One million New Yorkers to see Building 7 fall (AE911truth)

Who are the sheeple?

The Truthers are constantly parroting the phrase that we that believe the facts of 911 are Sheep, that we follow whatever is fed to us from the big bad media.

What we have here is King Truther: Richard "Box Boy" Gage attempting to sell his snake oil to the feeble minded populous of the the city of New York. Will he be able to? Absolutely! Will he raise 500K? I don't think so.

I laugh because the truthers don't care what bull this guy is slinging. They will buy his story. Um..wait... he has no story! Gage has never been able to release ANY peer reviewed paper to support his lies.

Keep digging deep truthers and pay this man his dues! Keep in mind, he does not care about you. He cares about his money! Point in fact, there is a truther gathering in New York state and he is going. All 8 key note speakers that are attending are not charging...well except for...yeah you guessed it Gage is charging for his airfare and his appearance:

www.sanderhicks.com...

The budget can be found here:
www.sanderhicks.com...

You will see that the biggest expenditure for the entire gathering is getting Gage to speak there. Expenses for Gage are close to 1 thousand dollars. Again...no one else is charging for going to this gathering. Don't worry truthers...if you don't have money, Box Boy will take what you got:

If you would like to discuss other forms of supporting AE911Truth that are not addressed above (e.g. planned giving, stock, real estate, vehicle donation, airline miles, in-kind, etc)...

www2.ae911truth.org...

Remember what you are paying for here:






[edit on 13-8-2010 by Six Sigma]

Why do I have the feeling that those who don't believe 9-11 was a conspiracy have done little more than read a wiki page or two. I would almost guarantee it. There is a MOUNTAIN of evidence and dozens of individual questions that simply cannot be explained away.

It's so easy for Geraldo watching naysayers to just deny the evidence, especially when they haven't even seen most of it. Watch just a few documentaries like "Loose Change" and if you can successfully answer away just the questions in that one film, I'll take you seriously. Cherry picking one or two weaker arguments as reason to dismiss it all is pathetic.

Building 7 is a great example because it was a controlled demolition, right in your face, plenty of evidence and yet some will still reject it, you find ways to reject all the plausible reasoning why it did happen for silly reasons why it didn't.

What about having an "exercise" of planes flying into the WTC the SAME friggin day to add confusion. No plane wreckage in PA. Hundreds of engineers and other experts fired from their jobs instantly for trying to speak out. Suppression of evidence, shipping out the entire crime seen to destroy the evidence on ships. Molten steel weeks after the incident (impossible due to plane crash). My favorite, they showed Bush, Rice, Cheney stand in front of cameras claiming "No one could have known this would happen", then we find out Bush and all of them were given a report with the WTC in crosshairs on the front cover describing an air attack just weeks before!, go ahead and ignore everything.

I'm tired of coddling ignorant people that run their mouths about things they know little or nothing about, you do my country a disservice and insult the intelligence of people that invested more than the 20 minutes you did researching and looking into the matter. It's painfully obvious to any intelligent person this was an inside job, there almost is no other conclusion...unless of course you haven't bothered to research it, then it makes perfect sense.

Originally posted by Paschar0
Why do I have the feeling that those who don't believe 9-11 was a conspiracy have done little more than read a wiki page or two. I would almost guarantee it. There is a MOUNTAIN of evidence and dozens of individual questions that simply cannot be explained away.

It's so easy for Geraldo watching naysayers to just deny the evidence, especially when they haven't even seen most of it. Watch just a few documentaries like "Loose Change" ...............

This is where I stopped reading your post. Loose Change? Really? Dude...welcome to 2010.

You only strengthen my point...

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by yyyyyyyyyy

 

Exactly what would they be "seeing"? I mean, billions of people have seen all the video there is to see of the collapse, and there are more than a few New Yorkers who saw much more as they were there when it did collapse.

It would appear that the approach here is to simply buy a marketing campaign for a conspiracy. Good luck with that, all these conspiracies have gone nowhere in almost ten years now, I don't think a slick marketing campaign is going to help. And of course, there is the big downside - people may start asking questions. You know, ones like "well, how did they plant explosives without anyone knowing"? or "why"? Questions that AEtruth have no answers for.

government conspiracies proven and admitted to:

1...iran-contra
2...watergate
3...nuclear test downwinders
4...gulf of tonkin resolution
5...CDC syphilis experiments on unknowing black men

these are 5 off the top of my head

too bad there wasn't people challenging our government at the time on those...it would have save lives and money.

i guess all you debunkers were out in force then too, saying what a bunch of "conspirecy nuts" some people were.

Everyone should have WTC 7 on their cell phone as a saved video. That is all the proof you need to get people interested in 9/11. Just ask them, "does this look like controlled demolition to you?" And when they say yes, tell them it is building 7 which fell on 9/11.

Originally posted by Paschar0
Watch just a few documentaries like "Loose Change"

You are of course joking.... remember the podded planes hoax? A B-52 hitting the Empire State building in 1945... the lie that Flight 77 had P&W engines etc etc!

Building 7 is a great example because it was a controlled demolition, right in your face, plenty of evidence

Yet you are unable to show any evidence it was a CD...

No plane wreckage in PA.

Just another truther lie

Hundreds of engineers and other experts fired from their jobs instantly for trying to speak out.

Name 20, and where they worked.

Molten steel weeks after the incident

Except there was no molten steel....

So once again just more llies from a conspiracy theorist

Originally posted by Paschar0
You only strengthen my point...

You have no point. The videos are a joke. Dylan admitted to mistakes himself.

Please, wake up and join 2010. No pod planes at the WTC and missiles at the pentagon.... we now have Super Dooper paint on thermite and planes tricking us at the Pentagon.

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by Paschar0
Watch just a few documentaries like "Loose Change"

You are of course joking.... remember the podded planes hoax? A B-52 hitting the Empire State building in 1945... the lie that Flight 77 had P&W engines etc etc!

Building 7 is a great example because it was a controlled demolition, right in your face, plenty of evidence

Yet you are unable to show any evidence it was a CD...

No plane wreckage in PA.

Just another truther lie

Hundreds of engineers and other experts fired from their jobs instantly for trying to speak out.

Name 20, and where they worked.

Molten steel weeks after the incident

Except there was no molten steel....

So once again just more llies from a conspiracy theorist

You're exactly the type I'm referring to, lets just pick the easy ones for the benefit of others,

Bldg 7: a handful of small fires, no damage from towers, Larry Silverstein on TV (later pulled) saying "Decided to just pull it", bldg falls in a perfect footprint of itself freefalling just like every other controlled demo, explosions heard, just use your eyes and point to one other example of this happening anywhere in the world at anytime, I look forward to your explanation.

Engineers - Aside from knowing one personally who can go on for hours on the details of how and why the official story doesn't work, you can look here
for a few more than twenty:
Architects and Engineers

I mention Loose Change simply as a starting point to learn about some things you won't find on Fox, can you find inaccuracies, sure, does that negate all the information, not to a reasonable person. All these types of films ask a lot of questions, many simply can't be explained away , if it were just one or two, that would be one thing, there are simply far too many to ignore.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
I have done my research onthis and according to time magazine it took 24 minutes before Norad was supposedly notified about this particuliar jet and fighters were scrambling to intercept at that time. Isn't it odd how there is Not a single mention of this aircraft in ANY of the articles written about this crash?

This is a false statement. It was recorded in the 9/11 Commission report, the thing that documented the 9/11 attack the begin with-

"Reagan National controllers then vectored an unarmed National Guard C-130H cargo aircraft, which had just taken off en route to Minnesota, to identify and follow the suspicious aircraft. The C-130H pilot spotted it, identified it as a Boeing 757, attempted to follow its path, and at 9:38, seconds after impact, reported to the control tower, "looks like that aircraft crashed into the Pentagon, sir". -The 9/11 Commission report, pages 25-26

Now, we see several problems right away-

-First, these conspiracy people are either lying through their teeth when they say, "not a single mention of this aircraft in any of the articles" becuase it's right there in the 9/11 commission report, or, they're horribly lazy becuase they never actually read the 9/11 commission report and instead went to some third party to spoon feed them their information, and worse, they didn't even bother to double check their information to see if it's even correct.

-Second, there's only one reason why someone would begin a sentence with something like, "Isn't it odd..."- it's to drop innuendo that something suspicious is going on, without actually coming out and saying it. The conspiracy people don't have even a microbe of any tangible evidence of any impropriety so they literally have to resort to manufacturing their own to fuel their conspiracy claims. Take a look at all the other claims the conspiracy theorists are pushing, from "Karzai is building a gas pipeline" to "Bush's grandfather helped finance Hitler" and you'll see it's 100% innuendo, without a shred of actual usable fact.

I've said this many times and I have yet to enounter anyone who could prove it wrong: if these conspiracy theorists were to ever hold their own claims up to the same exacting standard of critical analysis that they do the 9/11 commission report, they wouldn't be conspiracy theorists for very long.

reply to post by Paschar0

Why do I have the feeling that those who don't believe 9-11 was a conspiracy have done little more than read a wiki page or two.

Because your ego and sense of self worth demands it.

I would almost guarantee it.

Almost only counts in hand grenades and horseshoes.

There is a MOUNTAIN of evidence

I think you mean speculation and personal incredulity.

and dozens of individual questions that simply cannot be explained away.

All questions have either been answered or shown to not be based on facts. You choose to ignore all responses that do not start with the words, "you're right....".

It's so easy for Geraldo watching naysayers to just deny the evidence, especially when they haven't even seen most of it. Watch just a few documentaries like "Loose Change" and if you can successfully answer away just the questions in that one film, I'll take you seriously.

Ok, you just used the "documentary" and "Loose Change" in the same sentence, which is fine, except you forgot the word "not".

Cherry picking one or two weaker arguments as reason to dismiss it all is pathetic.

Now wait, there are "weaker" arguments? How can this be if they are the fruit of tree grown on a mountain of evidence?

Building 7 is a great example because it was a controlled demolition, right in your face, plenty of evidence and yet some will still reject it, you find ways to reject all the plausible reasoning why it did happen for silly reasons why it didn't.

The "evidence" to date that the collapse of building 7 was the result of a controlled demolition is limited to a few people looking at videos on youtube and declaring that it look like a controlled demolition. Based on the infallible logic that if you think two things kind of look alike then they are to be assumed to be the same until they are PROVEN NOT to be the same. This is a very comforting niche to crawl into when avoiding reality because it burdens the rational with proving a negative.

What about having an "exercise" of planes flying into the WTC the SAME friggin day to add confusion.

Didn't happen.

No plane wreckage in PA.

Yes there was and still is.

Hundreds of engineers and other experts fired from their jobs instantly for trying to speak out. Suppression of evidence, shipping out the entire crime seen to destroy the evidence on ships. Molten steel weeks after the incident (impossible due to plane crash). My favorite, they showed Bush, Rice, Cheney stand in front of cameras claiming "No one could have known this would happen", then we find out Bush and all of them were given a report with the WTC in crosshairs on the front cover describing an air attack just weeks before!, go ahead and ignore everything.

This little approach is always interesting. It is basically the "repeat BS until people get tired of responding to it, then it automatically becomes a fact". Or, basically, all unchallenged assertions are automatically facts.

I'm tired of coddling ignorant people that run their mouths about things they know little or nothing about, you do my country a disservice and insult the intelligence of people that invested more than the 20 minutes you did researching and looking into the matter.

Ditto.

It's painfully obvious to any intelligent person this was an inside job, there almost is no other conclusion...unless of course you haven't bothered to research it, then it makes perfect sense.

And yet here we are almost 10 years later and, well, nothing. So either all human intelligence has been restricted to a microscopic handfull of internet conspiractist, or option "B", you're wrong. I have a feeling you're not going with option "B".

Originally posted by Paschar0



You're exactly the type I'm referring to, lets just pick the easy ones for the benefit of others,

Bldg 7: a handful of small fires,

Lie #1

no damage from towers,

Lie #2 (although the damage per NIST declared it played no significant part in the collapse.)

Larry Silverstein on TV (later pulled)

lie# 3 It was on a PBS documentary and still available.

saying "Decided to just pull it",

lie #4 ... or you just don't know the entire quote/

bldg falls in a perfect footprint of itself

lie #5 no, it didn't.

freefalling just like every other controlled demo,

incomplete... the free-fall was for a brief period of the collapse.

explosions heard,

really? When? sources please.

just use your eyes and point to one other example of this happening anywhere in the world at anytime,

en.wikipedia.org...

Steel section of building not protected by sprinklers collapsed. Concrete section of building stayed intact.

I look forward to your explanation.

You look forward to ignoring it.

Engineers - Aside from knowing one personally

I know several. They all disagree with the ones you mention. Do yourself a favor..go to your nearest university and speak to some professors in the Engineering Departments. They will be happy to assist you.

I mention Loose Change simply as a starting point to learn about some things you won't find on Fox, can you find inaccuracies, sure, does that negate all the information, not to a reasonable person. All these types of films ask a lot of questions, many simply can't be explained away , if it were just one or two, that would be one thing, there are simply far too many to ignore.

It's FILLED with lies and inaccuracies. It is a great starting point for any truther that does not want to know the truth!

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by getreadyalready
I have done my research onthis and according to time magazine it took 24 minutes before Norad was supposedly notified about this particuliar jet and fighters were scrambling to intercept at that time. Isn't it odd how there is Not a single mention of this aircraft in ANY of the articles written about this crash?

This is a false statement. It was recorded in the 9/11 Commission report, the thing that documented the 9/11 attack the begin with-

You made this look like it was my statement? It was not my statement, it was a quote from a source provided by someone on your side.

It was quoted to show the discrepancies of the eyewitnesses that had supposedly seen the plane hit the Pentagon.

I hope that was just a quoting and editing mistake, and not an intentional attempt to discredit me by attaching a quote to me and then attacking that quote.

reply to post by Six Sigma

I know several. They all disagree with the ones you mention. Do yourself a favor..go to your nearest university and speak to some professors in the Engineering Departments. They will be happy to assist you.

I am on the University grounds almost daily. I have spoken to many Engineering instructors. My father in law is a mechanical engineer for the state. My brother is a physicist. I am a chemist.

I have never spoken to someone with credentials that believes a kerosene fire destroyed those buildings in a couple of hours. It is not possible. Not by any stretch of any imagination. Even in 12-24 hours it would have been highly improbable. Even in 12-24 hours of intense chemical fire heat, when the building finally went, it would have went chaotically with twists and turns and sliding. It would have been torqued in every direction from the beams that were not sufficiently heated. There would have been plenty of evidence still standing.

Maybe you should make a trip to the University instead. It was your suggestion, have you followed your own advice?

Originally posted by network dude
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

I have a question for you, Hooper, and Dereks. Do you believe the official story given by the 9-11 commission 100%?

I know it's a direct question and those never fly too far on here, but I am very curious about how any or all of you would answer this.

Originally posted by truthwillneverberevealed
This whole site is for open minded discussion and debate. This site is not intended to be used for sweeping generalizations and inflammatory rhetoric towards people with opposing views. There is plenty of evidence to 9/11 being an inside job. Just because there is a certain theory about 9/11 doesn't mean everyone who believes it was an inside job has those same views.

Dude, you are SO CLOSE that you're almost there...*noone* who believes it was an inside job has all the same views. Person A thinks there were controlled demolitions, person B thinks there were nukes in the basement, person C thinks it was lasers from outer space, etc. Even when a few of you get together and agree on some of the details, person D thinks the gov't was behind it, person E thinks it was Israel/Mossad, and I've even seen person F say it was the work of a secret cult of Satan worshipping numerologists. Unless you've lost all grasp on reality and think the 9/11 attack was staged by Satan worshipping Israeli demolitions specialists from space, you're going to have to concede yourself that many of these conspiracy claims are rubbish.

The reason for this conspiracy mongoring Tower of Babel is obvious- each conspiracy theorist is being suckered by different sources of information, and they can't come to agreement on anything becuase they all insist their point of view is right and everyone else is wrong. So the question still stands- is this poster campaign going to reveal *all* the information supposedly "being withheld from New Yorkers" up to including lasers from outer space, or are they going to invoke outright censorship to get New Yorkers to believe what they themselves want New Yorkers to believe I.E. not tell them that wreckage from WTC 1 fell on WTC 7?

Originally posted by Whyhi
reply to post by yyyyyyyyyy

 

Did you basically just tell him he's silly for mentioning holograms and then mention another silly 9/11 conspiracy involving nuclear bombs...?

if your reading comprehension wasn't intentionally lower than a 3rd graders, you might have refrained from posting, noting that 'goodoldave' mentioned holographs AND nukes in the basement.

Originally posted by getreadyalready



I am on the University grounds almost daily. I have spoken to many Engineering instructors. My father in law is a mechanical engineer for the state. My brother is a physicist. I am a chemist.

Wow...impressive. Let's see their scientific response to the NIST reports.

What? They haven't written one? What a surprise.

I have never spoken to someone with credentials that believes a kerosene fire destroyed those buildings in a couple of hours.

Me either! We typically speak of the two planes that were intentionally crashed into them as well.

Maybe you should make a trip to the University instead. It was your suggestion, have you followed your own advice?

Learn to read, truther. I have many friends that are engineers. The poster i was responding to claimed to not have known any. But...FYI...I have been in contact with university professors from a few establishments.

reply to post by network dude


Yeah, why not? I mean most of the report, pages 47 to 585 have really nothing to do with the nuts and bolts of events regarding 9/11 but are recommnedations and threat review.

Originally posted by yyyyyyyyyy
reply to post by hooper

 

Are you seriously saying you did not know and did not do the research, it's on Wiki, it's public domain info, the US secret service worked on floors 9 and 10!!!

Wikipedia is FAR from a reliable source of information.