You Can’t Handle the 9/11 Truth

reply to post by yeahright


I'm just playing with this idea in my own head. What are the chances that even those sounds would end up in the same class room, on that same day, with the then-President in attendance?

Out of all the words in the English dictionary, how did that particular combination of phonetic sounds fall together? Coincidence, or providence? You seem to be leaning towards coincidence, but I'm beginning to wonder...

As Morpheus said:

All of our lives, we have fought this war. Tonight I believe we can end it. Tonight is not an accident. There are no accidents. We have not come here by chance. I do not believe in chance. When I see three objectives, three captains, three ships. I do not see coincidence, I see providence. I see purpose.

There were so many things that could have gone wrong...and so many signs that foretold what was coming...and yet, it didn't fail, nor was it foreseen. Building 7 was reported as destroyed more than 20 minutes before the final event. Eyewitness testimony places an unmarked van at each of the buildings every night between cleanup and opening, when no one was around, for over a week before the event. All the silver goes missing from the basement, and no one has found it (curious oversight on the FBI/CIA's part). over a thousand experts find the collapse of the towers suspicious. Thousands of civilians will swear they saw the flash of explosives. And we haven't even BEGUN to pick apart the crash at the Pentagon. We have thwarted how many attacks? We have flaunted our military and our strategy for how long? And then 9/11 happens?

Our country can't be that stupid and still remain an independent nation. We would have been conquered by now.

Originally posted by Shamatt
reply to post by subject x

 

Well, if you are just going to ignore the actual evidence you have no hope of discovering the truth. Seriously.

Building 7 fell totally into it's own footprint. It had almost no structural damage other than what could be caused by a few small fires.

The 2 towers fell as near as damn it into their footprints. Again, with very little structural damage. They were designed to take the impact of an aircraft strike. The designers agreed that only a small amount of localised damage could be caused by an aircraft impact.

I have no idea how the teacher got that book. Are you not intrigued? Doesn't it tweak your sense of curiosity?

So now its only building 7 that fell into its footprint, Ok. However unfortunately B7 had substantial structural damage to 1 corner of the building.

"The 2 towers fell as near as damn it into their footprints. Again, with very little structural damage. They were designed to take the impact of an aircraft strike. The designers agreed that only a small amount of localised damage could be caused by an aircraft impact."


An aircraft impact could vary so much in the energy produced during impact that you would have to be specific with what design limitations were and were not. The towers could withstand an accidental crash however when turning a plane into a missile, well thats where the answer is it wasnt built to withstand a deliberate strike with very high speeds involved.

reply to post by InhaleExhale


Why didn't AF blow those planes out of the sky? They had a general idea where the planes were going, and the government WAS warned ahead of time. They knew something was coming.

AF, Navy, Military, and Marines should all have been on standby in case something went down. As soon as those planes went off-course, the military should have had laser sights on it. Not only is that an extremely curious oversight, it screams of negligence. Now, why would our country be negligent with thousands of Americans at stake?

We kicked Japan's butt using our technological prowess, we overpowered one of the most sadistic geniuses ever to disgrace Germany, and we won our independence from Great Britain, but some Iraqis steal a couple of planes and we're helpless? There is no excuse for that. None.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by crawdad1914

 

Haha. The impression I'm getting from half the members participating in this thread, is that they don't trust the official story OR the people screaming about conspiracies.

Who, then, do you guys believe? If you don't trust the government, and you don't trust the whistleblowers, who do you trust? Because other than those two groups, no one has enough credibility to make a statement on the topic AND defend it satisfactorily.

Whose testimony, whose expertise, whose experience and background and motivations do you trust then?

I trust people who in my opinion are searching for the truth. Engineers for 9/11 truth, Pilots for 9/11 truth and some others.

I dont trust anyone who in my opinion is not really interested in finding out the truth, but more interested in going along with the OS, or pushing the OS, without any honest and objective look at the evidence.

reply to post by crawdad1914


And who would that be, in your opinion? Because apparently, that isn't any of the people we're referencing in this thread...from what I've gathered in your posts, at least.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by crawdad1914

 

And who would that be, in your opinion? Because apparently, that isn't any of the people we're referencing in this thread...from what I've gathered in your posts, at least.

My apologies if it was not clear from my postings. I trust in people looking for truth, which in most cases will be those researching the conspiracy angle of 9/11. The official story to me when broken down is far less credible than the information coming out of the "truth movement"

Im on the side of the "truth movement"

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by InhaleExhale

 

Why didn't AF blow those planes out of the sky? They had a general idea where the planes were going, and the government WAS warned ahead of time. They knew something was coming.

AF, Navy, Military, and Marines should all have been on standby in case something went down. As soon as those planes went off-course, the military should have had laser sights on it. Not only is that an extremely curious oversight, it screams of negligence. Now, why would our country be negligent with thousands of Americans at stake?

edit on 12-9-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

I will spell it out as best I can. This is my view.

There was knowledge of the attacks prior to the event via intel agencies world wide.
The Government has to protect it self .
To protect it self and its interests so cover ups put in place because if the public find out one of their own elected leaders had a hand in allowing/planning or paying for such a tragedy to occur how would the government and current system of control survive, It couldnt, so when you see your life on the line your going to do everything in your power to stay alive even if it means using deceit. disinfo and murder.

If the current systems of government collapse and all is not destroyed then and only then will there be a chance at finding the real truth of what occured that day if there is still any evidence available which is highly unlikely.

The inside job that the government as a whole is responsible for is making sure the general public never get wind of what really happened, why it happened and who wanted it to happen. There is no doubt that people working for the US Gov helped plan the event or pass on info for planning.

Now if they are found they wont be labeled as taking part, helping, planning or financing the attack because that would affect the cover stories in place. So then another conspiracy would created to deal with the domestic culprits.

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by TheGreatDivider

 

I admit there is much I don't understand about that day but three steel structures falling straight down in their footprints really baffles me.

Why?

Before that day how many times has that happened?

Well, pretty much any time anything falls on the planet Earth, it falls down in a straight line. That's the way gravity works, in fact to get something to fall in a way other than a straight line requires that there be something acting on the object other than gravity.

OK, but you think fire brought down three steel buildings in one day? How often has that happened?

Originally posted by TheGreatDivider

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by TheGreatDivider

 

I admit there is much I don't understand about that day but three steel structures falling straight down in their footprints really baffles me.

Why?

Before that day how many times has that happened?

Well, pretty much any time anything falls on the planet Earth, it falls down in a straight line. That's the way gravity works, in fact to get something to fall in a way other than a straight line requires that there be something acting on the object other than gravity.

OK, but you think fire brought down three steel buildings in one day? How often has that happened?

Do you remember what happened that day, I seem to remember a plane hitting each of the twin towers and from their collapse damaging B7 by tearing away a number of floors on one corner of the building.

reply to post by TheGreatDivider

OK, but you think fire brought down three steel buildings in one day?

No and no one is trying to tell you thats all that happened except people trying to promote conspiracies. Read the extensive reports that were compiled explaining exactly why the buildings fell.

How often has that happened?

Why? Is there some quantity requirement? How often do the other events that transpired on 9/11/2001 happen? How many times a week did planes crash into the World Trade Center towers before 9/11/2001? How many times are buildings the size of World Trade Center 7 allowed to just burn? Before you can claim something is an anomaly you have to first present the rule that it's violating.

reply to post by InhaleExhale


Maybe we should look for an image of exactly how far the damage extended from the site of the actual crash...

Edit: here's a link showing a chronology of events as compiled using various artifacts and interviews following the events of 9/11. There's also a color-coded map detailing the fallout area.

9/11 Notes

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by TheGreatDivider

 

OK, but you think fire brought down three steel buildings in one day?

No and no one is trying to tell you thats all that happened except people trying to promote conspiracies. Read the extensive reports that were compiled explaining exactly why the buildings fell.

How often has that happened?

Why? Is there some quantity requirement? How often do the other events that transpired on 9/11/2001 happen? How many times a week did planes crash into the World Trade Center towers before 9/11/2001? How many times are buildings the size of World Trade Center 7 allowed to just burn? Before you can claim something is an anomaly you have to first present the rule that it's violating.

So if it hasn't happened once before, you think it was likely to happen three times in one day and one of the buildings was not struck by a plane?

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by InhaleExhale

 

Why didn't AF blow those planes out of the sky? They had a general idea where the planes were going, and the government WAS warned ahead of time. They knew something was coming.

AF, Navy, Military, and Marines should all have been on standby in case something went down. As soon as those planes went off-course, the military should have had laser sights on it. Not only is that an extremely curious oversight, it screams of negligence. Now, why would our country be negligent with thousands of Americans at stake?

We kicked Japan's butt using our technological prowess, we overpowered one of the most sadistic geniuses ever to disgrace Germany, and we won our independence from Great Britain, but some Iraqis steal a couple of planes and we're helpless? There is no excuse for that. None.

edit on 12-9-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

"AF, Navy, Military, and Marines should all have been on standby in case something went down."

They were on standby, just of the coast of Afganistan.

The only thing Iraq had to do with 9/11 is the fact that it was blamed on middle easterners and Iraq is where?

Mid East.

reply to post by TheGreatDivider


Actually I don't believe fire brought down three buildings in one day. However, I believe that two airplanes, weighing around 100,000 pounds (with 30-40,000 of those pounds consisting of highly flammable jet fuel) and traveling at speeds in excess of 300 miles per hour DID.

I think the arguments that Truthers present ARE really interesting...but the one, single thing I just cannot get past is VAST amount of people who would have to be involved in the planning and execution and subsequent cover-up involved who have managed to keep quiet. Yeah, the black trench-coated government thugs threatening familial harm...sure. But that evil, satan-worshipping Dubya ain't in office anymore...so you're telling me BHO is also in on the plan???? Or is he simply a dupe?

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by InhaleExhale

 

Maybe we should look for an image of exactly how far the damage extended from the site of the actual crash...

Edit: here's a link showing a chronology of events as compiled using various artifacts and interviews following the events of 9/11. There's also a color-coded map detailing the fallout area.

9/11 Notes

edit on 12-9-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

Why should I be looking at this link.

I have and Im not sure what your getting at, please elaborate.

reply to post by Shamatt


Totally agreeing with the OP. Considering the power of seeing it all happening on TV, being at the same time fed with a script, and all the psychologies involved - there is a huge step (as one can see from some of the answers) to acknowledging, and re-seeing the same information, accepting the horror with the actual objectivity in mind.

I myself being one such case, until something 1.5 - 2 years ago. It was only then, I started to go through the material available, the detailed videos, the interviews, the witnesses, the government data (and not just the explanations) - and the horrific picture of the totality started to open for me. In two-three months, this was my evening time hobby (to much dismay to my surroundings). It took yet another half a year, when I finally could really accept the fact.

Considering all that with the perspective of myself with some substantial capability for even the most theoretical aspects of this. The theoretical aspects were not the problem. It was the PSYCHOLOGICAL aspects, which really played against. But, once the whole system is in place, with all the evidence, one has a fact based argument, which sits tight. Against that, both the official explanations as well as quasi disinformation have not much of a chance to influence. (as little as kerosine - or paper/furniture fire - has for enforced steel).

So, if you get an inspiration from my and my peers comments, and the material - I urged you to embrace it, and start digging. It is one heck of an adventure, into real conspiracies for world dominance.

reply to post by TheGreatDivider

So if it hasn't happened once before....

You tell me. I don't have access to the database of all building fires in history. Obviously you do.

you think it was likely to happen three times in one day and one of the buildings was not struck by a plane?

Why not? You make it sound like three buildings just spontaneously combusted for no apparent reason and then fell down. There were some unprecedented predecessor events. But then everyone else knows this.

reply to post by hooper


You tell me...