What is the US Hiding about 9/11

reply to post by Mentorman

What is the US Hiding about 9/11

If we had the answer to that question, then we wouldn't be asking it.

Like most everyone else, I remember that morning almost 10 years ago. I can easily recall the anger and then the unity felt by nearly every other American. But over the course of time and considered thought, many of us have chosen to question the official story.

And it's not that we are directly accusing our own nation of the act, but we do feel... perhaps quite certain, that our government knows a lot more than it is telling. Moreover, even for those elected officials who have no more information than the guy on the street, there seems to be a fear that runs so deep as to make denial the only option.

The fear is, fairly obviously, that whatever the truth may be, that it could bring down the most stable republic in the history of human civilization. So, with the weights balanced in those proportions, the denial, or the lie, is preferable to the truth.

The same equation is often applied to JFK... where the probability factors for outcome are, or at least, were, quite similar.

The truth may set us free but there are, perhaps, truths that are so terrible that the freedom they offer is less preferable than the comfort found in the bosom of the lie.

That's not necessarily my own personal wish for this subject but... from a particular point of observation, it certainly could look that way. .

Originally posted by EmVeeFF
That microwave weapons that derive from Nicolai Tesla's research were used to bring down the towers...

You got it in one, Dr Judy Wood is where the real truth is.

A wepon of unspeakable power, and a lust for money and war.

do the maths 50 million tonns in each tower = 100 million a hollow aluminunm tube hits only 12 million tonns hit the ground metal turns to dust. car engines 3 blocks away burst into flames ground had to be taken to the site thats a bit odd the first time they were insured the towers was months before .so many clues cost of demolition in 1980s 9 billion + ASBESTOS claims the towers were due for demo ?by 2011 WHO had most to gain by this G W BUSH ? CO the first 200 pages in david ickes TALES FROM THE TIME LOOP . WHAT TIME DID YOU HEAR ABOUT 9/11 ? COULD START A THREAD ON THAT ONE . its my fav game when i meet american tourists love the look on their faces . nanu fxxxxxg nanu

Originally posted by geobro
do the maths 50 million tonns in each tower = 100 million a hollow aluminunm tube hits only 12 million tonns hit the ground metal turns to dust. car engines 3 blocks away burst into flames ground had to be taken to the site thats a bit odd the first time they were insured the towers was months before .so many clues cost of demolition in 1980s 9 billion + ASBESTOS claims the towers were due for demo ?by 2011 WHO had most to gain by this G W BUSH ? CO the first 200 pages in david ickes TALES FROM THE TIME LOOP . WHAT TIME DID YOU HEAR ABOUT 9/11 ? COULD START A THREAD ON THAT ONE . its my fav game when i meet american tourists love the look on their faces . nanu fxxxxxg nanu

If each building was only 500,000 tons then where does the 50 million tonns come from?

How do we solve the problem when we can't get the data correct?

hypertextbook.com...

psik

reply to post by geobro


are you sure you heard about it at 930am as ive just discussed it with the other half and we heard about it at around 2-230pm?

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by NorEaster

 

It's a shame there is not one peice of evidence to support your theory.
But it would make a nice movie. Who should we get to play the roll of the button pusher?

ah...but there is.

It's not reported on the 11:00 news, but it exists, and the only thing keeping it in its hiding place is the Anthrax that the perps have been using as their insurance policy since the 3rd week of September 2001.

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by drifter1109

 

The key point here, I think, is so what are you gonna do about it? There is more than enough evidence to support arresting those involved.

Name one person that was directly involved.
Show the evidence that would support an indictment in a court of law.

You're right. White rich guys don't get convicted unless they piss off other white, rich guys.

There are other ways to settle this score. No one has enough money to protect themselves and everyone they love forever.

Where are the courtcases from the hundreds if not thousands of victim family members?
Surely all are not Hooperites, who trust implicitly in the official 9/11 account.

What have they to hide? The fact that 9/11 was a Hoax of enormous proportions.
Video and photographic fakery (much as we are seeing coming out now in Libya)
was an integral part of the con-job, along with a complicit Main Stream Media.
The towers were prepared for demolition years in advance.
There were few if any victims on 9/11, most being fabricated computer generated entities.

Is that enough to be getting on with?

Originally posted by filosophia

Anyone who has done black smith work knows you need an incredibly hot fire just to get steel to turn red. And even then it cools almost immediately. The amount of smoke billowing out of the towers meant the fire was mostly out, as a raging inferno produces less smoke than one that is almost quenched. The black smoke indicates painted objects like ceilings, floors, office equipment was burning. The argument that office equipment, which is mostly plastic, somehow burned hot enough to melt steel is ridiculous. Plastic melts about as quickly as paper, and when it burns up, that's it, there's nothing left to weaken the steel. Since the towers stood for about an hour after the initial plane impact, obviously the plane did not cause the tower to collapse. So from the time the plane impacted to when it collapsed, something had to have burned hot enough to not just weaken the steel but pulverize it. Plastic can't do this, and the aviation fuel was visibly seen to have evaporated almost immediately upon impact, which is natural for combustible fluids to do. That fire ball most likely was what caused the office fire to catch fire, but the fire was mostly out shortly after that as can be seen by the black smoke.

And even if you say somehow after all this the tower just collapsed, how could it be that the exact same thing would happen to both towers when the planes hit different areas on both towers?

And even if you think this still somehow happened, how did building 7 which was not hit by an airplane also come down when buildings near it were worse off yet remained standing?

internetage.webs.com...

edit on 30-8-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)

DING DING DING!
We Have A Winner.

reply to post by phishyblankwaters

Oh man don't fall for that no plane foolishness, plenty of people saw the plane,

No planes equals media complicity, and that won't do, will it?

No planes answers all the questions.

In the year of the snake (1941),the United States was attacked ,and that attack led the United States into war.In the year of the snake (2001),the United States was attacked,and this attack led the United States into war.In the first case,YEARS after the fact,it leaked that the DC leadership knew about it ahead of time,and let it happen,because the war was thought desired for furthering their aims.Just because they were willing to sacrifice American lives back then doesnt mean that things are different today.BAHGOOFUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

reply to post by sensairich


110% sure of the time asked 100s of fellow tradesmen who have radios going all day asked reporters who hear the news as it breaks .super fxxxxxxg confident about that one. theres a bit in JFK about news being announced b4 it happens bloke i knew at work told me a story about his sis hubby who worked in towers being telephoned & told not to go to work that day i personally heard it at 11.40 am others i know swear to 9.30 ish strange but true

I have inside information that 9/11 was NOT an inside job by Bush and friends but it was planned and executed by those that run the black budget programs, at least three black budget technologies were utilized.

reply to post by pirhanna


yeah....I've read so much info over the last 10 yrs also that my brain is on overload! I did like the way you presented your analysis though!