Dutch documentary investigates 9/11 CT's

A very interesting documentary has just been shown on dutch television. It's called Zembla and is known to be one, if not the best docu show on television. They've investigated several conspiracy theories. For instance, they've tested in a flight sim weither the Pentagon could have been hit by an unexperieneced pilot. They've had experts look at the wreckage. They've investigated if any pre-knowledge of the attacks existed, investigated the put-options and the collapse of both the twin towers and wtc7 with scholars and a demolition expert. They've come to some very interesting conclusions! I won't spoil it yet because the documentary will be online for anyone to watch (with english subs) tomorrow morning (local dutch time..about 12 hours from now)

It can be found here (again, from about 12 hrs from nw)

omroep.vara.nl...

[edit on 10-9-2006 by errorist]

[edit on 10-9-2006 by errorist]

the documentary is already online, but w/o english subs (i think, cant check it myself)
-EDIT: direct link doesn't work. watch it through the page.

[edit on 10-9-2006 by errorist]

The entire documentary has just been released with english subtitles. Please have a look and tell me what you think! I think it's one the first serious investigations of the several CT's...

'The Conspiracy of September 11th' is now available with Dutch subtitles.- they mean english - This documentary looks into the existing conspiracy theories as discussed in films like Loose Change 2nd edition. In cooperation with the Technical University Delft in The Netherlands, the National Aerospace Laboratory in The Netherlands and Dutch experts on controlled demolition we researched the likelihood of these theories.

cgi.omroep.nl.../tv/vara/zembla/bb.20060911.asf



[edit on 12-9-2006 by errorist]

[edit on 12-9-2006 by errorist]

Leave it to the Dutch to investigate something that should have been done 5 years ago by the USA. Again, in all accords the USA is light years behind the Dutch. I can't wait to watch this. Anything interesting?

i caught the tail end of what appeared to be loose change the other week on a belgian tv channel called canvas - i think it was on the last half of 1 of their evening news show.

seems some countries are starting to look into it!

Originally posted by Griff
Leave it to the Dutch to investigate something that should have been done 5 years ago by the USA. Again, in all accords the USA is light years behind the Dutch. I can't wait to watch this. Anything interesting?

They pretty much debunked the no-plane theory and the CD of the WTC - but had a explosion expert baffled by showing him the collapse of WTC7 - he was 100% sure it was taken down by controlled demolition. No matter what impact the other collapses had on it.
An interesting point that he made was - and i have never read this anywhere before - that all controlled demolition starts from the bottom of a building - never from the top (with classic CD, that is)

They've also discovered that the disks that were recoverd from te rubble did indeed have prove of illegal transactions that took place from the WTC.


[edit on 12-9-2006 by errorist]

Originally posted by justyc
i caught the tail end of what appeared to be loose change the other week on a belgian tv channel called canvas - i think it was on the last half of 1 of their evening news show.

seems some countries are starting to look into it!

you're right, the 5th anniversary here in holland was all about the conspiracy theories. On 10th september, they showed on the public channel Fahrenheit 911, The above mentioned documentary followed by Loose Change.

I cant watch it at work, but did they resolve whether the terrorists could have flown the jets? (test the remote guidance, or auto guidance theories?)

I look forward to seeing the results from this...

But also consider that the American intelligence has good connections in Europe media also... so always keep some safety skeptism.

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
I cant watch it at work, but did they resolve whether the terrorists could have flown the jets? (test the remote guidance, or auto guidance theories?)

they had an equally experienced pilot (only flew a small cesna) try the manoeuvre in a flight sim. He managed to do the turn, and hit the Pentagon three times in a row.

[edit on 12-9-2006 by errorist]

Originally posted by errorist
They've also discovered that the disks that were recoverd from te rubble did indeed have prove of illegal transactions that took place from the WTC.
[edit on 12-9-2006 by errorist]

do you have any links to this because from what i remember, the german company convar that was tasked with trying to extract the information from the computer disks recovered from the wtcs was bought out by kroll inc (whose managing director arranged the wtc job for o'john neill). kroll inc were then bought out by marsh & mcLennan. m&m used to be housed on the 95th floor of wtc1.

more about all that here

Thanks for the link errorist

Excellent piece, highly recommended. I especially liked the demolition expert reaction when the filmmaker told him that WTC7 "imploded" the same day as WTC1/2.

BTW, this link works: rtsp://cachestreams.omroep.nl/bongo03/0/tv/vara/zembla/bb.20060911.asf


[edit on 2006-9-12 by zer69]

errorist-

What exactly did they say that debunked CD of the WTC towers? Like Lazarus, I can't watch it at work, but I'm very curious about that statement you made. Thanx-

Originally posted by 2PacSade
errorist-

What exactly did they say that debunked CD of the WTC towers? Like Lazarus, I can't watch it at work, but I'm very curious about that statement you made. Thanx-

There was the demolition expert who said that controlled demolition never begins at the top of a building but at the bottom. You sort of blow away its foot and take advantage of the buildings weight. He could also tell right away that the south tower would collapse first because of the way it was hit. He explained the plumes too. (too technical for me to translate)
He immediatly noticed the difference with wtc 7 collapsing (interesting is that he never heard of its collapse, let alone it happened on the same day) when he said; see, THIS is a controlled demolition (compared to the collapses of the towers). This is prepared by a team, this has been ordered by somebody. He found it really hard to believe that it was only 7 hours later! (told to him by the journalist)

The CD of the WTC has also been investigated by a bunch of students, but i dont recall exactly what they argued. Bottom line is they found no proof of control demolition at all.

But i guess they presented sort of a smoking gun by confirming WTC7 controlled demolition and in a lesser degree, the fraudulent money transactions. At least thats the way i see it, i take the team who made this doc very serious.

[edit on 12-9-2006 by errorist]

Originally posted by errorist

Originally posted by 2PacSade
errorist-

What exactly did they say that debunked CD of the WTC towers? Like Lazarus, I can't watch it at work, but I'm very curious about that statement you made. Thanx-

There was the demolition expert who said that controlled demolition never begins at the top of a building but at the bottom. You sort of blow away its foot and take advantage of the buildings weight. He could also tell right away that the south tower would collapse first because of the way it was hit. He explained the plumes too. (too technical for me to translate)
He immediatly noted the difference with wtc 7 collapsing (interesting is that he never heard of its collapse, let alone it happened on the same day) when he said; see, THIS is a controlled demolition, compared to the collapses of the towers. This is preaperd, this is ordered by somebody. He found it realy hard to believe that it was only 7 hours later! (told to him by the journalist)

The CD of the WTC has also been investigated by a bunch of students, but i dont recall exactly what they argued. Bottom line is they found no proof of control demolition at all.

But i guess they presented sort of a smoking gun by confirming WTC7 controlled demolition and in a lesser degre, the fraudulent money transactions. At least thats the way i see it, i take the team who made this very serious.

Thanx for the info errorist. I still wonder though. . .

If a CD was actually performed on the towers, wouldn't it be neccessary to perform it in a way that has never been done before due to the circumstances? They would HAVE to give the appearance that the towers collapsed from the impact areas. I would think this could be accomplished if properly thought out because we are led to believe by the 911 commission that even the buildings themselves, without any outside help, could execute this feat.

spelling

[edit on 12-9-2006 by 2PacSade]

Originally posted by 2PacSade

Originally posted by errorist

Originally posted by 2PacSade
errorist-

What exactly did they say that debunked CD of the WTC towers? Like Lazarus, I can't watch it at work, but I'm very curious about that statement you made. Thanx-

There was the demolition expert who said that controlled demolition never begins at the top of a building but at the bottom. You sort of blow away its foot and take advantage of the buildings weight. He could also tell right away that the south tower would collapse first because of the way it was hit. He explained the plumes too. (too technical for me to translate)
He immediatly noted the difference with wtc 7 collapsing (interesting is that he never heard of its collapse, let alone it happened on the same day) when he said; see, THIS is a controlled demolition, compared to the collapses of the towers. This is preaperd, this is ordered by somebody. He found it realy hard to believe that it was only 7 hours later! (told to him by the journalist)

The CD of the WTC has also been investigated by a bunch of students, but i dont recall exactly what they argued. Bottom line is they found no proof of control demolition at all.

But i guess they presented sort of a smoking gun by confirming WTC7 controlled demolition and in a lesser degre, the fraudulent money transactions. At least thats the way i see it, i take the team who made this very serious.

Thanx for the info errorist. I still wonder though. . .

If a CD was actually performed on the towers, wouldn't it be neccessary to perform it in a way that has never been done before due to the circumstances? They would HAVE to give the appearance that the towers collapsed from the impact areas. I would think this could be accomplished if properly thought out because we are led to believe by the 911 commission that even the buildings themselves, without any outside help, could execute this feat.

spelling

[edit on 12-9-2006 by 2PacSade]

Believers in Holland had the same argument after the show0; like: This demolition expert has obviously never heard of thermite or nuclear devices..but then i wonder, why didnt they use this on WTC7?

[edit on 12-9-2006 by errorist]

[edit on 12-9-2006 by errorist]

Because no plane hit that building. That would allow for a conventional CD to be employed to destroy the building. . .

Is it posible that WTC 1 & 2 were CD? Yes. The exposives would have had to be ignited by a computer that would control which exposives would go in what order. This does not have to be "cabled" to the explosives, but can be done by radio, remotly. Aim your hand held "Remote Control" at the tower that is selectivly set to a scambled frequency or set of frequencys to ignite the charges in order. In 1&2, top down. InWTC 7 it appears only the first and second floors were imploded where 1 & 2 had charges in key locations only.

The location of that computer system, I stronly suspect, was in WTC 7. Destroy 7, and you destroy all the inconvenient evidence, not only of the controlled demolition, but of the investigations into "Insider Trading" that was taking place inside WTC 7.

The documentary does seem to be bias about the pentagon. I have seen crash sites, and I can tell you it is a mess. The footage of a F4 crashing into a 8 Ft thick concrete reinforced wall is not representative of the pentagon. Besides, the F4 footage does not show the results, and all the debre that remains. Just saying the F4 vaporized is an injustice. Show the whole film. I am familiar with aircraft engins as I repaired them in the AirForce. Loose Changes accusations that the defuser found was not from a 757, are correct. The one fotographed at the pentagon was from a much smaller engine, no doubt in my retired military mind!

The documentary attempts to shift the focus of the event from the mechanics, to the monitary. And "who" are the monitary "Patsies"? The intelligence community. Such abroad accusation. Can we narrow that down a bit?