If Someone Proved one point Would Accept the rest?

9/11 was an inside job.

Next.

a reply to: gladtobehere

That inside job claim is in itself, false.

To prove my case, you can neither offer how such an operation could have been carried out nor the reason for a 9/11 false flag.

a reply to: skyeagle409

If one owns the media, and one owns a number of drone aircraft, and if one owns the security companies that guard the buildings, it would be very easy to plan and execute such a false flag.

a reply to: Salander

And just who would that be? Just curious to hear the answer

a reply to: Salander

If one owns the media, and one owns a number of drone aircraft, and if one owns the security companies that guard the buildings, it would be very easy to plan and execute such a false flag.

There were no drone aircraft involved in the 9/11 terrorist attack, That story was fabricated as well. If you want to know what aircraft struck WTC 2, you can go here.

Airframe Record of United 175

N612UA has Reserved/Multiple Records
Data Updated each Federal Working Day at Midnight
Print This Page Goto New Search Page
Reserved N-Number
Type Reservation Fee Paid
Mode S Code 51773757
Reserved Date 01/13/2015
Renewal Date None
Purge Date 02/13/2016
Pending Number Change None
Date Change Authorized None
Reserving Party Name TAYLOR BRUCE
Street 7126 CHELSEA DR NE
City CEDAR RAPIDS
State IOWA
Zip Code 52402-1471
County LINN
Country UNITED STATES
Deregistered Aircraft
Deregistered Aircraft 1 of 1
Aircraft Description
Serial Number 21873 Certificate Issue Date 01/18/1984
Manufacturer Name BOEING Mode S Code (base 8 / oct) 51773757
Model 767-222 Mode S Code (base 16 / hex) A7F7EF
Year Manufacturer 1983 Cancel Date 09/28/2005
Reason for Cancellation Cancelled Export To None
Type Registration Corporation

Aircraft Registration prior to Deregistration
Name UNITED AIR LINES INC
Street BOX 66100
City CHICAGO
State ILLINOIS Zip Code 60666
County COOK
Country UNITED STATES

Deregistered Airworthiness
Engine Manufacturer P & W Classification Standard
Engine Model 52054 Category Transport
A/W Date 02/15/1995

registry.faa.gov...

Now, you know why your drone claim was fabricated.

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

Somebody, a group of traitors, on the inside.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: cardinalfan0596

Somebody, a group of traitors, on the inside.

That level of proof is like saying . . .
"Cuz I said so."

a reply to: Salander

It is peculiar that you would say such a thing in the absence of evidence, especially when countries around the world issued warnings to the United States that Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda would use hijacked aircraft as missiles in their attack.

After the 9/11 attack, Osama bin Laden admitted he was responsible, and afterward, al-Qaeda released martyr videos of the 9/11 hijackers.

a reply to: samkent

Aren't we expressing opinions here?

Nobody can "prove" the official story, here at ATS or anywhere else including the 911 Commission report. Claims made by the government is not proof in any stretch of the imagination.

The official story is false, there some alternative explanation must be valid. A simple part of that is that somebody on the inside pulled this off.

a reply to: skyeagle409

With all due respect sir, you are not in touch with reality as to what happened and did not happen on 911.

Your claims are taken as seriously as claims by Rumsfeld or Powell or Cheney or Bush. That is, they are not taken seriously because they have been shown many times to be inaccurate and false. The official story is a magnificent deception.

a reply to: samkent

So let's say someone pulled off a miracle and proved to me water is in fact wet. And the ending was something along the lines that this proves mermaids exist. Well no, you proved water was wet but doesn't prove mermaids.

It you start with same point and this somehow ends up in proving we need to consumer water to replace what we lose for survival then sure.

Short answer, depends on what point is being proved, and how that relates to the overall topic. In general, proving one point will not make everything said proved as well.

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: Salander

It is peculiar that you would say such a thing in the absence of evidence, especially when countries around the world issued warnings to the United States that Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda would use hijacked aircraft as missiles in their attack.

After the 9/11 attack, Osama bin Laden admitted he was responsible, and afterward, al-Qaeda released martyr videos of the 9/11 hijackers.

Pretty simple. If you believe the official explanation then move on with life secure in this truth. If not keep working to piece together what really happened and if the work is good enough then maybe it becomes the new truth. Maybe the truth is a mixture of the two. I will say the government is not exactly known as a beacon for truth and openness and any questions and accusations is because of their own actions.

a reply to: Reallyfolks

Pretty simple. If you believe the official explanation then move on with life secure in this truth. If not keep working to piece together what really happened and if the work is good enough then maybe it becomes the new truth.

The truth is very simple; fire, in conjunction with impact damage, was responsible for the collapse of WTC buildings. Experts in the field of structures, architectural, demolition implosions and firefighting, have concluded that fact. Question is; why have truthers clouded the facts with disinformation over the years?

Secondly, there was no 9/11 false flag operation. There was no way the government could have carried out such an attack and not get caught, especially in a country full of investigative reporters looking for a sensational story and where such an operation would have left papers trails across the country and around the world.

Maybe the truth is a mixture of the two. I will say the government is not exactly known as a beacon for truth and openness and any questions and accusations is because of their own actions.

That's correct, but how long did it take before the Watergate scandal was revealed? What would be the short-term and long-term consequences if it was revealed the government killed almost 3000 people as an excuse to invade Afghanistan and Iraq?

Looking at the facts, the Taliban in Afghanistan was among those warning the United States of an impending terrorist attack and remember, had the Taliban turned over OBL, there would not have been a war in Afghanistan.

Iraq violated 16 UN resolutions after the Gulf War, so there was no reason for the government to carry out a 9/11 false flag operation as an excuse to invade either of those countries. Eventually, WMD was found in Iraq and tons of nuclear-related material was removed from Iraq.

The cost of those two wars have cost the United States thousands killed and wounded and the burden of trillions of dollars over the next three decades. In addition, the military suffered financially from those two wars and in some cases, some units were so strapped for cash that they didn't even have money to buy safety gloves and other units suffered cutbacks of breakfast items in Afghanistan.

Killing almost 3000 innocent people and causing billions of dollars in property damage on its own soil is not a valid excuse for the United States to get into such a dismal situation, which exposes the absolute absurdity of the Truth Moverment.

To put it simply, the Truth Movement is highly disrespectful to the 9/11 victims and their families.

a reply to: Salander

Nobody can "prove" the official story, here at ATS or anywhere else including the 911 Commission report.

I can, based on my experience as a pilot and aircraft structural technician and the fact that my Wing Commander was inside the Pentagon when it was stuck by American 77.

The official story is false, there some alternative explanation must be valid.

Considering that you have been caught posting disinformation makes your claim rather lame.

a reply to: Salander

With all due respect sir, you are not in touch with reality as to what happened and did not happen on 911.

Since you are in the habit of posting false information, the challenge for you is to prove me wrong.

Your claims are taken as seriously as claims by Rumsfeld or Powell or Cheney or Bush.

Prove it for us all.

That is, they are not taken seriously because they have been shown many times to be inaccurate and false. The official story is a magnificent deception.

Let's take another look because I think you missed something.

The Structural Engineering Community Rejects the Controlled-Demolition Conspiracy Theory

he structural engineering community rejects the controlled-demolition conspiracy theory. Its consensus is that the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings was a fire-induced, gravity-driven collapse, an explanation that does not involve the use of explosives.


The World Trade Center's Steel Structure Was Buckling Before the Collapsee

Police, Firemen and Civilians Saw Warning Signs of Collapse of the Twin Towers on September 11th 2001


WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory

Indications of the Imminent Collapse of the World Trade Center Buildings Disprove Explosives Theory

"The NYPD aviation unit reported critical information about the impending collapse of the buildings." They could see that the exterior steel beams of the buildings were bowing. You can see the inward bowing of the steel columns in pictures of both WTC 2, (the first building to collapse) and WTC 1 (the second building to collapse.)
Buckling Steel

www.representativepress.org...


Did experts on the scene think WTC 7 was a controlled demolition?

We have spoken with several who possess extensive experience in explosive demolition, and all reported seeing or hearing nothing to indicate an explosive detonation precipitating the collapse..."We were all standing around helpless...we knew full well it was going to collapse. Everyone there knew. You gotta remember there was a lot of confusion and we didn't know if another plane was coming...but I never heard explosions like demo charges.


Towers Weakened by Planes; Brought Down by Fire

Analysis by a team of 25 of the nation's leading structural and fire protection engineers suggests that the World Trade Center Towers could have remained standing indefinitely if fire had not overwhelmed the weakened structures, according to a report presented today at a hearing of the House Science Committee.

911-engineers.blogspot.com...


Why the World Trade Center Buildings Collapsed: A Fire Chief ’s Assessment

The jet collapsed the ceilings and scraped most of the spray-on fire retarding asbestos from the steel trusses. The steel truss floor supports probably started to fail quickly from the flames and the center steel supporting columns severed by plane parts heated by the flames began to buckle, sag, warp and fail. Then the top part of the tower crashed down on the lower portion of the structure. This pancake collapse triggered the entire cascading collapse of the 110-story structure.

vincentdunn.com...


Civil & Structural Engineers on WTC Collapse

The heat from an ordinary office fire would suffice to soften and weaken the unprotected steel. Evaluation of the effects of the fire on the core column structure, with the insulation removed by the impact, showed that collapse would follow whatever the number of columns cut at the time of the impact."

911-engineers.blogspot.com...

In addition:

Brent Blanchard: Top Demolition Expert

The Interview:

Undicisettembre: Talking about the three collapses that occurred on 9/11, are conspiracy theories that claim they were controlled demolitions even vaguely reliable?

Brent Blanchard: No. There's no evidence. We see the same material being presented year after year, over and over. We are not judge and jury but we do work in the industry and we see it all the time. We do see telltale signs of what to look for, we did work on the cleanup, I was personally on the 9/11 site later in the fall because we were documenting the clean-up effort by multiple demolition crews.

My engineering company is not tied to any political organization, we are not even tied to those demolition teams. We are just a contractor, and that was one of our jobs. We have a trained eye and none of us saw any indication of wiring, or cuts, or pre burning or any of the things we see hundreds of times a year on explosive demolition sites.

Given the amount of time we worked there, if we had seen some of it we would have taken note of it. We would have seen if something didn't look right. Not only my team, but all demolition teams….not a single man saw anything that looked suspicious or that looked like it needed further investigation related to explosive demolition.

This all came from conspiracy theorists who are not expert in controlled demolitions at all.

undicisettembre.blogspot.it...

To sum it up, you have no evidence, you have no case.

a reply to: skyeagle409

I do not need to prove you wrong sir, you need to prove yourself right. You make the claim that the story is true, and in spite of all your pictures and graphs and claims, you have proved nothing at all, except your own gullibility.

a reply to: Salander

Every investigation undertaken by a qualified, professional group has. Richard Gage and his ilk still have yet to produce any actual evidence to support any of their idiotic ideas.

a reply to: Salander

I do not need to prove you wrong sir, you need to prove yourself right.

I have. I have shown there were no demo explosions as the WTC buildings collapsed, which is evident by the fact no demo explosions are seen nor heard on video and that seismic monitors did not detect demo explosions.

I have proven that the WTC buildings did not fall at free fall speed, which is evident by the fact that I have provided videos and photos showing debris outpacing the collapse of those buildings, which should have told truthers that the WTC buildings were not falling at free fall speed and it was all just a matter of common sense.

I have corrected the founder of "Pilots for 9/11 Truth" when I caught him lying and distorting the facts in regard to the 9/11 aircraft and he has been proven wrong on ACARS as well.

Those are just a few examples.

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

At least 2 qualities are required for proper analysis. Technical knowledge relevant to any given event or object, and some measure of common sense.

Common sense and a knowledge of human behavior tell one that the government has been covering up many things. Recall that Bush rejected an investigation for 2 years. If not for the Jersey Girls, he would never have ordered an investigation.

If he had nothing to hide, and his case was so solid, why did he refuse to investigate? If the government has nothing to hide, and their case is so solid, why does it hide so much? Why did it eschew discovery and force family members to accept the class action?

There are reasons for that. The story is false, a hoax. We were all deceived, and some folks have still not figured that out, 14 years on.

a reply to: Salander

There are reasons for that. The story is false, a hoax. We were all deceived, and some folks have still not figured that out, 14 years on.

14 years and counting, and over the years, all 9/11 conspiracy theories have been debunked, and remember, detonating demo explosives makes a lot of noise.



Now let's listen to see if we can hear the same demo explosions in these videos.