The NYPD lied.

The FDNY lied too. Without their complicity, 911 could never have been accomplished.

Congratulations ! You are reading the one 9/11 website with a hope in hell of getting us somewhere : one with some actual hard documentary (literally) evidence behind it — the picture above, for a start — and one that names names. You won't find the Illuminati in this one ; you won't find the claim that no planes ever hit the Trade Center, because I don't believe that ; you won't find your time wasted with "proofs" of demolitions carried out by folk who are never identified, even by speculation.

Step 1 : anyone interested in 9/11, no matter what your views on who did it, should already have a DVD copy of the film "9/11," directed by Jules and Gédéon Naudet and James Hanlon. If you think you're an expert on 9/11, but you don't have that film, you're not. Everyone who cares about what happened that day, and wants to find out the truth, should have a copy, and should have some familiarity with the film. If you're not prepared to spend a few dollars or pounds, or give up some of your time and make a bit of effort, stop reading now and go elsewhere, to put it politely. There is a version of the film posted on YouTube, but that is a different edit [and see Postscript 2 below] : this article is based on the DVD cut, and tells you exactly where to find all the stills and sequences under discussion. You could just take my word that what is shown here is in the DVD, and I have not faked or misrepresented anything, but having the original is better, and would help you follow my arguments. This is not an easy read, and I will not pretend otherwise : 9/11 is not an easy subject.

Source

The 18 firemen interviewed in the Naudet DVD :

Battalion One :
1. Chief William Blaich (Commander);
2. Chief Joseph Pfeifer;
3. Ed Fahey, aide to Pfeifer.

Ladder Company One, Duane Street :
4. Captain Ron Schmutzler;
5. Lieutenant Gary Lajiness;
6. Lieutenant Bill Walsh;
7. Nick Borrillo;
8. Jamal Braithwaite;
9. John McConnachie;
10. Chris Mullin;
11. John O'Neill;
12. Steve Olsen;
13. Steve Rogers.
[also included James Hanlon, the interviewer, not shown, and probationary Tony Benetatos]
Engine Company Seven, Duane Street :
14. Captain Dennis Tardio;
15. Joe Casaliggi;
16. Tom Spinard;
17. Damian Van Cleaf;
18. Pat Zoda.

It would obviously be very strange if the Flight 11 shot was fake, but the rest of the Naudet film, showing how events unfolded from then on, was a perfectly authentic documentary. That, to put it mildly, is not the case. The film is absolutely littered with scenes almost as bizarre as Flight 11. Some are not too difficult to figure out, some have a significance that escapes me, but all of them raise serious questions about the truthfulness of the film and the people in it. My article concentrates on the plane shot because it is by far the most important example of fraud, but many, many others can be pointed out, only some of which are included here. When the film was shown on British TV in September 2002, many reviewers commented on how dishonest and tasteless it was to have a subplot about the brothers thinking the other one was dead, or everyone thinking Benetatos was — as if an event like 9/11 needed to be embellished. It never seemed to occur to them the reason for these things was that the entire film was fake : not in the sense that its images had been tampered with (although some may have been — see Appendix 4), but that its whole premise was a lie — that these people found themselves caught up in things they never dreamed could happen. That claim is made so often in the film it should sound false to any sensible person, but most write it off as just poor scriptwriting — stating the obvious. This, however, is not a case of a failure of creativity or vocabulary. It is a case of "protesting too much" — of overdoing alleged innocence, when it shouldn't even be in question. We never saw it coming ... Not in a million years did I think those buildings would collapse ... If only we'd known ... Who'd have thought it ? ... We were so young and naive back then ... Time and again, the same message : they didn't know. I say the following examples point towards a very different message : yes they did.

Source

Has anyone here even considered Illuminati? The best plan is one you can make people believe is impossible. They have been in control since before this country was founded. Whats 40 years in comparison? Open your eyes.

Originally posted by CharonIncarnate
Has anyone here even considered Illuminati? The best plan is one you can make people believe is impossible. They have been in control since before this country was founded. Whats 40 years in comparison? Open your eyes.

They're psycho.

One of the greatest feats of civilization was when a minority of sociopaths and psychopaths managed to convince the sane majority to emulate their behavior; it’s been downhill for humanity ever since.

Civilization as we know it is the construct of psychopaths; this is why today we call mass murder “war”, and mass murderers “war heroes”. We exalt our leaders who are able to kill women and children across the world while keeping a stiff upper lip about it, and even in our entertainment we idolize people who are able to fake emotions and pretend they are someone else; while most of our video games require our children to perform more and more psychotic acts. We’re trained from birth to be psychos.

The hierarchical structure of what we call civilization is represented in the pyramid we all know so well, with only the small percentage at the top, the psychopaths, able to see the whole picture. This pattern is repeated in the military world, as it is in the corporate world, as it is in the religious world; the people who can emulate a sociopath, ie, someone who has no empathy for others, will rise to the top. The science that studies this phenomenon is called Ponerology.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by septic


Ya its sad. It is good though, so many more people are waking up to this fact. But once you have some people placing doubt in sound ideas. Disinfo agents are prob all over this site. Spread a little doubt and the weak will follow. Someday soon we will all be informed of their true agenda.

Originally posted by brokedown
reply to post by samkent

 

baked alaska is NOT baked in an oven

buy a cookbook

Yes it is baked in an oven, an "extemely hot" oven.

Learn to use the web. Baked Alaska - Wiki

Originally posted by Kester
reply to post by septic

 

I think planes were part of the original plan then removed from the plan as being too risky. It was the very unconvincing results I got when I started looking for still photographs of the alleged second plane that alerted me to the 'Truth Movement' being a major part of the cover-up. In the original plan the planes were the detonators. I see the planes/no planes discussion as being unimportant, like discussing what kind of detonator was in the artillery shell that just wiped out your street. Thats why I almost never discuss the plane issue. It's part in a complete investigation but by no means essential. For a while I thought it may just have been possible that there were planes but we were only shown faked footage. That would have caused some confusion!

I got here because it's the only thing left, and it filled all the gaps. Then it made sense why the "no planes" theory is so denigrated by the ironically named truth movement. I disagree though, I think stressing the impossibility, if not impracticality of using real planes is critical to the lifting of the 911 veil. Only then can you really see the role the media play in managing our perceptions, not only regarding 911 but everything.

Originally posted by septic

I think stressing the impossibility, if not impracticality of using real planes is critical to the lifting of the 911 veil.

It's years since I spent all day every day unravelling the mysteries of 9/11. I'm not sure what the state of play is now. Unfortunately I'm too busy to devote myself to searching for evidence or lack of evidence. When I did search I was distinctly unimpressed with the still photographs of the second plane that I found. My reasoning is there was sufficient time for an unknown number of photographers with good quality old fashioned film cameras to surround the WTC site. When the second plane roared into view those cameras must have been clicking. There have to be a fair number of negatives showing the second plane, those negatives can all be checked against each other which will prove to us those images represent what was seen on the day.

Uniting the 'Truth Movement' and solving the case will save countless lives by preventing a repeat event. The London Olympics is widely touted as the next major False Flag atrocity. So if you're young, bright and you want to save the world please create a website with one purpose. To bring into one place all those images of the second plane that can be backed up with actual negatives.

When I looked I was struck by the number of photographers who said, "I missed the plane but I caught the explosion."

I've found intrptr's interpretations to be reliable in the past and I suspect he might be right about the composition of the material this gun is embedded in. Which leaves us with the statement "concrete melted like lava". A quick search suggests concrete would be more likely to melt like glass or crumble to dust. The general impression given to the disinterested public is one of great heat generated by the actions of naughty terrorists without differentiating between pre and post building disintegration fires. The biggest question I had in the first days after 9/11 was what caused the buildings to disintegrate. My innocence allowed me to accept the 'fire did it' story until I looked for more details.

It's important for all readers who aren't familiar with the details to be aware, the government funded investigation has not investigated the disintegration of the buildings. NIST were paid to conduct the scientific investigation that was supposed to answer our questions about how and why. They gave their opinion on why but when it came to how they just said, "Oh, it was inevitable once the conditions we've speculated were reached. We don't need to explain the video and photographic evidence showing violently ejected material or test the pulverised remains for explosive residue."

That's how simple the the cover-up is. We say the evidence shows extraordinary demolition. They say we don't need to explain the evidence, the intensely hot pre disintegration fires that somehow didn't leave any photographic, video or physical evidence but are illustrated by our words and computer simulations triggered the explosive disintegration of the buildings. There is no real debate between the supporters of the NIST story and those taking part in the enormous, worldwide cooperative investigation. The supporters of the NIST story simply refuse to discuss the evidence.

Thousands of highly educated and knowledgable people defend what they think is the official story. But they're busy professionals who don't have time to learn what the official story is. To narrow it down I'm calling the NIST investigation the official story. Other claims have been made by government employees which aren't endorsed by NIST. Although these claims could be accurately described as the official story they are frequently contradictory.

The 'thousands of architects, engineers and other professionals' who support the official story are a myth. The number of professionals who'll stand up in public and support the NIST investigation can be counted on the fingers of one hand. And they look as guilty as hell. Don't be fooled.

reply to post by Kester


Those are your opinions. None of which have any proof behind them. Nor are you an expert in any relevant field.

There has never been any comprehensive theory for 911 other than the OS.

Originally posted by samkent

There has never been any comprehensive theory for 911 other than the OS.

Please can you define what you mean by the official story?

My interpretation is the official story is the story told by government employees. The NIST investigation is the major government funded scientific investigation into the destruction of the WTC towers. Therefore I think it's accurate to refer to the NIST investigation as the official story when discussing the science behind the destruction of the WTC towers. An investigation which hasn't tested the steel for explosive residues, and doesn't mention testing the rest of the debris for explosive residues cannot accurately be termed comprehensive.

The majority of the physical evidence is on the Fresh Kills Landfill on Staten Island and covers an area of approximately 40 acres, between 15 and 20 feet deep. Digging up this evidence, with the oversight of wtcfamiliesforproperburial, and testing for explosive residue would be a step towards a more complete investigation.

It is important to mention that wtcfamiliesforproperburial are not asking for any further testing to take place. They just want the 'fines', thought to contain the remains of their loved ones, to be moved to a respectful place as they were told would happen. As things stand the only grave site where they can pay their respects is a stinking landfill.

Never forget.

reply to post by Kester

An investigation which hasn't tested the steel for explosive residues, and doesn't mention testing the rest of the debris for explosive residues cannot accurately be termed comprehensive.

Bla Bla Bla Same old Same old.

Lack of evidence doesn't mean it's evidence of some grand conspiracy.

An unlocked door doesn't mean a government agent was hiding inside and spied on secret files. More likely someone forgot to lock the door.

That's been the whole problem with the truthers. They take some seemingly odd trivia and spin it into a grand conspiracy.

Originally posted by samkent
That's been the whole problem with the truthers. They take some seemingly odd trivia and spin it into a grand conspiracy.

Sherlock Holmes did the same thing, and he's a popular character. Why ya all gotta call em truthers and treat em badly? The way the truther haters behave, they look more foolish than the most paranoid 911 conspiracy theorist. I don't think insults and immaturity help prove a point. How about a calm discussion that entertains the evidence? I'm pretty sure that's how civilized people handle these things.

reply to post by samkent


I always love this call for testing for explosive residue. Lets set aside that there is no cause to do such testing and consider the absurdity and futility of the request. You know that there is no physical way to comprehensively test all the material so you can almost imagine the uproar if they tested say, .5% of the steel recovered and found nothing.

Originally posted by Kester

Originally posted by samkent

There has never been any comprehensive theory for 911 other than the OS.

Please can you define what you mean by the official story?

My interpretation is the official story is the story told by government employees. The NIST investigation is the major government funded scientific investigation into the destruction of the WTC towers. Therefore I think it's accurate to refer to the NIST investigation as the official story when discussing the science behind the destruction of the WTC towers. An investigation which hasn't tested the steel for explosive residues, and doesn't mention testing the rest of the debris for explosive residues cannot accurately be termed comprehensive.

The majority of the physical evidence is on the Fresh Kills Landfill on Staten Island and covers an area of approximately 40 acres, between 15 and 20 feet deep. Digging up this evidence, with the oversight of wtcfamiliesforproperburial, and testing for explosive residue would be a step towards a more complete investigation.

It is important to mention that wtcfamiliesforproperburial are not asking for any further testing to take place. They just want the 'fines', thought to contain the remains of their loved ones, to be moved to a respectful place as they were told would happen. As things stand the only grave site where they can pay their respects is a stinking landfill.

Never forget.

I think the NIST conclusions are called the "OS" as long as it gives us the best explanation, which is currently still the case.

The reason the debris has never been tested for explosives residue properly is because the truth movement is completely incapable and/or unwilling to get anything done. I think for the most part it is unwillingness, as such a test would of course show that this whole explosives idea is a pile of nonsense. The only test I know of by truthers is done by Jones and his team, and his data does not show any explosives (or thermite), despite the claims to the contrary. That is why the world does not care.

Originally posted by hooper
I always love this call for testing for explosive residue. Lets set aside that there is no cause to do such testing and consider the absurdity and futility of the request

Those 3 buildings that fell straight down looked like they were exploding to me. I guess that makes me absurd.

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by Kester

 

An investigation which hasn't tested the steel for explosive residues, and doesn't mention testing the rest of the debris for explosive residues cannot accurately be termed comprehensive.

Lack of evidence doesn't mean it's evidence of some grand conspiracy.

Lack of evidence isn't the issue here, lack of testing is the issue.

Originally posted by hooper
You know that there is no physical way to comprehensively test all the material so you can almost imagine the uproar if they tested say, .5% of the steel recovered and found nothing.

NIST state that they didn't test the steel for residues. They don't mention the rest of the debris most of which is on the Fresh Kills Landfill. Regardless of the percentage of evidence that can practically be tested can anyone tell me why the steel should be singled out for testing? Were the other building materials not part of the buildings? Why the resistance to the concept of testing the material on the Fresh Kills Landfill?

Originally posted by gentledissident

Originally posted by hooper
I always love this call for testing for explosive residue. Lets set aside that there is no cause to do such testing and consider the absurdity and futility of the request

Those 3 buildings that fell straight down looked like they were exploding to me. I guess that makes me absurd.

Well, is it absurd? The buildings "looked like" they were exploding so that is sufficient cause to test millions and millions of pieces of debris for explosive residue? Sounds truly absurd to me.

Originally posted by -PLB-
This thread tops most other threads in delusional madness and despicable accusations. If ATS has any courtesy they would ban that fool of a septic.

I think the ATS staff and moderators are complicit in 911 and are liars and mass murderers. Their behavior should tell us enough.

(Just testing the moral standards on this forum)

I must be on the right track, you can tell when the professional liars start accusing themselves of complicity, and then calling for my ban.

The police lied, not me.