Backdoor to finally exposing 9/11

Originally posted by hmmmbeer
One of those is the moon hoax. Approaching with an open and scientific mind, the conclusion that it was a hoax is not hard to achieve.

Actually it is very hard to achieve - did you visit the bad astronomy site? Did you see how your silly conspiracy theories about the moon landing were destroyed one by one? Or are you refusing to go there, as you know your theories will be destroyed.

Much like the "truthers" and "birthers", they only visit conspiracy theory sites, as they hate the facts that destroy their silly theories!!

9/11 was done under a simulated war op
7/7 was done under a simulated war op

any one care to calculated the probobility for that to even be possible with out a serious leak in the intelegence community ?


i my self lean more towards an intentional op.

Originally posted by hmmmbeer
reply to post by Lillydale

 

Hi, whats your opinion re 9/11? If you have managed too through the clouds of disinformation and arrive at the conclusion it was an insde job, it opens up a whole new world of possibilities.

With all due respect, I would rather save my opinions on this for the appropriate separate places. If I say I am a "truther" then people will cheer and back me up. If I say I also believe the moon landing was a hoax, I will lose much of that support. Now what good have I done by putting them together? My post history is available though.

One of those is the moon hoax. Approaching with an open and scientific mind, the conclusion that it was a hoax is not hard to achieve.

Just trying to work the reverse on that.

One of these is... anything you want to put here. Until you can prove 9/11 on the terms of 9/11, linking it with other conspiracy theories that can also not be proven only multiplies your chances of getting no where on either.

I see what you want to get at and that is if 9/11 was a fraud then so was the moon landing. Unfortunately you cannot make that leap without actually proving the first.

Do not take this the wrong way. If you want to struggle that much harder to go up the same hill people are running past you on, go for it.

reply to post by Lillydale


I am not trying to link them!

I am only trying to get people to accept that a massive fraud can be achieved and huge coverups possible.

If the moon thing gets out, 9/11 will be investiagted deeper.

Both 9/11 and the Apollo Mission have certain commonalities.

In both cases, officialdom has presented a story that is provably wrong.

Skeptics then
- Take the most extreme opposite view
- Conclude that everything that officials have said is wrong
- Claim that "it must have been the US Government that did it"
- Claim that no-one from any other country could have been involved as only US citizens can think
- Claim that the entire US Government is involved.

Neither camp makes any sense at all.

Consider first the Moon Landings. The photos are clearly mainly poor fakes for the most part. This does NOT however prove that they did not go to the Moon. the following reasons would be grounds for a conspiracy and why these photos were fakes (some might seem outlandish, but are nonetheless still feasible):-

1. The expensive Hassalblad camera turned out to be duds and they ended up with no photos.
2. Some imbecile opened the door when they were developing the snaps and wiped out all the real photos.
3. They did n't go there at all.
4. They went there by other means that they did not wish to reveal, like a stargate or a UFO.
5. The real photos were not considered to be patriotic enough and some CIA head honcho had them reshot in a studio.
6. They were not actually prancing around on the Moon's surface, setting up experiments, but construction a set of nuclear silos so that no matter what, Russia can be wiped out even if all Yankies lay dead.
7. They found ET's living up there.
8. They found the Russians had got there first.
9. They found a British Lancaster bomber on the Moon.
10. Pope Gregory was right all along... the Earth IS flat and the planets move on crystal spheres, guided by angels.

In the case of 9/11, there is less width for possibilities, but there KBR DID actually have means, motive and opportunity to do 9/11 using mainly NON-US kit and with almost no assistance from the US Government.

5. The were taken ther

Originally posted by hmmmbeer
reply to post by Lillydale

 

I am not trying to link them!

I am only trying to get people to accept that a massive fraud can be achieved and huge coverups possible.

If the moon thing gets out, 9/11 will be investiagted deeper.

Okey dokey. I guess all I can do is applaud your perseverance. Far be it for me to tell you not to bother. I guess I hope you succeed in finding what you are looking for.

Bin Laden must be hiding on the Moon. That explains why we can't find him. How else could he be keeping his global terror network organized? We've got spy satellites and communication bugs up the wazoo down here on Earth. Al-Qaeda in outer space is a real threat to the security of the police state! The global war on terror needs to be expanded into the interstellar war on terror and some day (Satan willing) into an intergalactic war on terror! This is no time to get lax and let freedom reign. We must remain vigilant and fascist.

reply to post by Lillydale


Judging by the response to the 911 Poll, most people think the OS is a lie.

But what is the truth? Was it let it happen, make it happen etc.

All standard laws, including physics, were broken on 9/11.

And apparently we'll never know the truth. Which frustrates me. If enough people were to get angry and question it, it would happen. People power always wins.

So the breaking news that man never went to the moon would motivate people - all people - to question the OS on 9/11.

It aint just about me mate. Check out the 911 Poll.

reply to post by hmmmbeer


Your thread is brilliant. It seems to be clearly identifying truthers as moon hoax loonies to a much greater degree that even I would have expected.

Keep up the good work.

Originally posted by hmmmbeer
reply to post by dereks

 

please stick to the topic. this isnt a debate about the moon. what is your opinion re 9/11? If you *know* it was an inside job, open your mind to the possibility it has been done before.

If not, dont bother posting in this thread.

Like I said, its a double or nuthin deal.

Well YOUR wrong on both counts then PLENTY of evidence to prove that 9/11 happened as you saw on TV.

Originally posted by zerbot565
9/11 was done under a simulated war op
7/7 was done under a simulated war op

any one care to calculated the probobility for that to even be possible with out a serious leak in the intelegence community ?


i my self lean more towards an intentional op.
[/quote

Well since we have seen cctv footage of the 7/7 bombers and survivors who were on the trains and bus who saw them please explain

[edit on 5-2-2010 by wmd_2008]

[edit on 5-2-2010 by wmd_2008]

Originally posted by hmmmbeer
All standard laws, including physics, were broken on 9/11.

So now the government can suddenly decide to break the laws of physics when they want to.... you must not realise how silly that statement sounds!

So the breaking news that man never went to the moon would motivate people - all people - to question the OS on 9/11.

As man has gone to the moon that is a very silly statement! Apparently you still refuse to visit the Bad Astronomy website, as you know it will completely destroy your silly moon landing conspiracy theory!

reply to post by hmmmbeer


Most who subscribe to conspiracy thinking do so from the following psychological pragma: because X group is in control, and X group can never be beaten, there is nothing I can do of substance, therefore I will grumble and groan but I will not take practical action, because if I do so, X group will eliminate me. Conspiracy thinking is not only illogical, but it is a shallow psychological justification for inaction.

reply to post by concernedcitizan


But not me. I am a physicist and follow scientific methods. Hearsay and official stories are not 'Evidence' . Being open minded should not be a gift for a privilged few. Please open your mind and challenge a few official stories. You'll be amazed at what you find.

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by hmmmbeer

 

Your thread is brilliant. It seems to be clearly identifying truthers as moon hoax loonies to a much greater degree that even I would have expected.

Keep up the good work.

How fair of a statement is that ?

And all Debunkers believe that we found WMD in Iraq, earth is flat, and Pope Gregory was right that the other planets sit on mirrors, and are pushed by angels ???

No so fair....
To call someone crazy for having justifiable mean's to think something, is what people did to Copernicus for hundreds of years...

reply to post by hmmmbeer


Thank you for not taking offense. It is beyond doubt that lobbies and oligarchs create damage and perpetuate the decline of a system, but it is a mistake to assign to them a shadowy role of controlling it or creating it, because one will be then fighting the lobby or oligarch -- which is one of many such entities -- and not focusing on fixing the system itself. Conspiracy thinking engenders a negative psychology of paranoia and symbolic thinking instead of directing the user toward a realism in which the social design is corrupt and can be fixed, and that fix will in itself eliminate the power of all lobbies and oligarchs, actually resolving the problem. But of course one is free to pursue one's own reality. Good Luck.

reply to post by concernedcitizan


Just out of interest, have you watched/consumed any of the popular 9/11 or moon hoax documentaries? Sure they are not 100% accurate but in each case there are enough points made beyond doubt to 'prove' the OS is a lie.

Taking a simple BadAstronomy debunking attempt, the 'no blast crater' (and believe me I have trouble typing I am laughing so much) he uses an analogy of parking a car akin to landing on the moon. Apart from the obvious humour, taking reality and physics into account, the moon is pulling down on the lander with about 2000N of force (1/6 of earths gravity) so to stay in place or slowly descend, you must apply that same force downwards to create an equal and opposite force upwards. Thats a lot. Straight down - not sideways - so the opposite - straight up - force opposes gravity. It is not like parking a car. There would be significant disruption of the surface under the lander, had it got there as describedd in the OS.
Too bad most people dont understand basic physics, else the twin towers and tower 7 falling at free-fall speed could only be explained with explosives having taken out ALL resistance underneath the collapse zone.
Physics 101. Not advanvced in any way. Only requirement - an open mind.

Have a nice day.

reply to post by hmmmbeer




2000N is NOT a lot of force its just over 200kg and your wrong re the freefall speed of the buildings as well!

reply to post by wmd_2008


I know - its more, but to be safe I underestimated. In any case, there would be a crater and displacement of dust, with some settling in the landing pads, which are spotless.

And about the free fall, even the OS claims they fell at that speed! C'mon gimme a break! Check your facts. Even Tower 7 fell at free fall speeds, and the OS has no explanantion, but it admits to the speed.

Please please check your facts before posting.

The thrust from the lander was spread over a VERY WIDE area check the dia on the net and as a physicist you will be able to work out force per sq ft or mtr etc.

A link to check your facts

www.clavius.org...

Have a good look at the video of the first tower collapse the floors above the impact area drop as one you can see it on the video each floor weighed about 1500t the weight above the impact was over 40,000t. The tower that fell first was the second to be hit but was hit lower down so more load above impact point STRANGE THAT more load above the weakend structure and it fell first that must be wrong
As for the free fall speed THEY did not fall at that speed as once the floors vanish into the dust cloud you cant see when the fall stops even seismographs dont give a clear indication of the exact time taken.
Another link for you to check facts you see rubble falling from the buildings NOW if you claim that the buildings fell at freefall how can the rubble fall FASTER "you cannae change the laws of physics captain" as someone once said.

www.debunking911.com...

Back to you.



[edit on 7-2-2010 by wmd_2008]