Explosive News

I keep reading the same old tired faither arguments:

The WTC was designed to be hit by planes:

Yes, but not planes that big and not planes going full speed.

And.

Should we make a list of things that were designed to do something and failed:

Toyotas.
Space Shuttles.

Actually, a space shuttle, which was meant to handle being shot into space and re-entering our orbit was destroyed by ICE!

So if ICE can destroy the space shuttle giant planes slamming into buildings can destroy buildings.

That's a complete non-argument.

Here's more:

WTC7 wasn't hit by a plane:

Yes and have you ever seen an explanation that involves it being hit by a plane?

You're not arguing anything by bringing up that NON-POINT.

No one says it was destroyed by a plane... glad you've noticed something completely obvious.


I also love this double whammy of ludicrous non-sense:

Mossad sent in agents dressed as kids to plant explosives coupled with remote controlled planes.

I hope the few rational Faithers in this thread realise that that's what your side is all about... insane theories.

The building didn't fall at free fall.

Oh and hey, it seems a bit hypocritical to say the MSM is part of the conspiracy and ALSO say even the MSM said the building looked like controlled demos.

Which is it?

Are they part of the fake-teen-Mossad-remote-controlled-plane-thermite plot?

Or are they freedom fighters, calling it as they see it?

Or can someone make a list of the MSM folks that are good and the ones that are part of the evil plot?

That way I can be sure I'm only getting the truth...

[edit on 24-2-2010 by seethelight]

reply to post by mrbarber


It does take an imagination though. Go to the link I posted and you'll see fireman saying they can't go back in because the whole building is leaning.

I suppose he's part of the fake-teen-remote-controlled-planes-nano-thermite plot as well.

add him to the list.

Originally posted by Monts

I honestly do believe that TPTB are absolutely terrified at the idea of a new 9/11 investigation, as one could lead to their reveal and downfall.

...Or maybe in this case one should say "the powers that used to be".

reply to post by seethelight


It was designed to be hit by a plane

though it was designed to be hit by a smaller plane, it was designed to withstand that plane multiple times. Either way it was still a jet liner, the biggest at the time, that was in mind during construction. You probably never saw 911 mysteries.

I was hoping you'd at least say titanic, toyotas were recalled, not all failed, and the space shuttle blew up, just like WTC. Ice can sink the titanic, but at least it hit something, unlike WTC 7.

The only explanation given for the collapse of WTC 7 is a structural fail at a key point, combined with damage from falling towers. However, it collapsed seven hours later, in free fall speed. Don't you find this to be a bit odd? Combined with the witnesses saying they heard explosives, and the explosives caught on film, and the scientific paper on nano thermite. Some things can be coincidences, but not all things.

5 dancing israeli's were arrested on 9/11. whatreallyhappened.com... proof of possible mossad connection. To deny it is even remotely possible is to cover up this fact.

MSM ridicules honest questions, which is exactly why this OP thread is such big news, there is finally, after nine years, some, repeat, some light being shed on this issue, and you naively assume the MSM is NOT in on the conspiracy? Who is the faither now?

evil ones: Bill O'Reilly
Sean Hannity
Glenn Beck
Rush Limbaugh
(formerly) Tucker Carlson,
and Mark Davis,

The problem is that while anyone can come to any conclusion about 9/11, the people who believe in the official story HAVE to agree with everything the administration said at the time. Meaning they have to believe the Iraq war was good, Afghanistan is still justified, and essentially ignore every single future terrorist attack such as Fort Hood and Underwear Bomber and deny the overwhelming witness testimony that shows a cover up or military operation going on. You also have to agree that the TARP bail out was a good idea and that the economy is doing good. Doesn't it tire you to juggle all of that nonsense at once? Why not just let it go?

I know that ultimately I can never get the absolute truth about 9/11 or any historical event, yet you have to believe that you know exactly what happened on 9/11, and that furthermore you know this because Bush knew this at the time, without any flaw, and now you still must carry the burden of this belief. You sir belong to the ideological cult.





[edit on 24-2-2010 by ancient_wisdom]

reply to post by rainfall


Presumably many of you will already know this, however if you do not I suggest you take a peek for yourself. There have been several documentaries into the actual events of 9/11 and the stories force fed to us by mainstream media. One I thought to be very educational as well as eye opening would have to be 9/11 In Plane Sight. There is actually a segment dedicated to WTC7 and Larry Silverstein's and the NYFD's decision to "pull it". Pull it referring to the term used my demo experts to implode a building (ironically the footage shown of not only WTC 1 and 2, but also WTC7, all 3 look like a staged professionally rigged implosion.) Coincidence?

In refernce to another comment made about the media not demanding a new investigation being conducted to end the false wars i.e. OEF and OIF, why would they. The owners of the mainstream media outlets (CNN) are the biggest profiteers of the war machine. Ever heard of General Electric, our nations top military defense contractor? As an active duty service memeber, who has lost friends to these conflicts, I would love to see the wars end and stay him with my family for more than 12 months at a time, alas it is not to be. An old college professor of mine used to say "don't take it personal, it's just business". I think that quote is tailor made for this conversation.

Originally posted by butcherguy

I am being serious, I would think someone developing a theory would have checked out what eyewitnesses in the preceding weeks remember. Packing tons of explosives into the sites would have required something out of the ordinary to have been happening, as a cover.

Pay attention.....ancient_wisdom already posted this:

Originally posted by DropMasta
If the total collapse of three steel frame buildings was due to fire and the construction of the buildings, why isn´t there any discussion of how to avoid this in the future?

Why isn´t there any discussion about the responsibility of the engineers who constructed the buildings?

What about the immediate shipment of the steel to china shortly after the attacks?

If you ever looked at serious professional sites involved in building construction you would see an enourmous amount of debate regarding safety improvements post 9/11.

Here, for example, is an article from the American Institute of Architects :-

info.aia.org...

Originally posted by rainfall

Pay attention.....ancient_wisdom already posted this:

Okay.
I watched the whole thing.
It proves what? That they blew up the WTC?
There were photos of them on a mountaintop. Does this video prove that they blew the mountain up? or did they just move it?
There were photos of them in a gondola in what I will presume are the canals of Venice, did they drain them, or blow them up too?

The video that Anc. Wisdom posted proves that some people need zero hard evidence to make outrageous claims.

If a tiny Cessna can do the type of damage that was done to that office building in Austin why can't you guys accept that 2 large airliners could have taken down the towers?

Originally posted by ethancoop
If a tiny Cessna can do the type of damage that was done to that office building in Austin why can't you guys accept that 2 large airliners could have taken down the towers?

How can 2 airliners crashing into 2 buildings take down 3..??....

Originally posted by rainfall

A lingering technical question about the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks still haunts some, and it has political implications: How did 200,000 tons of steel disintegrate and drop in 11 seconds? A thousand architects and engineers want to know, and are calling on Congress to order a new investigation into the destruction of the Twin Towers and Building 7 at the World Trade Center.

There is also evidence of "advanced explosive nano-thermitic composite material found in the World Trade Center dust," Mr. Gage says. The group's petition at www. ae911truth.org is already on its way to members of Congress.

"Government officials will be notified that 'Misprision of Treason,' U.S. Code 18 (Sec. 2382), is a serious federal offense, which requires those with evidence of treason to act," Mr. Gage says. "The implications are enormous and may have profound impact on the forthcoming Khalid Shaikh Mohammed trial."

www.washingtontimes.com...

The Washington Times is covering Richard Gage....??.....

Isn't that MSM..??....

I think the tides are starting to turn...

Before the government will allow a new (or real) investigation to happen, I'm sure another war (Iran) will start or another 911 will happen just in time to divert attention from this...

Originally posted by ethancoop
If a tiny Cessna can do the type of damage that was done to that office building in Austin why can't you guys accept that 2 large airliners could have taken down the towers?

The question is...did that tiny Cessna do that damage that you saw on TV? After all, the alleged pilot shared his aircraft hanger with a Homeland Security agent...hmmm?

Originally posted by ethancoop
If a tiny Cessna can do the type of damage that was done to that office building in Austin why can't you guys accept that 2 large airliners could have taken down the towers?

Because there are over a thousand ARCHITECTS and ENGINEERS who doubt it.

The WT story is no doubt an echo (not actual coverage) of the recent organizational meeting of AE911truth that was held in California. Interestingly, nowhere in the article was the meeting mentioned. It was, however, the subject of a recent ATS thread.

Why was the article published? Is the WT trying to throw the "Truthers" a bone? Did someone overpower their usual censor? I think the publication of the article, even though it was slanted, ie : it was written Mr. Gage "managed to persuade" the >1000 architects to sign a petition. Managed to persuade? Ahem. In any case, I count the publication of the article as a palpable win for the 911 Truth movement.

To all the debunker people who are getting more furious on this thread: just sit tight and don't be afraid of the mounting evidence. There may be a time when you ask for some salsa to help swallow a meal of roasted crow.

Originally posted by ancient_wisdom
reply to post by seethelight

 

It was designed to be hit by a plane

though it was designed to be hit by a smaller plane, it was designed to withstand that plane multiple times. Either way it was still a jet liner, the biggest at the time, that was in mind during construction. You probably never saw 911 mysteries.

Sorry, mate, but similar isn't good enough.

Originally posted by ancient_wisdom

I was hoping you'd at least say titanic, toyotas were recalled, not all failed, and the space shuttle blew up, just like WTC. Ice can sink the titanic, but at least it hit something, unlike WTC 7.

You say that like it wasn't on fire for hours. It was. Explanations have been given; you just dont like them.

Originally posted by ancient_wisdom
The only explanation given for the collapse of WTC 7 is a structural fail at a key point, combined with damage from falling towers. However, it collapsed seven hours later, in free fall speed. Don't you find this to be a bit odd?

Combined with the witnesses saying they heard explosives...

...and the explosives caught on film...

and the scientific paper on nano thermite. Some things can be coincidences, but not all things.

Sigh. You get a Lot wrong here.

First, it didn't collapse at free fall speeds. That's a lie you've chosen to believe. Was 9/11 odd? We'll, name another event like it in US history? Name another time in the history of the world that two giant planes have been deliberately flown into two skyscrapers, within minutes of each other.

Let's set up a control group before we start saying ANYTHING that happened after that is more odd than one might expect on a day like 9/11.

Second, witnesses saw a LOT of things on 9/11, including WT7 leaning. Which would be counter-indicative of a controlled explosion, or at least would lead a LOT of credibility to the explanation that the structure was dramatically weakened.

Besides, how many people there on that day DON'T believe in the demo explanation. Are we having a count the witnesses contest? I bet I'd win that one.

As for seeing explosives.. that didn't happen... adn if you wanna talk about HEARING explosions, go watch footage of an ACTUAL demo and see if you think ANYONE would've missed that. It's a LOT different than a few randomly timed explosions, which is all that have been reported. Demos consist of dozens and dozens of well timed and highly visible explosions.

Originally posted by ancient_wisdom
5 dancing israeli's were arrested on 9/11. whatreallyhappened.com... proof of possible mossad connection. To deny it is even remotely possible is to cover up this fact.

Of course that whole story has been repeatedly debunked. If you gave even a toss about the truth you'd see that is a total lie.

Never happened.

Originally posted by ancient_wisdom
MSM ridicules honest questions, which is exactly why this OP thread is such big news, there is finally, after nine years, some, repeat, some light being shed on this issue, and you naively assume the MSM is NOT in on the conspiracy? Who is the faither now?

A few things. The MSM isn't monolithic. Never has been. It's a ratings driven business. If there was ANYTHING AT ALL in this, someone would cover it because it'd make a crapload of money.

Secondly, the Moonie Times is hardly the MSM.

Originally posted by ancient_wisdom
evil ones: Bill O'Reilly
Sean Hannity
Glenn Beck
Rush Limbaugh
(formerly) Tucker Carlson,
and Mark Davis,

We agree on that much at least.. though evil is just a joke word...

Originally posted by ancient_wisdom
The problem is that while anyone can come to any conclusion about 9/11, the people who believe in the official story HAVE to agree with everything the administration said at the time. Meaning they have to believe the Iraq war was good, Afghanistan is still justified, and essentially ignore every single future terrorist attack such as Fort Hood and Underwear Bomber and deny the overwhelming witness testimony that shows a cover up or military operation going on. You also have to agree that the TARP bail out was a good idea and that the economy is doing good. Doesn't it tire you to juggle all of that nonsense at once? Why not just let it go?

Umm.. none of this makes sense. I don't agree that Iraq was a good idea... at all.. in fact none of what you're going on about in this bit makes much sense.

Originally posted by ancient_wisdom
I know that ultimately I can never get the absolute truth about 9/11 or any historical event, yet you have to believe that you know exactly what happened on 9/11, and that furthermore you know this because Bush knew this at the time, without any flaw, and now you still must carry the burden of this belief. You sir belong to the ideological cult.

Uhh.. again, this is nonsense... complete BS.

If you knew me at all you'd know I'm a massive Liberal. I don't claim to know 100% about 9/11, but I do KNOW that you faithers have a LONG history of believing in something and then fixing the evidence around your beliefs.

In your case you've posted debunked and inaccurate stuff and then decided to round it off by calling me a Bush supporter.

Just sad really.

We're politically similar to some degree, but I just flatly refuse to start spouting lies to further a political agenda or to bury my head in the sand because I like the conclusion that allows me to reach.

reply to post by DropMasta

But building 7 was not hit by any plane.

No Sherlock - it was hit by a 110 story building

Or did you somehow miss that......

Originally posted by thedman

No Sherlock - it was hit by a 110 story building

Or did you somehow miss that......

Your God NIST says the impact of debris had ZERO to do with the collapse.

Please do some research.

reply to post by Another Vodka


Have you actually read that page (I know the answer)... if you HAD, you'd see that MANY of those folks are joining the "movement" because of evidence they've seen on the internet.

If their expertise was in the right area of the their field, they wouldn't need youtube videos to be enlightened.

ATS is proof that if you have enough people, a sizeable number will believe ANYTHING.

This isn't proof, it's an organised echo chamber.

Btw:

There's 132,000 licensed architects, just in America.

www.bls.gov...

There's 1.5 MILLION Engineers.

www.bls.gov...

So if you do the math you'll see that, if you only look at employed A&E you get one in a bit over 3000.

But of course, if you read the profiles you'll see that a pretty big number of those on AE911 are actually retired....

So really 1 in 3000 is WILDLY generous.

So 1 in 3000-5000 A+E have found something suspicious about 9/11 online.

And that's your proof that this is must be a valid thing?

reply to post by seethelight


it is a relevant fact that buildings do not collapse from plane damage, 9/11 is the only exception to the rule.

the fires were isolated...sigh, didn't you know?

it did collapse at free fall speed

www.911blogger.com... therefore every time you say it wasn't you are the liar.

do you have a link debunking the mossad claim?

MSM is owned by six major networks, fact. And they are all pro-establishment (pro federal reserve, pro-Israel, pro-OS 9/11).

You ought to be friends with those jokers on the MSM.

so, you are a liberal that agrees with Bush 100 percent on the issue of 9/11. that seems a bit odd. And if you really believe in the OS, where's Osama Bin Laden? And why aren't you in Afghanistan tracking down al Qaeda? Come on, another 9/11 is just around the corner (since they need to invade Iran, but I guess you wouldn't believe that anyways.)



[edit on 24-2-2010 by ancient_wisdom]

reply to post by seethelight


How many of those AE believed it was Controlled Demolition on 9/12?

I'll bet it was next to none.

As it is being studied, examined the Number Increases .

Why is that?

Because they are finding things that shouldn't be there , or that have happened.

I woke up to 911 about 2 years ago.

The Truth Movement is Growing.

reply to post by Sean48


Hey smarty pants, you're stretching it a bit.

Finally, the report notes that “debris impact from the collapse of WTC 1 initiated fires in WTC 7"

... and fire caused it collapse.

www.nist.gov...