There Necessarily Ought To Have Been Shadows.

Originally posted by GR1ill3d
Claiming this was a conspiracy is an insult to the victims.

The OS doesn't fly and keeps changing at that. So why would asking questions and pointing out perceived flaws "insult" the victims??? Really, to blindly ignore all the anomalies and just accept things... THAT would be the insult.

Originally posted by LightSpeedDriver
reply to post by GR1ill3d

 

I can find a hole in your statement about cost and impracticality. The recent use of military drones. These things cost at least 4.5 million dollars a piece (newer models) if it isn't much more and they require a team of at least 10-20 people to operate effectively. This raises the operating cost to a substantial level. Apparently the US military has "lost" at least 90 of these craft. That amounts to billions of dollars. Now, if one were to spread the cost of operations over the entire American population it's probably only a few dollars per citizen. If we consider 9/11 to be another vaguely military like operation, I am sure cost is but a minor factor in the whole equation.

Thing is, how would you keep those costs secret? It would be extremely easy to simply aid the "terrorists" and allow them to train in the flight schools (as they did) and then get onto the planes even after being checked (as they did). Some of them had knives, and some of them had boxcutters. If you believe the witnesses from the planes the day of (assuming you don't just assume it's all fake) then the terrorists killed people on the plane before taking the cabin and assuming control of the planes. Then, it was just a matter of reaching their targets. They weren't stopped or caught in any way along the way, so perhaps small secret portions of the government "helped" there too?

Point is, it's a lot easier to help and then deny once they're dead, than to engage in a multi-billion dollar secret conspiracy to create a false image of a plane and blow up the towers, attempting to keep quiet every single person who participated.

Originally posted by LightSpeedDriver
reply to post by GR1ill3d

 

I can find a hole in your statement about cost and impracticality. The recent use of military drones. These things cost at least 4.5 million dollars a piece (newer models) if it isn't much more and they require a team of at least 10-20 people to operate effectively. This raises the operating cost to a substantial level. Apparently the US military has "lost" at least 90 of these craft. That amounts to billions of dollars. Now, if one were to spread the cost of operations over the entire American population it's probably only a few dollars per citizen. If we consider 9/11 to be another vaguely military like operation, I am sure cost is but a minor factor in the whole equation.

Holes in my theory? pshh.

What about all the families that lost loved ones? The missing people on those flights had to go somewhere, so paying them off then paying off the families to keep quiet etc.. yea... not buying it man, keep trying tho.

Watch this.





If you can watch that video and STILL think it was CGI or in this case "Drones" then you are blind.
If you look back at the first page I give a link to Occam's Razor "The simplest explanation is usually the right one".

reply to post by Amaterasu


wtcfamiliesforproperburial represents some of the families who received no remains. These are the people who are being insulted. They were told the remains must be in the 'fines', the debris of less than 1/4 inch. The fines covered an area of approximately 1 acre. It was agreed that the fines would be moved to a respectful place. Instead they were suddenly bulldozed over the rest of the debris. This is the physical evidence that can be used to answer the question, 'How did the buildings transform into dust clouds and debris within a few seconds?'

Originally posted by Kester
reply to post by Amaterasu

 

wtcfamiliesforproperburial represents some of the families who received no remains. These are the people who are being insulted. They were told the remains must be in the 'fines', the debris of less than 1/4 inch. The fines covered an area of approximately 1 acre. It was agreed that the fines would be moved to a respectful place. Instead they were suddenly bulldozed over the rest of the debris. This is the physical evidence that can be used to answer the question, 'How did the buildings transform into dust clouds and debris within a few seconds?'

Is tons of weight, gravity, and energy just too hard to believe? We're not talking about dropping a set of lincoln logs here.

reply to post by Varemia


Sorry, I gave up on belief after studying 9/11. These days I just go with evidence. Starting with around a million tons of physical evidence on the Fresh Kills Landfill.

Originally posted by Kester
reply to post by Amaterasu

 

wtcfamiliesforproperburial represents some of the families who received no remains. These are the people who are being insulted. They were told the remains must be in the 'fines', the debris of less than 1/4 inch. The fines covered an area of approximately 1 acre. It was agreed that the fines would be moved to a respectful place. Instead they were suddenly bulldozed over the rest of the debris. This is the physical evidence that can be used to answer the question, 'How did the buildings transform into dust clouds and debris within a few seconds?'

Yes. Those who lost loved Ones and have been ignored and disrespected are the Ones receiving insults. We are NOT disrespecting the dead by asking Our questions and speculating on answers. We do Them high service thereby, in fact.

reply to post by Amaterasu


The issue of the missing human remains has been dreadfully misrepresented by the mainstream media. The impression is given that the families are having difficulty coping and are unreasonably asking for more searching to be carried out. The truth is the 'fines' were in one place after the debris had been sorted. The opportunity was there to move these remains to a memorial/grave site. It's easy to assume the perpetrators of the crime don't want such evidence to be accessible for forensic study.

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

Who the heck originally invented this whole "no plane" bit, anyway?

the government (elements within the US government not the whole) once they realized the psyop that was 911 had failed to convince the masses of it's authenticity and people started investigating.

The evidence does not support your assumption. We irrefutably know that more that a few of these crackpot accusations have irrefutably been created not by any secret shadowy entity, but real, live people who are attempting to use the vaccuum of information for their own financial benefit. The "lasers from outer space" claim for instance was created by Dr. Judy Wood, while the "no plane hit the Pentagon" claim was invented by French author Thierry Meyssan. Plus, the "the planes carried missile pods" claim was invented by Dylan Avery. Every single one of these characters is well known for trying to milk the 9/11 conspiracy theorists for a fast buck by selling books, videos, and the occasional T-shirt.

If these conspiracy claims are documented to have been concocted by con artists running those damned fool conspiracy web sites, then it stands to reason that ALL these conspiracy claims have been concocted by con artists running those damned fool conspiracy web sites. The only difference in this case is that we don't know specifically who it was that concocted this one...or at least, I don't.

Of course not. But once the dust settled, plenty of people, myself included, started saying "wait a minute" because some basic laws of physics were broken, namely the bottom half of a skyscraper, framed in steel, encased in concrete, offering NO resistance to the top section as it collapsed.

No, actually, that's nonsense those damned fool conspiracy web sites put into your head as well. For one, the towers were constructed completely and radically differently from every OTHER building, so physics dictate the building is going to react completely and radically different from every other building as well. The con artists behind those damned fool conspiracy web sites certainly know this, btu they simply withhold that information from you to prevent you from forming an opinion based on objective critical analysis. For another, literally every single person who keep screaming "conspiracy" is woefully lacking in any real expertise to even base such a statement on so they wouldn't know what really is suspicious and what isn't. For insstance, is the building fallign this way indicative of controlled demolitions, or a crappy construction job that used inferior materials?

The very moment they start imagining "secret gov't agents" everywhere, they're all but admitting all they're doing is making up stuff as they go along.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


"The con artists withhold that information"?
Given the nature of the internet how is that possible?

Originally posted by Amaterasu

Originally posted by Kester
reply to post by Amaterasu

 

wtcfamiliesforproperburial represents some of the families who received no remains. These are the people who are being insulted. They were told the remains must be in the 'fines', the debris of less than 1/4 inch. The fines covered an area of approximately 1 acre. It was agreed that the fines would be moved to a respectful place. Instead they were suddenly bulldozed over the rest of the debris. This is the physical evidence that can be used to answer the question, 'How did the buildings transform into dust clouds and debris within a few seconds?'

Yes. Those who lost loved Ones and have been ignored and disrespected are the Ones receiving insults. We are NOT disrespecting the dead by asking Our questions and speculating on answers. We do Them high service thereby, in fact.

Is this respecting the dead and their families ?

letsrollforums.com...

reply to post by Amaterasu

We are NOT disrespecting the dead by asking Our questions and speculating on answers.

Yes. Yes you are. The questions are thinly veiled, if at all, baseless accusations and groundless theories and the speculated answers are often the biggest insult.

reply to post by Varemia

Black or secret/undisclosed military budgets in the interest of National Security *cough cough*. Apparently at least some 30 billion dollars a year. Next question?

Originally posted by Kester
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

"The con artists withhold that information"?
Given the nature of the internet how is that possible?

Every possible way they can. One of the more well known examples comes from that con artist Richard Gage, in his video of the WTC 7 collapse he's always showing everyone. What he doesn't tell you is that he's intentionally editing the video to articially support his position- the collapse actually began six seconds BEFORE the point of collapse he shows, as the full collapse video shows the pentagon collapsing into the interior of the building six seconds prior. He does this so he can turn around and say "mysterious noises were coming from the WTC 7 six seconds before the collapse." Regardless of where anyone stands on 9/11 conspiracies, this is irrefutably tampering with the evidence.

All you need to do is look at the evidence the OP is using to defend his position. There's probably a thousand videos of the impact taken from every single angle and distance as possible and yet they don't show what he's pointing out in this video...but those damned fool web sites that put this "no plane" idea into his head withheld all the other videos to get him to believe what they wanted to make him believe. What are the odds that the other videos that don't show what he wants the videos to be showing will be accused of being "disinformation planted by secret agents", you tell me.

If NIST or FEMA was caught pulling stunts like this, the conspiracy people would be all over them like Charlie Sheen on a crack pipe.

Originally posted by LightSpeedDriver
reply to post by Varemia

 

Black or secret/undisclosed military budgets in the interest of National Security *cough cough*. Apparently at least some 30 billion dollars a year. Next question?

That is hardly related to 9/11 or secret operations. That deals more with the shadow market and greed of individuals. I still don't see why they would circumvent the monumentally easier method of maintaining a secret by simply using the real planes with real terrorists, just, you know, doing what the agents within the government want them too.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by Kester
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

"The con artists withhold that information"?
Given the nature of the internet how is that possible?

Every possible way they can. One of the more well known examples comes from that con artist Richard Gage, in his video of the WTC 7 collapse he's always showing everyone. What he doesn't tell you is that he's intentionally editing the video to articially support his position- the collapse actually began six seconds BEFORE the point of collapse he shows, as the full collapse video shows the pentagon collapsing into the interior of the building six seconds prior. He does this so he can turn around and say "mysterious noises were coming from the WTC 7 six seconds before the collapse." Regardless of where anyone stands on 9/11 conspiracies, this is irrefutably tampering with the evidence.

All you need to do is look at the evidence the OP is using to defend his position. There's probably a thousand videos of the impact taken from every single angle and distance as possible and yet they don't show what he's pointing out in this video...but those damned fool web sites that put this "no plane" idea into his head withheld all the other videos to get him to believe what they wanted to make him believe. What are the odds that the other videos that don't show what he wants the videos to be showing will be accused of being "disinformation planted by secret agents", you tell me.

If NIST or FEMA was caught pulling stunts like this, the conspiracy people would be all over them like Charlie Sheen on a crack pipe.

Dave,The man who never roams outside of the 9/11 forums since 2001.

There are and have been seismic reports that actually support the claims made.
911review.com...
released seismic charts included


Excerpt:

ERROR: 'Seismic Spikes Preceded the Towers' Collapses' The leveling of the Twin Towers generated seismic disturbances that were recorded by a half-dozen seismic recording stations within a 20-mile radius of Manhattan. Numerous websites have repeated an erroneous interpretation of the seismic recordings as evidence that bombs in the basements of the Towers severed the core columns at the onsets of the collapses. One source of this error is an article by American Free Press reporter Christopher Bollyn, reprinted in Serendipity.li.

Originally posted by GR1ill3d

Originally posted by LightSpeedDriver
reply to post by GR1ill3d

 

I can find a hole in your statement about cost and impracticality. The recent use of military drones. These things cost at least 4.5 million dollars a piece (newer models) if it isn't much more and they require a team of at least 10-20 people to operate effectively. This raises the operating cost to a substantial level. Apparently the US military has "lost" at least 90 of these craft. That amounts to billions of dollars. Now, if one were to spread the cost of operations over the entire American population it's probably only a few dollars per citizen. If we consider 9/11 to be another vaguely military like operation, I am sure cost is but a minor factor in the whole equation.

Holes in my theory? pshh.

What about all the families that lost loved ones? The missing people on those flights had to go somewhere, so paying them off then paying off the families to keep quiet etc.. yea... not buying it man, keep trying tho.

Watch this.

If you can watch that video and STILL think it was CGI or in this case "Drones" then you are blind.
If you look back at the first page I give a link to Occam's Razor "The simplest explanation is usually the right one".

Use that reasoning on the very video you just used for your own argument.

Lets have a closer more precise examination of that video and see what that leaves us :

reply to post by Varemia

I can't imagine too many people wanting a "job" that ends with their death no matter how many prostitutes or kilo's of illicit white powder are offered before the commence of operations.

Originally posted by LightSpeedDriver
reply to post by Varemia

 

I can't imagine too many people wanting a "job" that ends with their death no matter how many prostitutes or kilo's of illicit white powder are offered before the commence of operations.

They don't have to be hired, just assisted. There are thousands of crazy people all around us. All you have to do is exploit them.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


My point is Dave, they can't withhold information. Anyone with an inquisitive mind and the ability to type can search out the information needed to develop an informed opinion.
Gage is in it for the fight. He isn't an investigator he's just a pugnacious front man. His words are worth very little compared to the physical evidence on the Fresh Kills Landfill. Hordes of ignorant people are fussing over details that in many cases don't actually exist. Meanwhile the informed people are lined up. On one side those who have a fair grasp of the nature of the official story and have studied the condition of, and politics surrounding, the physical evidence with a quick glance towards the plethora of photographic and video evidence. On the other side two or three shifty looking blokes trying to justify the absurdity we call the NIST investigation.
One thing we probably do agree on, Dave. Bull# sells a lot of T shirts.