Free Coffee and Free Donuts and a USA Today

originally posted by: searcherfortruth
a reply to: TheAlleghenyGentleman

You would think it would be easier for a plane to crash through the Pentagon and would leave pieces that were evident, how come there was not any indication that the wings broached the interior, and where were was all the wreckage and how come the Pentagon did not catch fire due to office fires and jet fuel?

And what is supposed to the most controlled air space on the planet, did not shoot the plane down, where were all the passengers and luggage of that plane, where did those black boxes run off to?

So true. The wing spars on those planes are 1 piece extruded aluminum and very high strength. There would be very large pieces of wreckage left on scene, not a bunch of random parts laid out like a staged scene as it truly was. Some misinformed people say the plane would vaporize, but that is rubbish. 5 years working for Boeing, so I know how strong and how well built those planes are, plus the materials they use aren't junk alloys like you get at the local aluminum supplier.

Plus when it first happened CNN showed a video once only showing a small streaking object going in and hitting the pentagon, then after that it wasn't shown ever again, and when people asked about it every outfit denied it was ever shown and denied it existed. That is when I knew for a fact the entire package was junk.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
It's been 15 years. Yawn...

15 years from now, you and all the Liberals will still be lamenting that the Russians stole the election from Hillary.
9/11 is never a subject that should elicit a yawn from anyone.

I have never bought the "official" version of 9/11 to this day and I never will.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Oh and that staged photo op of Runsfeld searching the debris field was so comical, too.

a reply to: TexasTruth

Seems that many conspiracy theories stem from an argument from incredulity. If all you have is a logical fallacy then maybe you should think again

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

How fast was the jet going?

Video of what happens to airframes upon high speed collisions.

m.youtube.com...
youtu.be...

Hint, solid steel wedge fragmented when it hit the concrete stop.
youtu.be...

originally posted by: Sillyolme
It's been 15 years. Yawn...

And so it begins. How many younger people will be showing this sort of attitude in another 5 years?
A lot I bet.

What many people cannot comprehend is that the events that occur, the tyranny, wars, the conspiracies, wage disparity, taxation, cost, goods, slipping educate, quality of life - EVERYthing is controlled to happen with a generational timeline in mind.

It's no accident that these events and actions take place. Whether it's a disaster like 9/11 or laws put into effect, these things are planned with the knowledge that in 20 years, the next generation will not care nor even know the difference of how things really should be. It's just "the way it is" and to them, is perfectly normal.

The people entering adulthood today don't KNOW about a time before a Patriot Act and when we were a nation quite different than you see now. It's "normal" for gas prices to be over $2, just like it will be "normal" for gas prices to be $4+ 20 years from now. It affects EVERYthing. Look at how quickly the negative traits and acts of politicians are forgotten or forgiven. I don't care which side you're on, it's all of them and they know their transgressions will pass over time.

Why shouldn't these elites do the sorts of things that they do? They stand a great chance of everyone just forgetting about it all as time goes on. All they have to do is beat the drums for awhile until the lies are accepted or no one just really gives a hoot anymore. It's laying low on a larger scale is all.

A lot of civilians aren't that great at planning ahead, but the ones in power sure are. They think BIG and over large periods of time and if we don't stop them in their tracks, they get away with every, single act. We simply don't stand a chance as we age and the younger generations have new things to be concerned about.

Your post is, of course, very accurate SearcherforTruth. For many of us, the deceit and treachery are obvious. It's a damn shame that it will just become a page in the history books that no one wants to write a report on before we know it. And we already know which story is being told in those books.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Dude why are you on ATS, every opinion you have is counter to the ATS hive mind, from Hillary and the DNC to 9/11 ?

You should find friendlier ground.

a reply to: searcherfortruth

Sweet Op-Ed.

I thought you were going to actually put something out there, and am disappointed it's just a diatribe. Meh.

originally posted by: neutronflux
First, it was classic controlled demolition. Darn it, no sounds of charges, no pressure waves knocking out windows in surrounding buildings, no demolitions shrapnel.

I have no doubt you can explain away the eyewitness testimony to the contrary:

Citarelli, John : “Right as he said that, I heard a loud roar, “boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom,” and it was getting louder. I looked around, and we were looking at each other. What is that noise? I just looked out the window of the lobby. I could see stuff out of the window of the lobby hitting the street, and I just dove into the corner of the wall.”

Becker, Brian: “We were there I don’t know, maybe 10, 15 minutes and then I just remember there was just an explosion. It seemed like on television they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions…Not thinking that this building is coming down. We just thought there was going to be a big explosion, stuff was going to come down.”

Curran, James: “We started filing out and following the line of the building. I got just to underneath the north walkway. A guy started screaming to run. When I got underneath the north bridge I looked back and you heard it, I heard like every floor went chu-chu-chu. Looked back and from the pressure everything was getting blown out of the floors before it actually collapsed.”

Deshore, Karin: “Somewhere around the middle of the World Trade Center, there was this orange and red flash coming out. Initially it was just one flash. Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode. The popping sound, and with each popping sound it was initially an orange and then red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides as far as I could see. These popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger, going both up and down and then all around the building."

Link to above eyewitness quotes and many other firsthand accounts that contradict the OS

a reply to: searcherfortruth

Amen brother.

Just realise, your not alone in this mess.. i'm from Belgium, i was 15/16 years old when it happened. I remember they picked me up from school and my mom told me in the car that a plane hit a wtc tower, everyone was just blown away, silence fell, all watching the news with each its own horrofying look on our face. We kept watching the news closely for several days and talked about it non stop..

It was then that my interest got sparked to look in to the 'conspiracy' and i was 15 ffs but it wasn't hard to spot the lie.. to this day i'm still mind blown that most people don't even know that a 3th building collapsed without getting damage..

How is it possible that Norad and other defence agencies conviniently had its fighters send out way past there operation level on a ''test'' that happened to be hijacked airplaines. They literaly had like 20 hijacked plaines on the radar and couldn't tell wich one was a drill and wich wasn't. Are they joking ??? If this doesn't ring a bell then a building collapsing on it's own won't either

I'm havong the same problem as you, it's hard to enjoy life when you know we are all living in a lie ! It get's me depressed sometimes, thank god for my kids, they pull me true and get me happy each day ! But it shakes me to the core that they have to grow up in to this hell hole called earth.

I also find myself isolated from most people to some level. Who can you talk to with these subjects ? I had my share number of people watching me like i'm so wacko babling about some crazy theory's. Even when you present evidence before there face, they shut down and try to avoid at all costs. Hope is lost for most people. Let's hope there is still enought time for the people to see it, the only way to win this is to all stand together, we as the people of this Earth. But my fair guess is that there needs to be a war we haven't seen before, to get those sick f@cks of there golden throne !

The 9/11 Commission run by Zelikow was about as objective an exercise as the Warren Commission with its magic bullet and Allen Dulles, or Project Blue Book with Condon preemptively asking the Air Force what conclusions it found convenient. The government has proven time and again it cannot credibly investigate itself. However, it is very handy and well-practiced with the whitewash and cognitive infiltration.

“By March 2003, with the commission’s staff barely in place, the two men had already prepared a detailed outline, complete with ‘chapter headings, subheadings, and sub-subheadings.’" When Zelikow shared this document with Kean and Hamilton, they realized that the staff, if they learned about it, would know that they were doing research for a predetermined conclusion.30 And so the four men agreed upon a conspiracy of silence. In Shenon’s words: “It should be kept secret from the rest of the staff, they all decided. May said that he and Zelikow agreed that the outline should be ‘treated as if it were the most classified document the commission possessed.’ Zelikow . . . labeled it ‘Commission Sensitive,’ putting those words at the top and bottom of each page.”31 The work of the 9/11 Commission began, accordingly, with Kean and Hamilton conspiring with Zelikow and May to conceal from the Commission’s staff members the fact that their investigative work would largely be limited to filling in the details of conclusions that had been reached before any investigations had begun. When the staff did finally learn about this outline a year later (in April 2004), some of them began circulating a two-page parody entitled “The Warren Commission Report--Preemptive Outline.” One of its chapter headings was: “Single Bullet: We Haven’t Seen the Evidence Yet. But Really. We’re Sure.”32 The point, of course, was that the crucial chapter of Zelikow and May’s outline could have been headed: “Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda: We Haven’t Seen the Evidence yet. But Really. We’re Sure.”

my bold and underline

The Bush Doctrine & The 9/11 Commission Report: Both Authored by Philip Zelikow (link to above quote)

How can people (at least those without an economic interest in doing so) continue to defend such an obvious sham of an investigation?

a reply to: RazorV66

I had a few questions, but I basically accepted the official story for a number of years. As another poster mentioned, when the towers came down I walked away from the TV for days. Never knew about building 7 for several years.

The closer one looks at the official story, the more it falls apart.

a reply to: Elbereth

First? can you set context?

Second, please explain how people close enough to witness interior explosions you imply were cutting steel columns didn't have their ear drums ruptured or injured by demolitions shrapnel. Or cutting charges that would detonate with the intensity of 140 db was not picked up on video!

Third, how long before the top down collapse were they heard?

Fourth, how would your implied cutting charges at the base help the top down collapse?

You do know the jet impacts cut fire mains and elevator cables. The cut cables and jet impact damage sent elevators crashing. Also, anything with compressed gas can "explode" during a fire. Aerosol cans, AC compressors, air compressors, CO2 fire extinguishers, water trapped in pipes. Electrical transformations.


Congrats! You just illustrated why the majority of people don't trust the truth movement.

All those quotes taken out of context, with no effort to research how they fit with 9/11, the movement is selective and bases narratives on half truths, and with only emotion and innuendo as evidence.

People expect more form a movement that uses truth in their name. Oh, the irony.

a reply to: neutronflux

Provide your own context with the link posted above. I'm not getting into a tit for tat with you because I've experienced how you operate in prior exchanges. You make deliberately false claims (i.e. the nature of the building cores) and mischaracterizations (conveniently misstating the text below an image.) When called on your misdeeds, you either clam up for a while and hope people forget or assert it was an honest mistake on your part. Sorry, I'm not playing that game any more.

You claimed in this thread "Darn it, no sounds of charges." I provided a link to first hand accounts (mostly from NYPD firefighters) that say otherwise. Go practice your sophistry on someone who hasn't already had a nose full of it, and I will continue to call you out when I have the time and the inclination on my terms, not yours.


Dose this image ring any bells, neutronflux?

a reply to: Elbereth


And there should be clear audio evidence from the events at the WTC of CD charges setting off, people having extensive hearing damaged like ruptured eardrums, clear and present damage from demolition shrapnel because there was no sandbagging, water barrel, or shrapnel skirting, no evidence of an over pressure event to nearby buildings nor people, why would CD charges be set off an hour early and at the ground for at top down CD, how a sophisticated CD ignition system would survive jet impacts and fires that sent elevators crashing and cut fire main headers.

Then no physical evidence of CD charges setting off. No demolitions shrapnel, no blasting cap fragments, no CD cut steel.

The movement would be more credible if it used the same scrutiny it applies to the WTC one and two inward bowing and collapse as it does its own weak narratives perpetuated by con artists making a living or gaining noterietay off 9/11.
www.metabunk.org...

The point you are missing. The public doesn't trust the movement because you falsely label them willfully blind sheep. The public doesn't trust the movement because of its hypocrisy, cult like religion, its inability to come to a coherent and single theory on even WTC one and two, and the inability to police itself from con artists.

The public sees desperate people grasping at any "smoking gun" to vindicate their religious like faith that everyone from the NYFD on up was part of your grand conspiracy theory to prove the false theory somebody is in control of everything. Our government is in control of everything?

a reply to: Elbereth

Maybe if the movement spent more time on reality, policing its con artists, not desperately grabbing at every "smoking gun", showed it would present all facts, used the same scrutiny on itself as the NIST, and spent less time patting itself on the back by calling objective people sheep, the movement might gain some credibility?

I still don't think anyone knows what jetliners flying into a skyscraper would really do. Regardless of what they were supposedly built to withstand, it had never been done before, nor since. So it's easy to say "it's impossible," but is it really? No matter what the supposed specs were, I guarantee they were not tested against the stresses of the damage and heat that reality provided.

Pentagon is funny to me. There are people who have supposedly spent dozens of hours reviewing and arguing about the Pentagon. Unfortunately.. none can agree on an actual cause. I've heard equally heated and studied claims that it was a bomb, a missile, a flyover of a real jet, a different jet, etc. Obviously those are not all true. So why does anyone who thinks their theory with the multitude of hours of study is more relevant than others with the same # of hours.. but completely different theories, is the correct one?

I recall a special on TV.. a fellow spent I don't know how many hundreds of hours at the site after the crash with whatever special modeling software they had, to determine exactly what happened. He was actually disgusted at all the theories. He was certain it was a jet that crashed into the Pentagon, gave sound reasoning for it.. and I still chuckle that people think their theories are somehow more correct, when guessing using the Internet as their investigative knowledge.

While I can't say I definitively believe the "official" story as it is told, I've honestly not heard any other theories that hold much water. Small example of how simple things are ignored in someone's fanatical belief of an event: in the Pentagon crash, there are people who insist on a flyover, a missile, or a bomb. Ignoring the dozens of witnesses who saw a low flying plane, and even more so, ignored the knocked down lightposts etc. in the path the plane took to the Pentagon. But they most certainly were down. Directly after the event, too. So.. what.. did people run out and pull over those lightposts as part of the coverup?

You can't ignore even small facts. If you ignore things like that, you are building a case based on belief.. not facts. I am not sold on the real unfolding of events, but I am also certainly not sold on the myriad of other theories.. often a multitude of different theories around the same event. But.. apparently everyone is right.. all theories are valid.. and it happened I dunno.. in a couple of dozen different ways.

Maybe it was a quantum event. : )

a reply to: neutronflux

I am not a member of the 9/11 "movement," so direct your unwanted advice elsewhere. It is not my job to explain why the OS fails to be corroborated by voluminous eyewitness testimony. I merely point to the fact. The 9/11 Commission would have done well to address the many glaring inconsistencies in their product, but instead chose to ignore, lie, or ridicule. Cognitive infiltration came later when the public started to wake up to the Big Bamboozle.

Indeed, considering that a detailed outline existed prior to the Commission's "investigation," they weren't in a position to treat contrary firsthand eyewitness evidence by relevant experts (NYPD firefighters) with the careful consideration it clearly deserved.

I am baffled that you can't see the obvious intellectual dishonesty that underpins the OS in its entirety. A search for truth does not start from conclusions and then seek confirmatory evidence. You are lost in the technical minutia while somehow failing to recognize that the very enterprise that generated all this obscuring techno-smoke was itself a barely concealed pageant of disinformation.