911 Truth - Somebody Please Give It To Me!

I personaly feel as though I'm done..Posters beware as this threads title is misleaded..

Big dick,you can keep lying to yourself,and be a good little slave..

Preacher,god bless ya and dont give out to many donuts..


The truth will never be on this website..you know it,and everyone else does..To think so is just fooling yourself.
and it will never come from knuckle head that is so blinded by a pile of geusses called a report..They even cant call it the truth...Buh,buye..

[edit on 12-6-2009 by Redpillblues]

reply to post by Redpillblues


10 people. Cmon. There were 4 planes taken control of one way or another. Somebody would have had to kill all the passengers and terrorists so they could not reappear. The towers had to be rigged with explosives and detonated to near perfection, somebody had to launch a missle from nowhere at the Pentagon, and a huge team of people would have had to plan all of this. Plus you had to grab every camera around the Pentagon. Plus, you destroyed all this stuff and killed all these people for what purpose?

Think about the cost of the towers, the damage to the pentagon, the life insurance for all the dead people, the fact that the US economy was at a stand still for a week and for what?

So we could take over a country ran by lunatics with a bunch of opium?

reply to post by Redpillblues


Well thanks for participating and I will do my best to keep the donuts to myself. Good luck on pushing for another investigation.

You or the other knuckle head dont read so well do ya's
Amazing..

I'm not pushing for anything..If it happens it happens..Karmas a bitch.

.Once again tipping your hand..You should know better by now,shame on you..

reply to post by Redpillblues


Seriously there is not need to be angry. I really do hope there is another investigation that satisfies people more. If you are right and the government did it then we need to know that.

The main reason I started this thread was to try to narrow down and focus the 911 alternative events side of thing. Granted, I failed miserably.

reply to post by grapesofraft


Angry,no

amazed yes..


You we be very surpised on how easy it was to get into places where you shouldnt be..You would be amazed on how complacent security gets after being hounded by workers after months..
Right now i could tell you the location of an elevator in a casino that will get you to the owners suiet without question..But no less than 50 foot is the public elevator that has a security gaurd stationed at it..

Not everything is able to be proven on the internet and or able to be proven at all after the fact..some things just are,especially pre-911..
some things just are..

Hell pre-911 I roamed my states capitall no questions asked,as long as i looked like I belonged there..In wich I did..The lack of security and the basic I dont give a # attitude ran rampit,and people capitalized on it..

post 911,it was a different story..

[edit on 12-6-2009 by Redpillblues]

reply to post by Redpillblues


Well please tell me it is that amazes you. Do you think I am stupid for questioning both sides of the event?

How do you find truth?
1. Lay out possibilities
2. Try to prove which are right or wrong
3. Continue to test and remove failed possiblities
4. Continue until you narrow down possiblities until you get to one.
5. Keep questioning the one to make sure you are still right.

Originally posted by grapesofraft
Ok as far as the plumes being compressed air, this is feasible.

Please show us a video of a building collapse that is not controlled demolition and not the WTC that has visible plumes. See, you're just speculating and theorizing with your opinions. It is a fact that these plumes are only ever seen in controlled demolitions. Until you can provide proof of your claim that it's compressed air only at the WTC and the direct result of explosives in every other building collapse from controlled demolitions, then there is no feasibility. Produce a video or you're just theorizing with no proof to back your theory.

Originally posted by grapesofraft
So there would have to cord connecting all the explosives togehter.

Not necessarily. Controlled Demolition, Inc. has a remote controlled system called DREXS:

Controlled Demolition Incorporated’s implosion capabilities and DREXS (Directional Remote Explosive Severance) System facilitate the demolition or dismantling of all types of steel and concrete facilities to provide the safe, expeditious and cost-effective removal of industrial structures.

www.controlled-demolition.com...

But, it still could've been wired:

The security company at the WTC up until 2001 was Securacom/Stratesec. On it's board of directors from 1993-2000 was younger brother to George W. Bush, Marvin Bush. And from 1999-2002, Wirt D. Walker III, a cousin of the Bush brothers, was the CEO. That would be "Walker" as in George Herbert-Walker Bush. The Bush-family Walker's.

From 1996-2000, there was an $8.3 million contract to put in a "new security system" at the WTC. This could've been the perfect opportunity to do the needed planting of explosives.

Then Bush's other brother, Jeb Bush, governor of Florida, helps Dubya become president by stealing the election and carrying out the Bush-family plans. That, my friend, is a feasible hypothesis that is way too coincidental to not be feasible.

There are two great documentaries on the election fraud in Florida. I'll give links if you are truly interested in watching them.

Originally posted by grapesofraft
Having said that it is hard to believe that someone could have rigged the core of the building with explosives and no one notice the connecting cords running everywhere

Even if it wasn't done remotely like CDI can do, people don't walk around in the cores of the WTC. The only things in the cores were the elevators, which are enclosed, and the stairwells, which are also enclosed.

Originally posted by grapesofraft
Also, when you implode a building you dont just use explosives. You use jackhammers and blowtorches to weaken parts of the structure so it will fall in the manner you wish. So all this banging and burning is going on and nobody notices it?

Well since they weren't too worried about the towers damaging other buildings, which is what they try to not do in conventional demolitions, there would be no need.

However, in the weeks leading up to 9/11, there was alot of jackhammering work going on. From Scott Forbes, IT Manager of Fiduciary Trust in the south tower:

“It must have been at least four to six weeks before 9/11. It was like rebuilding work going on upstairs. The tenants, the people from Aon who had been there, were moved somewhere else. The offices were just vacant, and there was a lot of heavy machinery building work going on. It was almost like pneumatic drills and lots of hammering. So much so that the floors were shaking, that’s how noticeable it was. It was almost as if something heavy was being moved, and then it was being taken off wheels, and it was like, BOOM! Our floor underneath literally shook. You could feel the weight above you. That was how large it was.

On one occasion I opened a door to see what was going on, being nosey. When I opened the door the whole office space was empty. There was nothing there at all. It was quite bizarre because it was just empty, completely empty, barren, nothing, zero -- not even cables hanging from the ceiling. But there’d been these heavy noises and vibrations up above. It was really strange."

And in the week leading up to 9/11, Scott Forbes continues:

“It was probably the week leading up to 9/11. Every morning I’d come in around 7 a.m., and the dust was incredible! It was filthy. It was like the cleaners weren’t cleaning. Right where the windows were, there was a sill with enclosed radiators (registers). I was sick to death of the dust which was appearing on the window sills. It was dirty gray and very, very noticeable in that week leading up to 9/11. Where was that dust coming from?”

All of the evidence is there if you choose to open your eyes to it and accept it.

[edit on 12-6-2009 by _BoneZ_]

reply to post by grapesofraft


first thing you do is keep an open mind..Dont listen to anyone but yourself..Think of all possibilitys..know the peoperties of the materials at hand IE the steel and concrete..IE dont let someone tell you their version of facts and take them as gospul..BIG UNIT should have proved that one..

Like Bonez said research,and then more research..Dont follow someone elses lead,even myself..The truth is only going to be what you come to..That is unless we get a second opinion,that is unbiased..

the worst thing you could do is ask for the truth,cuz know one here knows it..all basicly what ifs..But plenty enough to question the official report..

a better thread would have been somebody please give me the facts..

reply to post by _BoneZ_


Good call on the remote demolition idea. Still it would have had to been perfectly timed. Generally when you see controlled demolition it is a series of spaced explosions.

It is just common sense that air is going to compress into the lower floors as a building collapses on itself. I dont know of any footage of a building collapsing that was not planned. I mean if it just collapsed what is the chance someone is going to be hanging out with a video cam right next to it?

Cannot really refute the people you have talking about noise and dust in the weeks leading up to 911, because you quoted them but did not give their names or why they chose to say these things. For all I know these guys just said they worked in the WTC.

reply to post by Redpillblues


OK, well first off I do appreciate your posts. I do think that we need other people to help us uncover facts, just because nobody is an expert on everything and there are a lot of dynamics in figuring out what happened on 911.

Even you must have gotten some of your ideas from someone but yourself, unless you were in the middle of the events or tried to prove what happened from the wreckage after 911. We all know that everyone's opinion is biased to some degree.

Really I do not see the difference between using the word facts or the word truth. I am not always the best with linquistics though, so maybe you could explain how you see the two as different.

I guess my first question to you is... what was the first thing that made you start to think this was an inside job as opposed to a bunch of terrorists?

Ok grapes, not sure what you're looking for and not sure if you'll ever find it, but you're at a place that offers ALOT of info on the topic. You would probably be better served to read more and post less.Here are a few things imo i find disturbing too say least.

NOTE: I would post links and vids but i'm not sure about letting add-ons run on my computer from this site. Sorry

1- Search Youtube for "US Dollar bills(5,20,50,100) contain hidden pictures" Now, you can say you can fold a dollar and see whatever you want to see, ok, but i find this as possible evidence of premeditation and it's not radical Muslims hiding in caves.

2-Go back to Youtube and search Rumsfeld flight 93. What happened in Pennsylvania? Why did he leave office?

3-Search Youtube again and search "WTC 7 - Pull It By Larry Silverstein" Now what happened to this buliding again?

This is not representive of 5% of the material i've looked at over the years and i don't expect anyone to make a judgement off what i posted. But these are probably some of the most blatant examples of showing the story we were all told may not be the whole truth. There are much better people than me who are really working on putting real information out there. I would never try to do anything that takes away from the real work people are doing at their own expense with no agenda only wanting the truth.


[edit on 12-6-2009 by curious_soul]

[edit on 12-6-2009 by curious_soul]

[edit on 12-6-2009 by curious_soul]

reply to post by curious_soul


Well thanks for trying to help and understand.

Ok I think it is way more easy to believe it is Muslims hiding in a cave, when they have a history of doing stuff successfully over the years.
1. First WTC attack in the 90's
2. The USS Cole
3. Numerous succesful terror bombings of embassy's, government buildings , etc.

This is way more believable than someone making a dollar years before an invent just to screw with everyone after they succesfully pulled off an attack. Just imagine, they are planning this and one guy says hey lets put all kind of cool messages out there so we can mess with their heads when we are done. Hopefully someone will fold a dollar this way and catch on.

Rumsfeld left office at Bush's request after the GOP got its behind handed to it in an election. Bush used Rummie as a scapegoat.

I have read the stuff about pull it, but I cannot take one man's comments and read his mind to determine why he said what he did. However, I could see myself using this statement to just say forget about it let it collapse because it is basically already destroyed, so get away from it before one more person gets killed.

reply to post by grapesofraft


i dont think i ever said it was either or..

Theres too many holes in the report not to question.Or to look at the evidence that was ignored either on purpose or not..

But I dont know any better than the rest of us..The odds are not with a freek of nature 3 building collapsing symetricaly in the same city on the same day..So what does that say?

My opinion the difference between the truth and fact..
truth is the complete story as it truly happened..It can not be enswered here..No matter how hard you look,and how many sites you search it will never be found..

What we can do is find the over looked facts of that day..And when you put facts toghether I beleive it be comes circumstantial..Just as in a court case..You cant put a finger on the trigger but you have enough evidence to find guilty..And right now we only have 2 faces to put any evidence against..The accused hyjackers,and sadly someone else..In witch case the evidence is pointing to the latter of the two..The who is unknown..

Actually what i should have said,instead of not beleiving anyone but yourself is this..Watch video's like who Killed john galt I think its called and branch off and find the facts that support it..

Its not that hard..I'm sure bonez can point you to a few sites..I havent read anything posted by him or her that isnt true the best of my knowledge..But i am no body so take that as you may..

reply to post by grapesofraft


I assumed you were a "man of the cloth" when I read your OP, and saw your avatar. I assumed you wanted to hear both sides, maybe for the benefit of your congregation. And I will give you the benefit of the doubt. But I have read this whole thread, and re-read every thing you have posted. It seems that when possible, you are "goal-tending" some previously held beliefs. Example:

Ok I think it is way more easy to believe it is Muslims hiding in a cave, when they have a history of doing stuff successfully over the years.

10 people. Cmon. There were 4 planes taken control of one way or another. Somebody would have had to kill all the passengers and terrorists so they could not reappear. The towers had to be rigged with explosives and detonated to near perfection, somebody had to launch a missle from nowhere at the Pentagon, and a huge team of people would have had to plan all of this. Plus you had to grab every camera around the Pentagon. Plus, you destroyed all this stuff and killed all these people for what purpose?

A lot of assumptions in there, and one question at the end. I suggest you
start there with your upcoming research. For what purpose. Did the Muslims benefit?
Who did?

You have caused a lot of people to go into overdrive to try to prove their points, on both sides of the argument.

If you are a pastor etc., you have education, and if Christian as your emblems in your avatar represent, you are a peacemaker. I suggest that peacemaking has not happened in this thread. You should know that you opened a "can 'o worms". I suggest you go do a lot of research on your own. It is out there, and the truth will....

How do you find truth?
1. Lay out possibilities
2. Try to prove which are right or wrong
3. Continue to test and remove failed possiblities
4. Continue until you narrow down possiblities until you get to one.
5. Keep questioning the one to make sure you are still right.

I suggest, go to the library, internet, respected colleagues etc. and do some real research, a lot of it, and come here with a lot of information to share. Whatever side it may be on.

Originally posted by grapesofraft
It is just common sense that air is going to compress into the lower floors as a building collapses on itself.

Common sense for you with your level of understanding of physics. I'll give you a simple experiment to do. Take a large, hard book, take it outside into a dusty alley or any place with dust/sand, hold the book a foot or 2 above the ground and drop it flat onto the ground. Notice the dust coming out of all the sides and along the whole entire side of each side? When you drop the book into the dust, the book and the ground stay intact to create compression.

Your theory of compression will not pick what windows to go out of and what floors. And how can your air compression jets come out of different floors at the same time and sometimes 50 floors below the collapse zone?

The floors in the WTC were made of trusses and 4 inches of a light concrete mix on top of the trusses. What happens when concrete comes under the slightest stress? It cracks and breaks up. There was nothing in the WTC to cause any kind of compression because the concrete and everything else was being blown and/or collapsed into dust as evidenced in videos.

The test I challenged you to try looks nothing like concentrated jets of air compression. Those plumes at the WTC were the direct result of explosives as has been seen in almost every other controlled demolition and nobody can prove otherwise, period.

Originally posted by grapesofraft
Cannot really refute the people you have talking about noise and dust in the weeks leading up to 911, because you quoted them but did not give their names or why they chose to say these things.

Then you didn't read my entire post and probably just skimmed through it. Go back and reread my post. His name is posted twice and the company that he worked for in the south tower. He was interviewed for the documentary "9/11 Mysteries" and also interviewed for the newest documentary "ZERO: An Investigation Into 9/11".

reply to post by 1SawSomeThings

I assumed you were a "man of the cloth" when I read your OP, and saw your avatar. I assumed you wanted to hear both sides, maybe for the benefit of your congregation. And I will give you the benefit of the doubt. But I have read this whole thread, and re-read every thing you have posted. It seems that when possible, you are "goal-tending" some previously held beliefs.

It is not goal tending. It is just stating another possible explanation to the one presented.

A lot of assumptions in there, and one question at the end. I suggest you
start there with your upcoming research. For what purpose. Did the Muslims benefit?
Who did?

A case could be made that they are trying to do to America what they did to the Soviet Union. Bankrupt it. Actually, it is kind of working. You make a country so paranoid and driven to defeat you that you make them loose sight of the cost of being fearful. Really, it is a brilliant tactic as all war is a psychological endeavor.

You have caused a lot of people to go into overdrive to try to prove their points, on both sides of the argument.

If you are a pastor etc., you have education, and if Christian as your emblems in your avatar represent, you are a peacemaker. I suggest that peacemaking has not happened in this thread. You should know that you opened a "can 'o worms". I suggest you go do a lot of research on your own. It is out there, and the truth will....

I have not incited war. I have just created a pot to have people share their ideas. Is a heated debate bad? I do not think so. It challenges both sides to rethink their ideas and to build their case up. It is a means to an end and that end is truth.

Even Jesus was not shy to create conflict when he found it beneficial to making a point. Did he not go wild in the Temple when people were selling goods and exchanging money?

reply to post by _BoneZ_


Air is going to come out wherever there is the least resistence. Dropping a book is not a good example because there is no resistance on any side below it, so of course it is going to come out evenly.

I know you will not like this because it is just a guess. But lets say that on the floors you see the dust coming out either the elevator doors or the door to the stairs was left or held open. Then that is a path of least resistance. The air will escape from whatever window is weakest or missing.

A good example would be to fill a car with compressed air until something gave. Would you expect to see all the windows blow simultaneously? I doubt it. One would give first and the others would remain intact.

I apologize if I missed the guys name. I admit to a little skimming. I will find time this weekend to look into the mens claims.

Id hate to say it but attention to detail is not part of your ''quest'' for the truth..there for its showing ''goal tending'' as the poster above said..

The facts are in the open,the only key is if you decide to see them..

start with this and report back with a synopsis..

reply to post by Redpillblues


Yes teacher!
I will watch it. I must go and tend to my children, but when I get a spare hour I will watch it and report back to you.