The "Power Downs"and Evacuations Weeks Prior to 9/11

a reply to: neutronflux

Where did this thread say anything about a power outage due to unforeseen events. I thought the thread was about tagging and locking out sources of electricity for maintenance?

What to talk about fizzle no flash bombs? Thermite ceiling tiles? Buildings built with C-4 covered rebar? Nuke bombs? Holograms with lasers or energy beams? Dustification.

I thought the thread was about : The "Power Downs"and Evacuations Weeks Prior to 9/11

Not Flash beams, nuke bombs, holograms with laser energy beams, or dustification.

a reply to: Informer1958

Just pointing out you cannot even be intellectually honest about this thread.

You wanted to talk about who cannot be trusted?

Just pointing out that the truth movement is full of frauds.

Some videos for you on how a rational, scientific person views the truth movement, and why. Has nothing to do with being a government agent, a sheep, nor the ability to reason.

When you kindly and reasonably confront a conspiracists, they go into emotional overdrive? Love the false accusations of pseudoscience, being an agent, being called a shi**.

Interesting 9/11 Truther Comments
youtu.be...

Interview with Charlie Veitch - The truther who changed his mind (part 1)
youtu.be...

Debunking 9/11 conspiracy theorists part 1 of 7 - Free fall and how the towers collapsed
youtu.be...


A Review of Dr. Judy Wood’s Book Where Did The Towers Go? #1 - Myles Reviews
youtu.be...

MP Media – 9/11 Truthers New York 2012
www.s...

But why would you start now listening to a rational and self reasoning person?

a reply to: neutronflux

Just pointing out you cannot even be intellectually honest about this thread.

Seriously? So me posting my "opinions" about the topic makes me intellectually dishonest?

Just pointing out that the truth movement is full of frauds

This thread is not about the Truth movement.

The fact is the OS of 911 is full of frauds. Not everyone that you disagree with, is part of the conspiracy 911 Truth movement. You paint with a broad brush lumping "everyone" in the Truth Movement, now that is proof of "intellectually dishonest".

Some videos for you on how a rational, scientific person views the truth movement, and why. Has nothing to do with being a government agent, a sheep, nor the ability to reason.

Videos? You claim repeatedly that Truthers use youtube videos that are all fake to support their fantasies. Yet, here you are doing exactly the same thing. Pot calling Kettle.

Again the thread topic: The "Power Downs"and Evacuations Weeks Prior to 9/11, no one is interested in "opinions" about the "long dead" Truth Movement.

As I said early on the first pg, I am sure there is evidence that the WTC experienced power outages all the time.

Also, our government would never lie about anything concerning 911, because that would be dishonest, wouldn't be?

My point is, our government would never committed any kind of fraud against the American people to fulfill an agenda, because there has never been any kind of evidence they have done such a thing in the past.

a reply to: Informer1958

Your the one that wanted to be off topic. Please cite in this thread where the original post discusses anything other than isolation of power in accordance with occupational safety and hazards regulations for the purpose of maintenance. Cite were there was mention of disrupted power due to unscheduled power outages.

My point is the truth movement is based on people selling false narratives for personal gain.

Hard for you to envision how rational people view conspiracists that use emotion and innuendo for evidence?

How man charges would you state were used in your false narratives?

www.911myths.com...



In 24 days, CDI's 12 person loading crew placed 4,118 separate charges in 1,100 locations on 9 levels of the structure. Over 36,000 ft. of detonating cord and 4,512 non-electric delay devices were installed in CDI's implosion initiation system. As the implosion required the detonation of a total of 2,728 lb. of explosives, CDI implemented 36 "primary delays" and an additional 216 “micro-delays" in the implosion initiation sequence in an attempt to keep detonation overpressure to a minimum.
www.controlled-demolition.com...

a reply to: neutronflux

My point is the truth movement is based on people selling false narratives for personal gain.

Since you keep lumping me in the dead Truth movement, how am I making money?

911 myths.com website is "very bias" and only support the OS of 911. Most honest researchers looking into the 911 events learn about 911 myths and their opinionated yellow journalism in support of the OS narratives, and learn to stay away from such deceitful websites.

Hard for you to envision how rational people view conspiracists that use emotion and innuendo for evidence?

Like the OS of 911 right?

Emotions: Like all those killed at the WTC, and to speak out against the OS narratives is disgraceful against the surviving families, you mean emotions like that, correct?

originally posted by: Informer1958


Since you keep lumping me in the dead Truth movement, how am I making money?

911 myths.com website is "very bias" and only support the OS of 911.

Funny, myths.com would only seem to be bias if you were "lumped" into the truth movement.

For rational people, it just exposes the biased and falsehoods of the truth movement.

Going to ever say how many charges were planted in your false narrative of the WTC CD implosion? Isn't that a truth movement talking point?

Then what is your theory on what brought down WTC 1 and 2?

a reply to: Informer1958

How does exposing the weaknesses, the quotes out of context, pictures out of context, and the pseudoscience of the conspiracists make me a government agent? You deny I have been repeatedly accused of being a government agent at ATS, among other things?

a reply to: neutronflux

Funny, myths.com would only seem to be bias if you were "lumped" into the truth movement.

911 Myths.com is factually a very bias website, full of BS, and excuses in supporting the OS narratives. Opinionated yellow journalism doing damage control in maintaining the 911 OS narratives, and nothing more. A fifth grader can read that and come to the same conclusions.

For rational people, it just exposes the biased and falsehoods of the truth movement.

I see, so ATS members that you disagree with are not rational people? So why bother having a discussion with them anyway?

Going to ever say how many charges were planted in your false narrative of the WTC CD implosion? Isn't that a truth movement talking point?

I am going to use your quote here: You are being very "intellectually dishonest" to make false claims that I personally claimed charges were planted in the WTC. I never have made any such claims.

Care to prove me wrong?

Isn't that a truth movement talking point?

I do not know, I am not part of any movement, It seems to me you know more about the Truth movement than I do.

Is there a special website on the internet dedicated towards this alleged Truth movement? I would love to see it?

originally posted by: Informer1958
a
911 Myths.com is factually a very bias website, full of BS, and excuses in supporting the OS narratives. Opinionated yellow journalism doing damage control in maintaining the 911 OS narratives, and nothing more. A fifth grader can read that and come to the same conclusions.

It's a shame you are beyond reason. Again, Myths.com seems biased because you are in to deep into the truth movement. To rational people, it just exposes the little tricks and falsehoods to push false narratives.

So, what brought down WTC 1 and 2? If you cannot say a cause contradictory to the inward bowing leading to collapse, you have nothing to debate. No point in being here. Just rants and emotions. Unless, you agree the inward bowing and collapse is the only logical cause.

a reply to: neutronflux

Myths.com is yellow journalism? I thought it was a site honest about 9/11 facts were the truth movement is not? Got evidence to back up allegations of yellow journalism, or is it just slanderous and unfounded speculation?

We can revisit fizzle no flash explosives again? Thermite? Nukes? Holograms and lasers? Holograms and missiles? Energy weapons? Dustification? CD implosion with no sound of explosions, no demolitions shrapnel, nor evidence of an over pressure event caused by CD charges?

a reply to: neutronflux

It's a shame you are beyond reason.

Yet, you are still desperately trying your best to convince me and everyone who will read your postings that the OS of 911 is all true.

Again, Myths.com seems biased because you are in to deep into the truth movement.

Seems biased? It is biased, the website dismisses everything outside the OS narratives and mocks outside theories of any kind.
Furthermore, I made it very clear I am not in any movement, yet you continue to be "intellectually dishonest" in your comments towards me, why is that?

To rational people

You mean members who support the OS narratives, don't you?

So, what brought down WTC 1 and 2? If you cannot say a cause contradictory to the inward bowing leading to collapse, you have nothing to debate. No point in being here. Just rants and emotions. Unless, you agree the inward bowing and collapse is the only logical cause.

Sorry to inform you, this thread is not about, what brought down WTC 1 and 2?

I see you have nothing to bring of substance to the OP, but emotional rants, and raves against some long dead Truth movement.

Like I said before, Didn't the WTC suffer many black outs before 911.

I stand by my comment, that our government never tells lies either.

a reply to: Informer1958

One, where did I ever say it was all true? I think I mostly have stuck to inward bowing, jet at shanksville, jet at pentagon, hitting the pentagon would not destroy all financial records and records of contracts, and puts are used as insurance.

Two, quote where myths.com actually mocks. Myths.com list truth movement arguments, and counters with logical arguments based on facts.

Three, still waiting on proof of myths.com being yellow journalism. I see you already backed tracked down to mocks.

Four, myths.com is a rational site. It would only seem biased to people that follow the truth movement with religious faith.

Five, back to one. The only argument I am making here is the towers collapse was initiated by inward bowing.

Six, do you have proof of a more credible theory to supersede inward bowing? If you don't, you have nothing to debate. No point to your rants.

a reply to: neutronflux

Just cite a source were electricity at the towers was lost from power failure.

Prove the black outs were random and unscheduled. Not planned electrical isolation for scheduled maintenance. Blackouts are different than isolation power for scheduled maintenance.

www.dictionary.com...

blackout

noun

the extinguishing or concealment of all visible lights in a city, military post, etc., usually as a precaution against air raids.


a period during a massive power failure when the lack of electricity for illumination results in utter darkness except from emergency sources, as candles.