Trillion Dollar Conspiracy... 9/11 Mounting Evidence...

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

There you go. That wasn't so bad eh!

So why then was Osama put into a hospital in Dubai in June 2001 by the CIA? Wouldn't they have arrested him first?

a reply to: Deveron

He wasn't. That stems from a story in Le Figaro that was planted by French Intelligence in an attempt to stop the US from going into Iraq and exposing the under the table deals the French had with Saddam.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs

Upsetting Scenes, Strong Language(Not Frequent)!


Segment 1: Eye Witness Accounts!

Witnesses say they saw, heard or felt explosions...
Almost all the concrete was pulverised to dust..."

Many of the witnesses compare the collapse of the Towers with demolition jobs...

This is a recent video from September 2014...
I did a search for this and didn't find anything that matched...

Many of the testimonies I hadn't heard before...
Some will be known to you for sure...




Segment 2: News Footage!

This shows many different news scenes of both the South & North Towers collapsing, with different insights from different journalists...
Many who make the claim that they look like demolition jobs.

Once again, some footage may seem familiar...
Quite abit of it was new to me, even 13 years on.




Segment 3: Building 7!

The most suspect situation of that historical day...
The Smoking Gun in many people eyes...

The building that the BBC said came down, a good 10 minutes before its actual "collapse"...
The building that was "pulled" according to Larry Silverstein...

"I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

Segment 4: The Experts!

This section of the video is expert testimony on the hypothesis of demolition...
Scientists, Firemen & others share their theories as to what may have occured on 9/11...
Claiming it's impossible for fire alone to do such damage.










It's a touchy subject I guess...

I'm still on the fence in a way...
But I do find it difficult to imagine 19 people bringing a whole country, the world's most powerful country, to its knees on that fateful day.

At the same time I don't find it hard to believe that such a large pair of buildings would collapse when weakened...
Sort of like the exception(s) to the rule...

Fire hasn't collapsed buildings prior to or since 9/11...
With that said not many 100+ story buildings have been on fire, nor damaged in such a way...




It's 57 minutes long and I've only managed the first 30 minutes so far, but it is hard hitting stuff...

I still don't know what to think about 911. I've read a lot about it and watched countless videos such as this one.

However, something about it all doesn't sit right. Just watching the videos of the collapses makes me feel like two planes knocking down these towers doesn't quite make sense. I may be wrong. And then building 7 as well..

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0
Let me just clear this up right away.

You see... all of these "truthers" seeking the "truth" have allot to gain. First of all, people like Richard Gage are making millions of dollars, and buying yachts left and right due to their 911 videos selling billions of copies--people still haven't figured out how to torrent them yet. Secondly, every single person spewing the OS is false is getting rich, AND it's benefiting them enormously. Just think about it, people who speak out about 911 are hailed as hero's and everyone loves them. They usually get a huge raise at work, and promotion. It's SICKENING.

Next, Building 7 is something allot of people like to use to attempt to prove 911 was some sort of "conspiracy." If you hadn't noticed, building 7 was on fire. Steel framed buildings are falling over left and right due to fire, EVERY DAY.

Furthermore, the government has ZERO reason to lie to the people. When has the government every lied about anything? NEVER. Also, every single government official is 100% trust worthy. This can't be debated. So any official committee they would have created to investigate this would be 100% impartial and have ZERO reason to fabricate anything.

All of this craziness about ties to different people is a clever ruse. OBVIOUSLY we we're attacked because "they" hate us. America is the GREATEST country in the world. We're like 41st in quality of living, and 36th in healthcare. Last time i checked their is a "1" in those subset of numbers. Meaning #1, DUH! No wonder they hate us! Hater's gonna hate!

So all of these truthers need to stop perpetuating this propaganda. It's rude to the families and victims. You don't honor the victims and hero's by attempting to solve their murder and bring justice. You honor them by ignoring the evidence and NEVER EVER talking about these events which CANNOT BE ARGUED. Period. EVER.

Lol! Well played.

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs

Upsetting Scenes, Strong Language(Not Frequent)!


Segment 1: Eye Witness Accounts!

Witnesses say they saw, heard or felt explosions...
Almost all the concrete was pulverised to dust..."

Many of the witnesses compare the collapse of the Towers with demolition jobs...

This is a recent video from September 2014...
I did a search for this and didn't find anything that matched...

Many of the testimonies I hadn't heard before...
Some will be known to you for sure...




Segment 2: News Footage!

This shows many different news scenes of both the South & North Towers collapsing, with different insights from different journalists...
Many who make the claim that they look like demolition jobs.

Once again, some footage may seem familiar...
Quite abit of it was new to me, even 13 years on.




Segment 3: Building 7!

The most suspect situation of that historical day...
The Smoking Gun in many people eyes...

The building that the BBC said came down, a good 10 minutes before its actual "collapse"...
The building that was "pulled" according to Larry Silverstein...

"I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

Segment 4: The Experts!

This section of the video is expert testimony on the hypothesis of demolition...
Scientists, Firemen & others share their theories as to what may have occured on 9/11...
Claiming it's impossible for fire alone to do such damage.










It's a touchy subject I guess...

I'm still on the fence in a way...
But I do find it difficult to imagine 19 people bringing a whole country, the world's most powerful country, to its knees on that fateful day.

At the same time I don't find it hard to believe that such a large pair of buildings would collapse when weakened...
Sort of like the exception(s) to the rule...

Fire hasn't collapsed buildings prior to or since 9/11...
With that said not many 100+ story buildings have been on fire, nor damaged in such a way...




It's 57 minutes long and I've only managed the first 30 minutes so far, but it is hard hitting stuff...

I still don't know what to think about 911. I've read a lot about it and watched countless videos such as this one.

However, something about it all doesn't sit right. Just watching the videos of the collapses makes me feel like two planes knocking down these towers doesn't quite make sense. I may be wrong. And then building 7 as well..

My advice is listen to the voice. It doesn't seem right because it isn't. Those planes did not knock over the buildings.

Building 7 is such an obvious demolition that Chaney, Bush and the CIA cronies have to think we are just plain stupid not to call them out on this.

a reply to: Jchristopher5 Yep. It is such an obvious demolition that NO ONE found ANY evidence of an implosion rig. No wiring, no blasting cap remains, no anything that would indicate the building was wired for demolition. In addition, not a single, solitary witness has come forward to say that there were holes in their office walls with wires coming out of them. Yep, OBVIOUS controlled demolition.

originally posted by: Jchristopher5
Building 7 is such an obvious demolition

According to whom exactly?

What experience do you have with building demolition? How many have you knocked down?

a reply to: hellobruce

I am not sure what reason there is to argue with you about this. But, to me, it's obvious when you watch a nearly 50 story building crumble into its own footprint, and for nearly 2.5 seconds fall at freefall velocity. Many professional architects and demolition experts have made this observation. Heck, even Dan Rather made this comment on 9/11, after seeing building 7 improbably, no impossibly.

All of the steel columns would have had to instantly, and at once crumble below it for this result. Or, it could have been rigged for explosion, with prior knowledge, prior to that day.

Keep in mind, no steel frame building has ever crumbled into its own footprint, when NOT hit by a 757, except for building 7. EVER.

Anyway, the building owner said, that they discussed "pulling or" and decided to "pull it" and watched it being "pulled". This was a PBS interview, I am sure you have seen it.

How more obvious could it be?

a reply to: Jchristopher5 Two problems. 1. It ended up falling towards WTC 1. So, NOT in its footprint. 2. The collapse of the penthouse before the main collapse starts indicates a massive failure that would account for what you describe as a two second "near free fall" perhaps because of a failure of the supports over the ConEd substation in the base of WTC 7.

a reply to: Jchristopher5 Oh, and the use of the words "pull it" refers to the decision to pull the FDNY squads OUT of 7.

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

You are so wrong. Put that into context. This is what he said.

"I remember getting a call from the fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

You are hypnotized by your patriotism, if after reviewing his remarks you really believe he was talking about fire fighters.

a reply to: Jchristopher5 No, you are showing a distinct lack of knowledge about the situation. Or, do you truly believe that a team of Supermen ran into a heavily damaged, burning building, and then set a galactic speed record for wiring a building for demolition.

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: Jchristopher5 No, you are showing a distinct lack of knowledge about the situation. Or, do you truly believe that a team of Supermen ran into a heavily damaged, burning building, and then set a galactic speed record for wiring a building for demolition.

While I am clear Building 7 was demolished, I have no idea how it was orchestrated. It could have well been planned, and explosives planted, weeks in advance.

originally posted by: Jchristopher5
it's obvious when you watch a nearly 50 story building crumble into its own footprint,

Well, as it did not crumble into its own footprint... why do you claim it did?

All of the steel columns would have had to instantly, and at once crumble below it for this result.

Again, according to whom?

Or, it could have been rigged for explosion, with prior knowledge, prior to that day.

That is just silly, so no one noticed the tonnes of explosives being installed, the km of wiring needed, the holes punched in the walls.... Also what would have happened if 7 WTC was not severely damaged by the collapse of 1 WTC?

Keep in mind, no steel frame building has ever crumbled into its own footprint,

It never crumbled into its own footprint...

Anyway, the building owner said, that they discussed "pulling or" and decided to "pull it"

They were discussing pulling the FB out of it.... what makes you think "pulling" means they are going to demolish it?

Anyway, since when do the NYFB do building demolitions?

So just more silly conspiracy theories, not based on anything factual.

a reply to: hellobruce

Lol the Repeaters always say the same thing. Of course Building 7 was pulled. It is self evident. Any idiot with half a brain can see that.

You don't have to be a trained Demolition man to see the obvious!

However Repeaters will always deny it. And they have zero evidence to back it up.

a reply to: Deveron. No, you have ZERO evidence to back you up that it was a controlled demolition. We have the reports of the FDNY that they could see the building was heavily damaged, pieces were falling off, and that they had set up a transit that showed the building was slowly shifting towards the south. We also have the FDNY statements that they were expecting the building to eventually collapse.

This whole episode was very well documented in the website "whatreallyhappened". whatreallyhappened.com...

Consider the facts:

1. The fires in WTC 7 were not evenly distributed, so a perfect collapse was impossible.
2. Heavy duty explosives were in the building.
3. Silverstein spoke to his insurance carrier about demolishing the building.
4. Silverstein said to the fire department commander "the smartest thing to do is pull it."
5. Firefighters withdrawing from the area stated the building was going to "blow up".
6. News media outlets had foreknowledge of the collapse.
7. An explosion can be heard prior to the building's penthouse collapse.
8. Cutter charges can be heard immediately before the collapse.
9. The building collapsed perfectly into its footprint at freefall speed.

It takes a few minutes to read and digest, but the author's conclusion is that the building was, in fact, demolished.

They also document at least three sources, including debunker's favorite in Popular Mechanics, indicating there where no firefighters in the building to "pull".

Case closed. Building 7 was demolished. Why?

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: Deveron

He wasn't. That stems from a story in Le Figaro that was planted by French Intelligence in an attempt to stop the US from going into Iraq and exposing the under the table deals the French had with Saddam.

When in doubt, blame the French eh?

Didn't Israel blame the French for Mossad trotting the globe assassinating political enemies.

The French cam plant a story but the US is soooo above that. Pffft!

a reply to: Jchristopher5 Try reading something other than conspiracy sites. You keep repeating the things that are completely untrue.

a reply to: MALBOSIA deleting snarky comment.