Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
a trillion dollars missing Pentagon budget which is not accounted for because a plane conviniently hit that part of building where the records were),

Except of course that did not happen like you claim...

Truth has become the unwanted child in todays world

Well, we are not getting much from you with the above blatant lie...

should we teach our kids history of which we ourselves are not sure of ?

YOU are not sure of? Well, when you post such lies like above no wonder you are not sure!

edit on 19-1-2012 by spoor because: (no reason given)

You are right it was 2.3 trillion...and I admit...it was only allegedly the place were the records were. So, if it's only allegedly, and you claim that it didn't happen that way, than you must know what actually happend to those records? So what was the result of the audit that was being done at the time of 9/11?


I'm no sure if you ment that the blatant lie is a claim about missing records or a claim that truth is an unwanted child.

Anyway...it's a bit harsh to say to someone that it's a blatant lie. If anything...i could be misled by phony reports...and that does not mean I'm lying, it only means I'm not informed correctly. I didn't invent this claim...others have...

And as for the truth being unwanted...I bet you think there was nothing fishy about the JFK murder also?

The officials wouldn't lie....if they say it's a lone gunman...than by god it is. Case closed.

Originally posted by spoor
Except of course that does not state who individually have signed a statement saying 9/11 was accomplished using explosives.

Hmm I would think that is a given if you sign a petition asking for a new investigation? What else would they believe if they don't believe fire did it?

Yes, as confirmed by you above!

Hmm no, OSer confusion I think.

Then please explain why they continually lie!

They don't. What lies? Is everything you disagree with is a lie? Please give me an example of these lies?

Again so what if 'truthers' do lie? We are not the ones covering something up right? Who has the motivation to lie? Again there is no point in 'truthers' lying, it wouldn't help anything would it?

People might exagerate to makes points, or get there information confused, that is not lying. Lying is telling people fire can cause three high rise buildings to completely collapse with no sign of resistance. If you want to accuse people of lying you should start with those that have benefited by lying, have killed thousands of people by lying. This is nothing new, it's just another chapter in a long history of war for capitalist gains.

Get out of you box, and wake up to the reality.

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by spoor

Then please explain why they continually lie!

They don't. What lies? Is everything you disagree with is a lie? Please give me an example of these lies?

Do you really want the floodgates to open up on you?

Well one has to only go on A&E9/11T to find them! Take a look through their "list" of evidence. Most of them are LIES. Here are a couple right off the bat!


Would you like some more lies? Ok. How about, no planes? Pods on the plane? How about explosives found in debris? How about small minor fires in all three buildings? How about bomb sniffing dogs all removed from WTC prior to 9/11? How about explosives in the basement? How about the picture of the "molten thermite" found at Ground Zero? (shame on you Dr. Jones for LYING) :


How about the claim that there are bombs in WTC7 in the video with the firefighters?

(bomb scare at Stuevesant High School, NOT WTC7)

How about this gem with FAKED audio (isnt that lying?):


How about a missile hitting the Pentagon and everyone is lying who said they say a plane hit.

How about Jews were forewarned not to come in?

How about lying about what Larry Silverstein said?

How about lying about the times it took for collapse of all three buildings?

How about lying about pyroclastic flows?

Shall I continue?

Again so what if 'truthers' do lie? We are not the ones covering something up right? Who has the motivation to lie? Again there is no point in 'truthers' lying, it wouldn't help anything would it?

Um what? You have no problem with someone claiming to be for the truth lying? Seriously? I'd like to know what is Dr. Jones motivation to lie. I want to know what is Dr. Griffin's motivation to lie so damn much. I wonder what is Richard "Boxboy" Gage's motivation to lie. Well, first I'd check their bank accounts! Then I'll check their self delusion and the need to be worshiped. Doesnt it bother you that a THEOLOGIAN is the one who started all this Truther crap? He practically created a whole new religion. Ah yes and Alex Jones. Hmmmm a fringe radio show host trying to get more ratings? NO!!! Say it aint so!!!!!!! Boy ANOK, for someone who thinks of himself as so intelligent and higher thinking than us, I'm surprised none of the above ever crossed your mind.

People might exagerate to makes points, or get there information confused, that is not lying. Lying is telling people fire can cause three high rise buildings to completely collapse with no sign of resistance. If you want to accuse people of lying you should start with those that have benefited by lying, have killed thousands of people by lying. This is nothing new, it's just another chapter in a long history of war for capitalist gains.

Get out of you box, and wake up to the reality.

Thats funny, cause to you, when a debunker or someone that is saying something that is counter to your 9/11 beliefs is slightly mistaken by a small error or punctuation, you act as if that is the magic chink in the argument and bulldoze it with ridicule and handwaving due to the error, but when your points are pointed out to be ABSURDLY incorrect, erroneous, or out and out LIE, you pretend as if it doesnt matter and say, "Oh well, peple make mistakes or got confused." Its amazing really you said that ANOK, I almost fell off my chair from laughter.

I almost forgot another LIE by the "Truth" Movement.

The $2.3 Trillion "missing". Geeze and it gets repeated over, and over, and over, and over, and over. I guess Truthers think that if you repeat it often enough, it becomes true. But its a LIE.

reply to post by GenRadek


Hey, if you could please explain about the 2,3 trillion...I'm not saying I know too much about it. Just what I red/watched. Saw Rumsfeld give a #ty explanation about it...but that's it. How did that story end?

As far as I remember, they did admit about that money being missing...or unaccounted for (whatever that means). Or am I wrong?


Thanks

Maybe this was debated or "debunked" in some way...just stumbled upon it.

Senator Max Cleland - Cleland called the agreement "unconscionable" and said it "was deliberately compromised by the president of the United States" in order to limit the panel's work.

"If this decision stands, I as a member of the commission cannot look any American in the eye, especially family members of victims, and say the commission had full access," he said. "This investigation is now compromised . . . This is `The Gong Show'; this isn't protection of national security."

Boston Globe....

There are some others....
www.wanttoknow.info...

People who follow this stuff more closely know all this already. Be them truthers or otherwise...

So, without going into a no win debate about the evidence...what are OS followers thoughts about remarks of some of the high ranking people? People like Max Cleland, Mike Gravel, Louis Freeh....two former senators and a former FBI director (I'm only naming few of them)...implying that the investigation was a scam (not literally), calling for a new independent one?

Are these guys also crazy liars as the truth movement people? Are they payed off to go against the president? Gravel is calling for Bush to be subpoenaed.

They might not be expert in controlled demolitions or structural engineering..but can obviously put two and two together and call it suspicious. Not the evidence...but the investigation.

The conclusion that I can make...and try to be as unbiased as possible...that a new investigation should be made obviously. Without presumptions...just a clean new independent one. Maybe the OS is true...and this is all crazy nonsense conspiracy talk...maybe.

Why not prove it?

Why the resistance?

reply to post by MarioOnTheFly

As far as I remember, they did admit about that money being missing...or unaccounted for (whatever that means). Or am I wrong?

They were in the process of merging multiple computer systems using different software. Each containing the accounting for multiple departments and projects.
The money was never missing the final reconciliation into one was just not completed before 911.

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by MarioOnTheFly

 

As far as I remember, they did admit about that money being missing...or unaccounted for (whatever that means). Or am I wrong?

They were in the process of merging multiple computer systems using different software. Each containing the accounting for multiple departments and projects.
The money was never missing the final reconciliation into one was just not completed before 911.

Yes, you're on the right track. Perhaps if it's expressed as a DOD Centralized Accounting issue rather than actual missing $$ it would be more easily understood. $ 2.3 trillion involves several years of DOD Budgets. There was/is no actual missing $$, it's simply a long term problem of integrating all of the various levels of DOD into a Centralized System to allow top level DOD Officials to micro manage expenditures.

The other issue is silly. To think that all of DOD accounting records were stored in an office in the Pentagon is the epitome of ignorance.

reply to post by Reheat


Groovy...so we can put that issue to rest...

I was confused a bit 'cos I couldn't find any mention of it later in the development.

Anyway...this issue was only marginally associated with the events that day and bare no weight on the investigations. I still stand by my assertion that there are at least a couple of suspicious things concerning the investigation, main being the limitation of the committee to review White House files concerning the 9/11, and to interview the president who at first refused to be, and only partially giving in after a public pressure. And even after that, only a few members could review documents and are allowed only to take notes which would in the end be further reviewed for inclusion in the report. Also, rejecting to committee's request that him and Chaney be interviewed separately...The only purpose of that request being denied, that I can think of...is to prevent inconsistencies in the story.

If a friend and I were arrested for, let's say burglary, and were being questioned for it, it would have deffinately been done separately in order to prevent synchronizing stories. It's standard procedure when questioning suspects or multiple whitnesses, no matter what country you'r in.

Concerning the fact that for this crime, a man has been accused (not officially though), that is a long time busyness partner of the Bush family...I would say that requires you to testify about this event. Any known associates of someone who is accused of a crime, are almost always interviewed, or called in for testimony. I see no valid reason for this man to escape an in depth interview, unless you are hiding something.

America started the war on false pretenses that they were after this man who is responsible for the attacks on the towers, yet...he was never officially charged for it, because there isn't hard proof that he did (so the FBI says),
and when they finally caught up with him...what was done? Nice swift democratic execution. No trial, no evidence, no jury, and no judge. Only the long arm of the executioner.

What happened to the great American "innocent until proven guilty?"


To me...that stinks to high heaven...

reply to post by MarioOnTheFly


Samkent and reheat both got it down pretty well.

The issue to was that many in the truth Movement took Rumsfeld word and twisted it into meaning something else. In fact, Rumsfeld never said anything about any money missing. It was purposly twisted by the truth movement to create a false acusation they could run with and provide fodder for the "inside job" nonsense. Its sick really, and this is a shining example of truthers BLATANTLY lying.

reply to post by GenRadek




I think you are misstating reality here Gen, there are accounting errors and then there are accounting errors. 2.3 Trillion in "unaccounted for transactions in ONE YEAR" was not "made up by the truth movement". It was the DoD auditors that said it.

The truth movement were certainly not the first ones to ask "what happened to this money".

One thing you can be sure of is that this isn't like a Lehman Bros. event where the money literally just ceased existing. The money was real and was spent on something.

If you don't want to draw the conclusion that it was stolen or diverted to black ops it is certainly your right to be naive, but don't resort to outright lies to support your position. The only question is how it was stolen and by whom, not if. You can be sure that every cent of that money is accounted for in various individual's Swiss bank accounts down the line, probably more when you consider multipliers.

reply to post by Darkwing01

I think you are misstating reality here Gen, there are accounting errors and then there are accounting errors. 2.3 Trillion in "unaccounted for transactions in ONE YEAR" was not "made up by the truth movement". It was the DoD auditors that said it.

Not simply talking about one year - were the result of years of accumulated errors

Problem is Pentagon used some 40 different accountings systems for different command and projects with
incompatible data formats which made it impossible to reconcile spending

As example - can you you account for every dime you have ever spent? Try that with several million people
both civilian and military spread over globe with budget of 500 billion dollars

Unfortunately the mentally challenged seem to have problem understanding this and concoct bizarre conspiracy
stories about Rumsfeld stuffing the money in his mattress...

reply to post by thedman


I'm sorry. I was quoting Sen. Byrd who was in all likelihood quoting the auditors themselves when he said "The DoD cannot account for 2.3Tr in transactions IN ONE YEAR ALONE".

You make suggestive noises about what that was all about but I haven't seen one shred of anything remotely resembling evidence that what had occurred was not exactly what Sen. Byrd quoting the DoD auditors said occurred.

Also "cannot be accounted for" is just another way of saying "missing", which is just a polite of saying "stolen by persons unknown". The reality everyone knows where the money went and how it got there and why it being "unaccounted for" is absolutely no mystery at all. That doesn't mean it went to one individual or a well-defined group of individuals, but it is still went to people. Real money in real pockets.

Next you will tell me that Idi Amin's Swiss bank account is just a "conspiracy theory" too. No Bob, it was very real with very real people's very real money in it whatever the peculiarities of Swiss fiduciary law.

As example - can you you account for every dime you have ever spent? Try that with several million people both civilian and military spread over globe with budget of 500 billion dollars

I am a private individual with no obligation to do so beyond what is required in the tax code.

Have you ever heard of double entry bookkeeping? Some crazy conspiracy theorists say that often helps.

reply to post by Darkwing01


However, it is correct that it can't be 2.3 Trillion in actual missing money in one year, just unaccounted transactions (the yearly spend even now only amounts to about a third of that number). The real number of actually missing money in one year is probably closer to 2.3 Billion, but that is still an enormous wad of cash.

Unaccounted transactions means that there was money stolen, and that amount of unaccounted transactions means it was probably quite a lot, but the fact that it is unaccounted for means that no one will ever be sure exactly how much and to whom.

But that doesn't change the fact a large amount of money was siphoned off to persons unknown and certainly does not mean that the truth movement "invented" the idea of money being stolen in the first place.

To the supposed architect, you dont need to be an expert on the WTC buildings to understand the laws of physics. As an architect, you should have enough knowledge on steel structures to form a valid opinion.

wow, 'proudbird' is trolling hard in this thread! It's blatantly obvious what has happened with the WTC collapes, and your replys are so weak that it's giving extra weight to the explosives evidence. I'd quit now before you lose any more credibility.

Originally posted by 4hero
wow, 'proudbird' is trolling hard in this thread! It's blatantly obvious what has happened with the WTC collapes, and your replys are so weak that it's giving extra weight to the explosives evidence. I'd quit now before you lose any more credibility.

Speaking of credibility, do you have a Pulitzer prize? Let's see the details. Does anyone else have a Pulitzer Prize for cracking this huge conspiracy? What's taking so long? If it's so obvious where is all of the overwhelming evidence of support from credible and qualified people all over the world.

Instead all we have are a few charlatans and fraudulent authors of nonsense who've gathered some ignorant and gullible followers from those who pervade conspiracy related forums on the internet spreading the nonsense introduced by charlatans and frauds. "Truthers" and trolls (Proud Bird is not a troll) have made themselves irrelevant by continuing in this vicious circle of spreading nonsense over and over again. Now, that is what is blatantly obvious, not anything that happened at the WTC complex or the Pentagon or near Shanksville, PA.

Originally posted by Reheat

Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by Reheat

 

You must not have saw the video of witness testimonies describing explosions. They're in the OP. There are also some in the film that I'm sure you didn't watch.

Of course there were explosions as one would expect in a building that size. However, there were NONE even remotely resembling those required for a demolition.... Not even close = NO DEMOLITION

In many videos you can clearly see smoke emissions from charges being detonated. Very typical emissions for controlled demolitions that use explosives! This thread is obviously littered with trolls and deliberate disinfo, all the evidence is there, and to ignore it and dismiss it means you either have a lack of intelligence, or are part of the conspiracy. You will never throw people off because the evidence speaks for itself!

Originally posted by Reheat

Originally posted by 4hero
wow, 'proudbird' is trolling hard in this thread! It's blatantly obvious what has happened with the WTC collapes, and your replys are so weak that it's giving extra weight to the explosives evidence. I'd quit now before you lose any more credibility.

Speaking of credibility, do you have a Pulitzer prize? Let's see the details. Does anyone else have a Pulitzer Prize for cracking this huge conspiracy? What's taking so long? If it's so obvious where is all of the overwhelming evidence of support from credible and qualified people all over the world.

Instead all we have are a few charlatans and fraudulent authors of nonsense who've gathered some ignorant and gullible followers from those who pervade conspiracy related forums on the internet spreading the nonsense introduced by charlatans and frauds. "Truthers" and trolls (Proud Bird is not a troll) have made themselves irrelevant by continuing in this vicious circle of spreading nonsense over and over again. Now, that is what is blatantly obvious, not anything that happened at the WTC complex or the Pentagon or near Shanksville, PA.

edit on 22-1-2012 by Reheat because: (no reason given)

Classic disinfo response! How much are the American government paying you to talk such uttter rubbish!?!

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by TupacShakur

 

Death rays and elves have the same evidence as demolition. Are they all stupid theories?

The 'laws of physics' appeal doesn't work if you cannot explain what and how the laws were violated. Explain, exactly, how WTC7 was exempted from the action-reaction law.

Explosive to completely clear each floor in the time required would have been more that the random noises heard on the videos. Using enough explosive to turn concrete into powder is unrealistic. Do any of the demolition proponents have any idea at all how demolitions are done? Do any realize how much explosive would be required to pulverize that amount of concrete or where it would have to be placed?
Of course not. Had that been done, we would not be arguing about demolition, we would have video evidence and the glazers union in Manhattan would still be replacing windows.
In the statement: "Even if this was true, collapse initiation and therefore the collapse itself would not be symmetrical because the building sustained asymmetrical damage. This isn't even high school physics, this is just basic common sense. Then the gravitational collapse would not have been at free-fall speed, because as floors and material within the building at the point where the collapse was initiated interacted, the building would slow down" what building are you referring to? Are you shifting gears from the ‘laws of physics’ to ‘common sense?'
Yes, demolitions can also go exactly as planned, but none of the proponents has even been able to suggest a plan. That they cannot means that they are hardly experts. They are poseurs taking advantage of those who don't understand demolitions but fervently wish for them.
As to the collapse times, NIST had the time wrong also. They may have corrected it, since. The free-fall times for the towers are a little over 9 seconds. 13-16 second times are not 'almost freefall' as has been claimed. Of course the collapse will accelerate. That is what happens in a gravitational field. The amount of energy required to destroy the floors and pulverize concrete and drywall is accounted for in the extra time it takes the buildings to collapse.

Dont use what is already known to you as your guide. This is the government we are talking about, they have secret technology that we dont know about. Conventional methods we know of were probably not used.