your empty argument.

On page 5 of this thread you said to me

Originally posted by DeeKlassified

I see you're another OS promoter that only answers some of the questions posed to them!

Are you going to answer GenRadek question?

edit on 5-6-2013 by waypastvne because: (no reason given)

Firstly, are you GenRadek posting under a different name? If not what has my conversation with them got to do with you?

I did not need to answer that question because I'd already said what they were covering up, and why. So if you or your alias cannot be bothered to read my posts correctly, then why should I keep repeating myself?

Anyone with half a brain could figure it out anyway, it's not like we dont discuss our reasons why 9/11 was covered up on a daily basis, and you've been around 9/11 long enough to know this!

You are just being petty because you have run out of valid arguments, so trying to make me look stupid is your last resort. Nice try, but it's pretty desperate if that is all you can bring to the discussion!

Originally posted by DeeKlassified



Firstly, are you GenRadek posting under a different name? If not what has my conversation with them got to do with you?

I did not need to answer that question because I'd already said what they were covering up, and why. So if you or your alias cannot be bothered to read my posts correctly, then why should I keep repeating myself?

Anyone with half a brain could figure it out anyway, it's not like we dont discuss our reasons why 9/11 was covered up on a daily basis, and you've been around 9/11 long enough to know this!

You are just being petty because you have run out of valid arguments, so trying to make me look stupid is your last resort. Nice try, but it's pretty desperate if that is all you can bring to the discussion!

What is wrong with the NIST report ? Be specific.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by DeeKlassified
Just happened to be 'standard' security, as one would expect! Haha! Maybe as you'd expect, but it the Pentagon, not a grocery store! Even banks have better CCTV than the Pentagon on 9/11 it seems! As if!
Security is paramount at the Pentagon, do you realise the importance of the Pentagon?!

You forgot to mention "It's in the most restricted airspace in the world". If you're just going to be blindly repeating the conspiracy myths those damned fool conspiracy web sites have been repeating ad nauseum for the last ten years then you might as well mention them all.

FYI I've been to Washington D.C. and I know for a fact it's rubbish. Planes are constantly streaming by the Pentagon on their way to land at Reagan all day.

edit on 5-6-2013 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)

We were talking about cameras, why would I need to discuss the airspace, that had nothing to do with what I was debating.

What myths are they then, please do enlighten me! If conspiracy sites are for fools then are you including yourself in that because you have put some serious man hours in on conspiracy websites!

I come here for discussion, not for information, I use all the evidence available in the public domain, from a variety of sites, and generally don't use anything from any other 9/11 forum. If you look hard enough, you'll be surprised what you can find, but you know this anyway, you've been immersed in 9/11 for a long time now, and you only bring up information that fits the OS, even if it goes against common sense.

The real 'fool conspiracy' is the one you blindly follow, and aggressively promote, but it's just some fairytale NIST and co knocked up, low budget stuff indeed.

What exactly is 'rubbish'? I never said anything about Washington DC and planes in that area, I think you're very confused as usual! I have also been to DC, it's not exactly a place that is exclusive is it! You said that like only you had been there!

If you're gonna jump in on someone else's conversation, at least get the details of the conversation right!

reply to post by DeeKlassified

...then you can see from about 2mins onwards that there is nothing inside the Pentagon that remotely resembles a plane.

Were those taken after they removed the plane wreckage? I don't see a time stamp so...

I can as easily dismiss your "evidence" of no plane too.... just_like_that.

Isn't that what you just did?

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by DeeKlassified



Firstly, are you GenRadek posting under a different name? If not what has my conversation with them got to do with you?

I did not need to answer that question because I'd already said what they were covering up, and why. So if you or your alias cannot be bothered to read my posts correctly, then why should I keep repeating myself?

Anyone with half a brain could figure it out anyway, it's not like we dont discuss our reasons why 9/11 was covered up on a daily basis, and you've been around 9/11 long enough to know this!

You are just being petty because you have run out of valid arguments, so trying to make me look stupid is your last resort. Nice try, but it's pretty desperate if that is all you can bring to the discussion!

What is wrong with the NIST report ? Be specific.

As I said, if you read my reply properly, I've mentioned what is wrong with the NIST report so many times already, I'm not going to repeat myself. If you missed it, and if you're that interested, then go through my history and look for yourself. Lazy or what!

reply to post by EarthCitizen07

Did you JUST NOW see the light? I guess better late than never. I thought no amount of explaining, no amount of videos, no amount of anything would help some folks. But I am not really known for my patience in making long posts that are super explanatory either.

Anyone who asks will find that I have always thought that elements within the US government, Banking Industry and Military Industrial Complex were behind this. Theres more smoking gun there than in theorizing what blew up (or down) that day. I think its ridiculous to bicker about Planes/no Planes or how the towers fell.

Who Gives A Rats Ass?

I just love asking these questions and receiving no reply...

Where is the "explosives" evidence? Been asking that one on here for years...

Because I agree with

any of the "players" culpability doesn't mean that I agree with How the Towers Fell.

Iv'e said that a hundred times too. Too a hundred different people, one at a time.

BORRRING