Proof of explosive devices (the media coverage they don't want you to see)

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
This video already had a thread.

I didn't know that but i still think it's a good thing that i refreshed it.

This video should be viewed by everyone i think.

this is a great video

one of the better 911 videos i have seen

but ive known now for a long time it was an inside job so it really does nothing for me...

hopefully it opens up some eyes for those that still think it was muslim fundamentalists

but then again.. if people are STILL denying the truth then they'll probably never wake up to it

its a lost cause

Originally posted by selfless
Flag this thread, raise awareness.

I want many people to see this video, I think this is very important in raising awareness of what took place that day.

Better yet. Post this video anywhere you can. I post these things on MySpace. I'm sure my friends think I'm crazy, but I think they're ignorant.

[edit on 16-5-2007 by tyranny22]

Nice video,thanks for posting it.
I feel like some others here,I already believe that 9/11 allowed to happen,or caused to happen by the powers that be.This just seems to be another nail in an already nail ridden coffin.
I suppose this is one of those few times when mainstream media actually reported the truth.

not to play the bad guy here, but this video isnt PROOF. im sorry it just isnt. its certainly more circumstantial evidence but its by no means proof.

youve all watched the videos countless times, ask yourselves what you see but more importantly what you dont see.

what brought the towers down? no bloody idea. what didnt? that i got a pretty educated guess on.

9-11 was a magic spell, saturns hexagon is the same as a masonic symbol commonly used in building archetecture in modern office buildings. It only makes sense that they are trying to awaken something they believe will make them powerful, but in the end will only drain the life from everyone. Naf in the end, Christ will be revealed as the new name-rightious and true, and satan will not be so obvious, as he will trick a majority of the world, or perhaps..already has. Nonetheless it is upon us all, which side will you find yourself on? YOU ARE NOT PREPARED!

my basis is that the elements were all there on 9-11...

Fire/water
human sacrifice
precious/pristine metals

the design were like giant tuning forks. They would receive the air and ground energy and transmit it right up into space, then years later the signal reaches saturn opening a door for them to do something which nature cycles a message back saying its open by way of odd convective weather patterns, perhaps something evil? Or maybe the intent was good, but then gets warped somehow..either way, your KJV bibles explain what im explaining better. The end is wrought with little hitlers and ikemans running around in a delusional murder/kill/reflex state of mind..like animals.

Then again the reporters are only human after all and many mistaken reports did air on 9/11 such as one of the four planes parked in Cleveland, OH by a Cincinnati, OH TV station. That a Dayton, OH reported a possible 5th plane crashed into the VA Hospital in Dayton, because loud booms/explosions were heard a few hours earlier and black smoke could be seen in the direction of the VA.

In all the discussion one of the things that always gives me a chuckle is thermite bombs. Thermite is basically powdered aluminium and powdered rust. It does not explode, it burns and it burns hot and keeps burning until it is gone. It is an incenterary compound. Incenterary compounds can be enclosed to make a bomb, like a pipe bomb out of matchheads. However the bomb casing would be melted through long before gases built up to explosive levels in a "thermite bomb".

Thermite needs a high amount of heat to ignite like a magnesium ribbon. You can even start thermite with a propane blowtorch. So, no having an electronic detonator that you can call on a cell phone won't ignite it either.

The biggest problem with the truth movement is the people that think and call other people idiots and "sheeple" and other things because they disagree with their (or most likely repeating someone else's) theory of what happened. The problem only becomes worse trying to debate.

But for sake of arguement, let's say something eventually comes down the pike that is 100% irrefutable evidence that the official story is wrong. Then what? Gloat about being correct? Arrest those and only those that can be proven guilty? Some might still get away with their involvement. What if the guilty are not the ones that have been accused and demeaned over the years?

Honestly the biggest stumbling block is that most people acknowledged that 9/11 was a tragedy and got on with their lives. Even the ones that lost loved ones. Picking at an old wound hurts those that were there the worst. I don't look down at the people that calmly discuss what happened, because that helps the healing process too. But I do look down on the ones that make a buck off of slick productions those that religiously follow them and rabbidly strike down those that disagree. And that goes for the truthers and official story people. Disgraceful actions are just that, disgraceful.

If these words fill you with a seething rage and make you spout off "disinfo agent". Best advice is to step away, calm down and read the previous paragraph again.

Originally posted by Ahabstar
Then again the reporters are only human after all and many mistaken reports did air on 9/11 such as one of the four planes parked in Cleveland, OH by a Cincinnati, OH TV station.

[paraphrase]shame on you CTers for not seeing the emotions of victims as your paramount priority[/paraphrase]

If these words fill you with a seething rage and make you spout off "disinfo agent". Best advice is to step away, calm down and read the previous paragraph again.

if your words merely make me think i'm seeing a reiteration of the newest 'logic' being used by those who cannot add up 2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2 to disuade those who can from reporting their actual logic, and i don't call you any names, what then? (yes, it's a brutal run on sentence)

these 'mistaken reporters' are a highly unusual breed on any given day. a reporters', and their producers and editors whole life revolves around reporting FACT, and knowing how to do that(even though, they usually only report the FACT they want you to process, while leaving out relevant other FACTS, so they don't offend their advertisers)
it seems these rampant bad reporters are another '911 coincidence'.

Will the 9/11 paranoia never end?
There were no explosives. Explosives can be found in the rubble.
Furthermore, when a building like that gets damaged, explosions will be heard all through the building. This is because several systems in the building will stop working.

Think about water, gass, electricity and ventilation systems.
The 9/11 conspiracy trip is getting silly.

i have to start by saying that i dont believe the official story.


That being said, your thread title is misleading. What you have there is proof that explosions were heard on 9/11 at the WTC. This does not prove that explosives were used.


my $0.02

well, personally...i like to think that over the last year and a half ive presented a strong case as to why i DONT believe there were explosives used. sadly there was an error here at ats last august and most of the stuff i had presented when i first got involved in the 911 debate was lost. so my frist few hundred posts are just gone.

recently i was in a H2H debate here h2h debate over in the debate area on ats and i consolidated my data and actually did calculations and presented hard data to support my case. i will go once again on record as saying my debate partner presented one of the most articulate cases FOR the use of explosives ive seen adn ill never say otherwise. but, if anyone is interested in some general knowledge data on explosives and their properties i feel i presented some good info.

ive always been willing to answer questions about explosives and always been willing to do so without bias of my own opinions, but oddly enough very few have ever taken my up on that offer.

seems MANY of the people that are just so sure it was explosives that brought the towers down dont actually care HOW explosives work cuz they've seen it on TV and movies enough to be experts on the subject that little things like...oh...facts dont seem to appeal to much to them.

so, i have to ask...are some of you just not interested becuase you dont care if explosives can really do what we saw the way we saw it, you just know it was explosives and thats all that matters? or is learning some things to better make an informed opinion just not that appealing?

see, heres what i see as a MAJOR problem with the 911 discussions and sadly this applies equally to both sides of the debate in some cases.

some guy has a theory. different guy has a different theory. eventuallly you got a list of theories. both guys will rabidly defend each others theory even if neither of them believes the other guy so long as both theories piont to the US govt. neither guy is willing to accept any facts or anything said by any expert in a feild if it contradicts what they think.

whereas to me at least, i would rather know if my theory is even possible and id learn all i could. if i thought it was explosives id want to know how much it would take to replicate what we saw. if explosives wouldtn do it the way ti was done, id scratch it off the list of possible explainations and move on.

but what i see instead are conversations like "well, for the following reasons (insert reasons here) i dont think it was explosives and heres the data to back up my opinions" "oh yeah...well then what did cause them to fall" "um, i dunno" "you dont know nothing so you must be wrong about explosives so im right yer wrong neener neener neener"

or worse yet

"ive done work with explosives and for these reasons i dont think it was explosives"

"SHEEPLE!!!! DISINFO AGENT!!!! MORON!!!!" and so on and so forth ad nauseum.

hense my decline in posting in any discussion relating to 911. ive even had people flat out tell me "oh i can convince you" without reading ANY of the data ive posted or checking out my facts or opinions. they just KNEW i was wrong and had to educate me. how open minded is that?

so, ive rambled enough, you guys enjoy yer discussions. should anyone have questions feel free to u2u me but, yeah...for the Nth time, im done.

peace.

Good post Damocles,

It seems like some people just want to see conspiracies everywhere.
Looking for conspiracies is awesome, but let's not lose our common sense in the proces.

Originally posted by Jakko
Will the 9/11 paranoia never end?
There were no explosives. Explosives can be found in the rubble.
Furthermore, when a building like that gets damaged, explosions will be heard all through the building. This is because several systems in the building will stop working.

Think about water, gass, electricity and ventilation systems.
The 9/11 conspiracy trip is getting silly.

[parody]will government disinfo shills and their unknowingly brainwashed apprentices ever stop trying to hand wave away masses of facts?[/parody]

firemen will direct you to the 'fire triangle' of fuel, oxygen, and spark. you need all three in the same place at the same instant. this is not hollywood, where every car explodes in an accident, and circuit breakers never trip, but exposed wires lying in liquid continue to spark until the gas, or water touching the human creeps towards the spark and then ignites/electrocutes.
i've heard a transformer explode, outside my house. they 'pop', and don't sound like the 'boom' of a bomb, at all. people can tell the difference.

these were not random explosions. there were synchronized, according to ear witnesses, and 'low level flashes' reported by a fireman seem like characteristics of controlled demolition. others reported seeing 'sparkling', as well.
and cars were randomly exploding. according to witnesses, that is.
but, if you can find any footage of totally burned out cars beside perfectly intact ones, let me know.
nevermind, actually. i've already seen them. that means, that witnesses who reported flashes, sparkling, and randomly exploding cars, were bang on the money about what they saw and heard. it is then the sherlockian task, to find out how this magic trick was performed.

does a 'normal' controlled demolition have all these features?
i think something exotic was used.

Okay Billybob, rather than make a post of quote tunnels or nitpick every detail. I think you proved my point best with the paraphrase that glossed over other points from other paragraphs. I do thank you for including that it was a paraphrase because the point you addressed was not the point I addressed. Which of course doesn't make it a paraphrase but an edit with your opinion injected. Which is what the press has become.

The press (which includes TV news) is supposed to deal in facts. Usually they do, but sometimes fall victim to hoaxes, incomplete investigation and misinturpetation. The press also likes to sensationalise information as well. This happens because they need higher ratings to charge advertisers more and journalists compete for raises and higher jobs. This leads to pressure to be first and to be the one reporting. It also leads to fabrication like the GM gas tank explosions where pyrotechnics were added to get the big explosion.

One other small fact about the press, they too often have bomb threats and sometimes have to evacuate while the building is searched. But unlike schools, malls and businesses they very rarely report it even if it is a rival news station. I asked a TV reporter about that once. He said they don't report it because they don't want to encourage copycats.

I hope all that doesn't come across as being snarky as it is not my intention. Just backing up some of what I said earlier. And yes, both sides use the "freakin' idiot" attitude instead of rational debate. That is what I find disgraceful.

That out of the way, in the video the fireman that says there is a bomb in there. I would like to see the whole context of that clip. Often times when trying to control a subject lies are told. When I worked security in a hospital I would have to calm down patients. Usually I would start with reason and sometimes had make them believe that I might have to hurt them by using intimidation. The reality was I was not allowed to hit anyone except in self defense. It could be that the fireman was trying to keep people back and said that there was a bomb in there to get them to move back. In otherwords a little white lie to make his job of protecting the crowd easier. Without seeing the whole clip, hard to gauge the context. Just a thought.

Hi, just wanted to comment on the video's music why does it have such sensational music under this? Arn't the news reports sensational enough? I don't understand why this is done it really makes it less credible. Although the reports are from mainstream media the music is making it sound like a bad b film too me. Maybe some people are fooled by it and make it more credible but that wouldn't be a good thing, because people should by convinced by facts, and not by propaganda like tactics.

[edit on 17-5-2007 by Eman ruoy]

Peter Jennings was murdered. He was the most prevelant reporter on tv for 9-11 and after. I think he went almost 3 days straight.

Then he did a primetime special on UFO sightings, and now he's dead...

Originally posted by Eman ruoy
Hi, just wanted to comment on the video's music why does it have such sensational music under this? Arn't the news reports sensational enough? I don't understand why this is done it really makes it less credible. Although the reports are from mainstream media the music is making it sound like a bad b film too me. Maybe some people are fooled by it and make it more credible but that wouldn't be a good thing, because people should by convinced by facts, and not by propaganda like tactics.

[edit on 17-5-2007 by Eman ruoy]

The purpose of music in a video is to fit the theme of the piece and should be related to the mood of the video.

You don't see comedy music in a horror movie and you don't see horror music in a comedy movie...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You don't see happy little joyful music in a video that illustrates that your own government would murder 3000 people for economic reasons.

The video is full of evidence of explosives, not proof. Read the definitions.

Proof is subjective, I think all the evidence is so obvious that it's proof. ( my personal opinion)

And my thread tittle will relate to my opinion, obviously.

Of course if you take time to read what i said in the OP, I said:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a compilation of all the evidence and witnesses who heard explosives go off. There are reports of explosions before the towers even collapsed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PS: one of the definition of proof goes like this:

-the establishment of the truth of anything; demonstration.