Canadians wary of 9/11 explanations - and of US officials

General Petraeus can't get a little action on the side without gettin caught. Bush and Obama's every associate and crony have been revealed and publicly named in articles and investigations. The leaker Snowden has revealed thousands of files of a highly classified nature. Not one iota of legitimate intel has come forth to paint us an even sketchy picture of what the truthers say happened on 9/11. Incredible claims require at least some evidence.....unless you're a conspiracy theorist, in which case the lack of evidence is evidence.

reply to post by Flatcoat


I'm not sure but I think I just got threatened here on ATS for nothing more than speaking out, than speaking my mind and sharing the truth as I have come to see it.

It doesn't condemn the entire American government or the American people, that's absurd. The American people are the victims in this whole 9/11 fiasco as much as anyone and as far as the government goes, the shadow government is not the whole of it, in spite of the fact that this one appears to have met with approval at the highest level, and also covered up at the highest level, with whoever else knowing, perhaps corrupted by the information in their general unwillingness to speak out or to question or challenge what was happening when it was happening, but simple cowardice isn't in and of itself treasonous. Also given the psychological nature of the deceit involved in "the Big Lie", they can hardly be blamed. It implicates only whoever it actually implicates, which is a group of people that probably isn't all that large to begin with.

It doesn't even really implicate the present administration, except to the degree that they understandably did not question and towed the line while continuing with the entire policy framework that arose from 9/11 and that we can see involves various abuses of power like excessive domestic spying for example.

No one can hide behind a screen any more, not these days.

So while I do not relish or savor the idea of being threatened by a government employee on ATS, to get to me in my face, past the screen, it can't stop me in my right and freedom to speak out no matter what the implication because courage is what's needed to face this whole monstrous and satanic thing down. I didn't expect however in pointing to a small satanic faction and conspiracy that I would be issues a satanic like threat, but maybe it just goes with the territory.

Faith no fear!

Courage.

I can't alter my speaking out, nor the nature of the truth as I see it. Intimidation is part of the problem, the bullying the abuses of power.

I'm not hiding, but I don't want anyone to come and get me either.

Never been threatened on here before.

I hope that doesn't happen again, it's a little unnerving, to a degree.

NAM

I didn't threaten you. I was simply pointing out that if truthers care so much about their accusations then why don't they come forward, instead of hiding behind a computer with a false name?

Yes, when you call the Commander in Chief a liar, conspirator and murderer that reflects upon every single American-including the 2782 people who died that day. It means nothing to you or anyone else who pushes their insulting agenda that real people lost their lives-not avatars on a computer game.

As I have said before I have had my ups and downs over the years with the government. Nothing makes me madder than the death tax that is so unfair, yet to oppose it, the media labels you as 'greedy' and lacking compassion for those less fortunate. My experience is they want to stay 'less fortunate' as it sure is easier than working.

Despite all this if the Commander in Chief-President Obama told me he needed me to get a gun and shoot at some people-and probably die-I would not be hesitant in the slightest. The reason is immaterial as that is how this country became the democracy that it is.

The thing I try to impress on truthers is to look at the 9/11 attacks and see the personal sacrifices so many people made. Look at all the people who gave up their lives so others could live-the horrors of the 687 people trapped in the Windows of the World restaurant on the 109th and 110th floors of the North tower. Christine Olander pleading with 911 operators and Port Authority dispatchers to give her some direction. The mood among the people once they all knew they were doomed-so much of this has never been released to the public because it's so upsetting. One call in particular that was only released into the Archives 10 years afterwards because dispatchers were no longer trying to give people false hope-they began having prayers with the ones who had accepted their fate.

The courage show by some is mountainous in it's sadness yet hopeful in terms that our species does indeed have hope-despite our problems.

The people with social disorders I can understand-low self esteem can be disastrous on a persons life. However, those-like many of your post-who see themselves above reproach because everything they say-is the truth and they don't need evidence to back it up. All that is required is to stay hidden and hide behind any and everything when insulting the dead and the survivors.

reply to post by spooky24


If you are wrong and mistaken about initial causes and the policy position that gave rise to the whole mess, threading through modern history up until the present day in terms of all manner of abuse of power in the name of 9/11, and as far as i'm concerned, and can discern, the laws of physics just don't lie, or in other words you ARE mistaken in your original assumptions and presumptions based on a rational and objective examination of the actual occurrence of the event itself, from the way and manner in which the buildings were destroyed, even to the south tower plane clocked on approach to impact at 510 knots at sea level, the equivalent airspeed of impossible speed numbers exceeding mach 1 at altitude when 510 knots is considered in light of what's called equivalent airspeed which factors the aerodynamic pressures at they occur at higher altitude vs. sea level where the air is 2/3rd thicker at Sea Level than it is at 30,000 feet.

If you are mistaken in regards to initial conditions and actual causes, including the very policy that imagined it in the first place as well as, the actual occurrence and phenomenon of the event itself - then it would not be doing the victims and their experiences, real and authentic justice to invoke them in the name of and under the cloak of a Big Lie and monstrous hoax which is now self evident according to nothing less than the physical laws of the universe that actually govern reality as it is.

Zelikow of course understood that it's all about perception, and thus, the narrative, even if it might violate the laws of physics, he said that once during a presentation on historical tipping points, that it need not adhere to the laws of physics!

These people all died in a terrible way.

The whole premise of your argument is based on the nullification of anything that might challenge or reveal in self evident terms, the fundamental problems with the official story, and as i've been pointing out they are so fundamental that the official story cannot be believed - by virtue of what it implies in regards to what the government or shadow government and MIC will and will not do, to realize a narrow policy agenda in this case to 'take over the world' in effect, and throw a security blanket over the people of the world, by hoodwinking them or blinding them - it's all in Zelikow's policy and teaching, echoed in the writings and degree thesis of the likes of Paul Wolfowitz at the University of Chicago under the tutelage of Leo Strauss.

It takes courage, not cowardice, to speak out for what's real. I don't hide. And it's very painful too and i'm not even an American citizen, but the lengths to which i've had to go to process this and deal with it, as it IS, has by no means been easy. It's not really fun to be right about something like this, something this grave and serious.

So i'm out there, in the face of this monstrosity in real loving memory of the many victims of such a horrific and tragic day, who belong to God who knows all and never forgets.

They, the victims, don't "belong" to you nor to the LIE that the official story has proven itself to be in self evident terms looking back on it objectively and with near 20/20 historical hindsight, straight through to the event itself placed under a magnifying glass of cold hard reality.

It was a monstrous hoax.

Therefore, which "truth" does those victims justice?, of the real and lasting kind capable of teaching something, about a certain type of style of history which is not to our mutual enlightened best interest where it may be said, again that "it was the stone that was rejected by the builders, that became the keystone."

I've shed tears and have taken responsibility in these matters by far exceeding that which belong to me, but someone's got to do it.

Only when the truth is known, can they the victims be truly memorialized in a way and a manner capable of doing them justice, according to a type of historical understanding and awareness and reality whereby REAL justice is served in what can be learned from the ugly truth lurking at the heart of it, and as a the giant "forgotten" elephant in the room, who isn't going to go away, not while valid questions linger, unanswered and in many ways rendered self evident.

There's no mudding over the 9/11 fiasco of the first decade or two of the 21st century, it's not going to work. Those who ought to know about this NEED to know.

Truth to power my dear, truth to power. (feel free to share with your colleagues),


That takes courage.

I don't hide behind a screen name telling or supporting lies and half truths in the name of doing the victims justice because if that were done with knowledge and awareness (that it's a lie) to protect the very thing at the heart of it all as it's first cause and continued justification for all manner of abuses of power including the ability to offer veiled threats in so far as we can longer hide nor enjoy privacy, that would not represent justice or be justified.

I've carried a heavy load with this thing you must know, been put through the ringer the dark night of the soul you could say.

I am doing what i KNOW is right, and saying what needs to be said, nothing more and nothing less, no matter what it takes.

i'm also rather successful and am already sitting on a gold mine in case you must know. Or did you check my bank account already..?


Best Regards,

NAM

hammanderr
General Petraeus can't get a little action on the side without gettin caught. Bush and Obama's every associate and crony have been revealed and publicly named in articles and investigations. The leaker Snowden has revealed thousands of files of a highly classified nature. Not one iota of legitimate intel has come forth to paint us an even sketchy picture of what the truthers say happened on 9/11. Incredible claims require at least some evidence.....unless you're a conspiracy theorist, in which case the lack of evidence is evidence.

When the media is controlled by the same folks who instruct the conspirators, no real headway can be made.
And I don't mean Bush/Cheney/Obama.
The actors for 9-11 were likely directed by Intelligence agencies of the US and its two main ME allies.
The identities of those who devise the real instructions for action to those agencies would be, of course, the most closely guarded of secrets.

An excellent rebuttal however it still has no substance, no shape, no discernible form and offers little more than a whisper of evidence.

Here is the main issue that sinks the entire truther argument into oblivion and discredits any indication of a simplistic explanation being offered.

"NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives planted prior to September 11, 2001. NIST also did not find any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead, photographs and videos from several angles clearly showed that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward, until the dust clouds obscured the view.

This report was assembled by 47 of the most experienced structural engineering, design and failure annalist the world has to offer. The credentials of these man and women, along with their credibility, are solid and can't be comprised. Their support staff consisted of 169 research and historical professionals who processed an enormous amount of data.

In order for your argument to have even the slightest hint of truth every single one of these people would be murderers after the fact and conspirators in a plot of thousands.

No one is ever going to believe that. Sorry, but that is just the way it is.

As I have said if someone is talking about holograms of airplanes, heat rays, robot terrorist and such then they have issues with reality and that excludes them from the debate. The main debate is substance of fact-and if you can't give credence to the best the planet has to offer in terms of scientific expertise then the debate ends. That goes for 7th graders joining their first debate team all the way to persons, such as myself, who are historic researchers with decades of experience.

If your not going to believe the experts-then who do you believe?

If I get time today I was going to post two of the 9/11 mysteries that I have been working on for the past year-obliviously I have no solved them-and I think they will interest you-since no one here knows about them.

reply to post by spooky24

"NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives planted prior to September 11, 2001. NIST also did not find any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead, photographs and videos from several angles clearly showed that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward, until the dust clouds obscured the view.

So how did NIST explain the total destruction of the two towers? Not just collapse initiation.

They can see the holes better, because there on the outside looking in. Plus they don't live under a curtain of "official" dogma.

reply to post by spooky24


I have a strong rebuttal to that, which I don't have time to relay at the moment, but for now I would like offer that I did not suggest for a moment that planes did not impact those buildings, only that in the case of the south tower plane, such speed at sea level, with flight control and maneuvering, would be absolutely impossible for an unmodified Boeing 767, and as it turns out neither does the plane fit the profile in terms of length and proportion, of a Boeing 767-222.

As to the NIST report, it was a collapse initiation hypothesis only, as is highlighted by your quote.

I'll come back and add to this, to show that indeed NIST was involved in a cover-up of the crime of the century, because they had access to all the videos of the destruction as well as the time of destruction relative to free fall speed, so they simply can't NOT have been aware that another causal mechanism than that of the plane impacts and fires alone was involved, although that is perhaps a logical and seemingly rational hypothesis on the face of it, that because the destruction for each building initiated at the impact area, that the plane impacts and fire were the sole cause.

They simply did not investigate any other hypothesis however than the collapse initiation hypothesis, while leaving what occurred thereafter in terms of the "global collapse" in the domain of an "inevitability".

More later.

So, your counter argument is that the NIST didn't have enough information or was protracted from getting the data they needed?

Again, I know nothing about building collapses or airplanes, that is why I rely on experts in the field.

However, I do know a great deal about the strategic and tactual aspects of the crime. It is my strong point and I have never seen even a hint that the timeline is in anyway affected by events such as you describe.

It's just not there. I'm in a bit of a rush myself but I still plan on posting the unsolved mystery of the North Tower above the impact zone-it plays right into your line of thinking.

reply to post by spooky24


Ah no i was saying that NIST had more than enough information to see clearly that the actual occurrence of the destruction itself must have involved more than a "collapse", from around the impact levels, but that they did not investigate anything other than the apparent cause (plane impacts and fire) only because the alternative is preposterous and outrageous ie: in line with your primary argument that it's beyond the pale to even begin to consider any other hypothesis than that which fits together with the OS narrative as the only possible explanatory hypothesis, because the alternative cannot be considered nor entertained, the implication of which is that the event was a murderous hoax.

If you are to be looking at the North Tower and the North Tower top block, i would like to bring the following into evidence, for review, not just your own, but for anyone who's attempting to understand the truth about what really happened. It does not require a degree in structural engineering, but the most rudimentary understanding of the laws of physics including Newton's three laws of motion coupled with Galileo's law of falling bodies, along with a simple thought experiment to clearly recognize the self evident truth of the matter, which is that the buildings did not really "collapse" at all.

What was NIST to do, in looking at what happened there? - say that the buildings were destroyed in a high precision engineered controlled demolition from around the impact areas, to deceive the American people and the world that the plane impact and fires were the sole cause of the destruction of the buildings amid the murder of 1000's.

The magnitude of the event itself and the way it was "rendered" carried with it it's own marching orders.

They had no choice BUT to cover it up with their report by endorsing, exclusively, a collapse initiation hypothesis, without really addressing or even attempting to model that actual occurrence of the destruction itself. By limiting their "investigation" to only one possible outcome without really explaining in any way the actual phenomenon, all the evidence to the contrary, including a very long list of events and phenomenon under observation which do not point to the plane impacts and fire as the cause, was conveniently ignored, as if a mere logical assumption that once the point of collapse initiation was reached, what ensued thereafter as the "global collapse" was "inevitable" and automatic, "as seen in the videos". This is a lie because what's seen in the videos isn't really a progressive, sequential "collapse", at all, and cannot be considered as such within the allotted time difference between free fall through nothing at all (except air), and the remaining structure, which is only about 4-6 seconds. According to the laws of motion and conservation of momentum, it's utterly impossible, the actual occurrence of destruction, absent either the foot of God, or explosives, evidence of which is manifest at the scene both in terms of first hand eyewitness accounts, as well as the evidence of the presence of temperatures by far exceeding anything that would be possible in a jet fuel and/or office fire.

Everything else was excluded in favor of only one hypothesis, as the starting assumption, since it's rather "obvious" that the plane impacts and fire must have been the sole causal mechanism, because they would not have "collapsed" otherwise now would they.

The plane impact is a fake causal mechanism for the high precision engineered controlled demolition initiated at around the plane impact areas - no other conclusion in the face of the reality of the actual event itself is really possible, not in examining it objectively including all phenomenon under observation.

So while i can't blame them for towing the line in making the wrong call, it nevertheless does represent a "scientific" (their method as we've just shown was not scientific at all beginning with only one possible conclusion/outcome while ignoring phenomenon and data suggesting otherwise) cover up, of the Crime of the Century.




NIST's 3-Year $20,000,000 Cover-Up
of the Crime of the Century


Now before you slap the label of "truther" on the info present or me, not that it really matters but it would be nice to carry on a debate without derogatory labels being thrown around as an ad hominem attack, please review the information and watch those videos i posted above.

good to see the canadians helping to keep the quest for 9/11 truth going.

I see your point however oddity of crash sequences does not lead any further than that-an oddity. That is why I say you can't just pick an occasion, study it in depth, then use that to promote the entire 102 minutes of the towers failing. Again, it's the same thing over and over. There is simply no comparison to be made as no other building has ever fallen like that before. Without data to compare too it's simply not evidence as no one is expected to close all loose ends-ever single one.

It's like in a murder trial when the defense attorney argues that the states case is incomplete because the prosecution can't prove where the victim got the $100 that was found in his pocket. So for that reason he should be acquitted because the state has left a small part of the case unsolved. The legal term is preponderance of the evidence. In your demonstration the building didn't fall the way you thought it should-OK I agree the tower didn't fall as you thought it should. Be that as it may the strange collapse is not evidence of a world wide conspiracy involving 1,000's of people.

I was always interested in the miracle of stairway B, not for the humanity of the miracle, but the reconstruction of the event. A team of experts debriefed the survivors and put together a consistent audio recollection using all of the memories of everyone. The consistence remembered a well defined 'twist' that the entire building made. It sounded like when you take a dishrag and squeeze it tight it makes a grinding sound-that was very loud. At the same time everything went off center-it just turned-even the panel that had buttons to push turned off center. Then they began to hear a sound like a bowling ball going down steps and picking up speed each time it went from one to the other.

Not a single witness said anything about an explosion-just the violent twist and then the bowling ball sound. Using your logic because they didn't the noise of the pyrotechnics then your conclusion has no merit.

spooky24
I see your point however oddity of crash sequences does not lead any further than that-an oddity. That is why I say you can't just pick an occasion, study it in depth, then use that to promote the entire 102 minutes of the towers failing. Again, it's the same thing over and over. There is simply no comparison to be made as no other building has ever fallen like that before. Without data to compare too it's simply not evidence as no one is expected to close all loose ends-ever single one.

LOLwut!?

Completely disregard everything else you said, because it's garbage.

"IN COURT BLAH BLAH BLAH".

Court cases set precedents.

-DS

-PS: Why is it this is the ONLY place you ever show up?

reply to post by spooky24


That's absurd, your little 'twist' about precedent, and no one ever said 1000's of people involved, but it certainly was and has been a global conspiracy. How many were or were not involved, which is pure speculation and supposition, or the domain of the unknown in terms of that one small piece of missing evidence throwing the whole thing out of court, doesn't wash, it doesn't pass muster as a rebuttal, and i don't think you're representing the truth and the reality in the evocative description you used with the twist and the sound of a bowling ball crashing down. In fact it appears that you've just attempted to twist history itself to fit the official story while simultaneously ignoring all evidence to the contrary.

spooky24

Not a single witness said anything about an explosion-just the violent twist and then the bowling ball sound. Using your logic because they didn't the noise of the pyrotechnics then your conclusion has no merit.

That's just simply not true on the whole. You're offering only the most vague and isolated example to try to explain the "strange collapse" and paint a picture, but it's not accurate, in more ways than one as we shall come to see in looking at the bowling ball falling analogy. No progressive pancaking collapse hypothesis explains the actual phenomenon and events as they actually occurred, in reality.


But explosions were definitely experienced, by the first responders and many of the experiencing witnesses all over the place and at varying levels of the building far away from the impact areas. But these reports quickly removed themselves and vanished from the official story reports and accounts, to replace what really happened and leaving only something like that little anecdotal story you just shared. The narrative was dominated however, right from the outset, by a fundamental lie about what really happened, which did include explosions.

And what else would we expect to find if not merely jet fuel and office fires were involved, but the use of explosives?

Super high temperatures present, well beyond that the jet fuel and office fires, also in evidence (to follow in a later post).


explosions - first hand, eyewitness accounts

First hand accounts re: explosions.

Debate note:

Because of your use of the official story record, to try to explain the event (strange "collapses"), i can enter this into the record (of the court of public opinion and awareness), on equal footing.

I dont know the truth of the matter. But from every thing that I have seen or heard concerning 911, I dont believe a word of the OS. In my opinion I think it was an inside job or a black flag, or what ever you want to call it. I just look back in history at these `events` The gulf of Tonkin springs to mind. Or any other number of similar `events` that have occurred in the past which led to a war of some kind or other. There is no way that `we the people` are going to find out what happened that day, from the Govt or any official speaking on their behalf. The only way to get that kind of info is to kick a few doors down and `water board` the likes of gw and bliar and the rest of their gang. As for wtc 7 just `pull it`. He admitted that in his own words. There is nothing that we can do about it. You will be labeled a loony if you mention any thing about it. People think that govts or gangs with in govts would never do this sort of thing. Yet history proves other wise. As this case will some distant day in the future.

The survivors in stairwell B were the closer to the collapse than anyone else-in fact it came down all around them.

In a court of law-being civil or criminal-there is a term called 'direct testimony'. Basically, this says for a fact to be considered from a witness-the witness must testify to that direct fact.

In other words to be allowed into evidence you can't go back in time and prioritize segments and YOU deduce them to facts.

Only the witness can do that. A fireman responding to an unknown question can't be considered because the question could have been anything.

Asking a fireman if he saw the Challenger blow up and he said it was an explosion then you can't remove the question-and use his comments any way you want.

Every single one of those interviews were done the same way-the question was removed and the word 'explosion' was framed.

That is the reason everyone ignores this and pays little attention to it because it's obvious the responses are framed and misdirection is used.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


I am unable to understand the points this poster is trying to make. These "self proclaimed experts" have at least a 4 yr. university education which includes a solid foundation in physics. The members of A&E may not be experts in demolition or building construction but all understand that a building cannot collapse at free fall speed unless all resistance to vertical motion has been removed. In layman's terms it means that the feet have been knocked out from under the structure before the fall begins. My understanding of the official story, was the impact of airplanes and subsequent heat caused the buildings to collapse from the top down; meaning that there would be plenty of resistance preventing the structures from collapsing at free fall speed. Even NIST had to agree that the videos showed bldg 7 falling at free fall speed.
As for $100k to be a member of A&E, I must have got the bargain of the century. It was free for me for showing I had the credentials.
As for Richard Gage benefiting from this, why not. The man is clearly a patriot who loves his country. He gave up his career to take on this challenge. No architectural firm seeking gov't contracts would touch Gage today for his controversial position. He has made personal sacrifices that few of us would entertain. He has the courage and integrity to stand up for what he believes in and has certainly experienced major blow back for his position.
To advocate that Gage take on this full time challenge with no compensation is absurd. I respect Gage for his tenacity and courage in trying to educate a public that does not seem to care that this singular event marks the beginning of the final sprint towards a totalitarian police state in America.
As for nano thermite; plenty of evidence was found in the site and Neils Harrit, and Stephen Jones were both involved in the analysis of material.

reply to post by spooky24


You gotta be kidding. I don't think it was the Space Shuttle blowing up that they were describing as "explosions" and the eyewitness testimony is ripe with these reports, didn't you watch the first of the two videos I presented? Explosions, huge explosions, explosions that knocked people off their feet. These must have been preparatory explosions in advance of the explosive destruction of the buildings because they occurred at different places and levels of the building prior to the total destruction. There's even a video somewhere from across the river which recorded some of these both as audio and visually in terms of rising dust clouds from the base of the buildings.

There were explosions, and the record is clear about that.

And hey all we have to do is to watch the videos to SEE that there were explosions and that the buildings were blown up from the top down, starting at around the impact area, which is easy enough to accomplish.

Anyway, you can't say that there were no reports of explosions and in fact there were many.

Because they cannot be queried, or because all evidence as to method is not available, you're saying it must be stricken from the record? That's crazy.

You do realize how this is starting to appear, for the reader, I hope..