I have a 9/11 question... you know the tower that started to tilt... did the building start to tilt towards the direction the plane impacted, or did it fall to a different side?
Jon Gold (not verified) on Mon, 03/06/2006 - 11:23pm.
#4 is what should have happened if the steel was damaged by the impact, which I don't think it was. #5 is what happened which tells me that explosives caused the collapse.
Jon Gold (not verified) on Mon, 03/06/2006 - 11:39pm.
I don't need to watch the video (and can't while at work). Any of you... take a pen or a pencil, and stand it up... strike the pen or pencil at the bottom, and tell me which direction it falls. It should fall in the direction of the impact. That's what should have happened to the tower if the steel was damaged, which I don't think it was. Instead, it tilted to the opposite direction which indicates to me that there were explosives used.
Jon Gold (not verified) on Mon, 03/06/2006 - 11:50pm.
stick away from demo theory, its not your strongsuit ;) and you do need to watch the videos, because the primary damage was on the exit, not the entry.. also, if i stike a pencil on oneside is much different than if i go through the pencil and blowout on the opposite side.. plus it was then 30 minutes later that it fell, not instant like knocking someones feet out from under them..
check out the videos from the 'terrorize.dk' site in the international sites panel, they have every angle on both collapses..
The damage to the floors, the building material is immaterial. Only damage to the steel could have caused it to tilt. If there was damage to the steel, which I don't think there was, it should have been damaged towards to the side the plane impacted it.
Jon Gold (not verified) on Tue, 03/07/2006 - 12:06am.
Anyway... I'm just thinking. The fact that it didn't topple over when it started to tilt, and instead, the building fell from the bottom up fast enough to prevent that from happening is also a good indication explosives were used.
Jon Gold (not verified) on Tue, 03/07/2006 - 12:12am.
i just got offered a full time position (was a contract worker) at my employer, gunna celebrate tonight.. be sure to get in any news that comes in before i head out to celebrate around 7ish.
"Port deal is nothing compared to Ptech -- US computer infrastructure compromised by terrorist-owned company; Cheney 'friends' with owner"
6 March 2006 http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0603/S00079.htm
THIS LOOKS LIKE A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO SPREAD SOME 9/11 TRUTH! (Although I'm not sure if it's a topic of the evening.) (But, Cooper Union is an engineering school.)
Democracy Now! and WBAI invite you to join us for an evening of conversation with Harry Belafonte, Amy Goodman, Juan Gonzalez and WBAI's Bernard White as we mark the 3rd anniversary of the invasion of Iraq
and
the 10th anniversary of Democracy Now!
Does anyone know whether the 9/11 Commission has at least one valid defense against criticism that it didn't cover important issues, in that some of those issues are matters of criminal investigation and that it couldn't discuss them?
hamilton was asked that on a cspan book tv interview by a caller.. he went into their standard schpeil about how they went through 50,000+ documents and couldnt look at everything, blah blah blah..
they interviewed 1 secret service guy i think, but they didnt grill him or ask any tough questions.. i beleive griffin covered it in his second book..
as for supoenaing anything i guess they didnt see the need.. they never bothered getting the footage from the pentagon, etc. etc.
The Professional- Directed Energy Weapons were used to initiate the Superthermate (Sulfur added) charges. This produced a shock wave which ejected a huge pyroclastic plume, and set off a downward shock wave that detonated the other charges. This design overcame the problem of connecting to a wireless detonation system (to risky).
AmandaReconwith (not verified) on Tue, 03/07/2006 - 3:29am.
"All the 9/11 people want a leader or people who show leadership and can get attention, then when we come along, you guys chew us up like we are a 'doggy-pull-toy'."
Sorry Phil... you're no "leader" of mine.
Jon Gold (not verified) on Tue, 03/07/2006 - 3:35am.
Imagine a fleet of orbiting spacecraft armed with Directed Energy Weapons operated by a wing of non-terrestrial US Air Force officers. Ever been to Google Earth? Imagine GPS positioning enabled Directed Energy Weapons from outer space. Maybe imagine is the wrong word.
AmandaReconwith (not verified) on Tue, 03/07/2006 - 4:18am.
I just replied to Mia Dolan's idiotic comment on Daily Kos. I won't be able to continue tonight, but I hope some of you guys have the time to participate on my behalf:
Brett Folk, host of Revere Radio's 'Fate of Nations', questions Lee Hamilton about 9-11.
Landon Lecture w/ Lee Hamilton
March 29, 2005
Video - 10 minutes, beginning at 42:50 - end at ~ 52:00 http://ome.ksu.edu/lectures/landon/video/hamilton.ram
FrankV (not verified) on Tue, 03/07/2006 - 7:43am.
Bruce Willis is a jackass, the guy is putting up 1 million dollars of his own money if somebody "catches or kills" Bin Laden or Zarqawi. somebody needs to tell Bruce they are most likely already dead, and more importantly, they work for the CIA. and they say Hollywood is liberal huh?
I seem to remember hearing on 911 that there was normally a operateing video camera at the top of one of the WTC towers that was used for live observation (web-cam?). Anyway I remember hearing for whatever reason it was not working that day prior to the attack. Am I imagineing this or does anyone know anything about this? If this could be proven it would be another amazeing coincedence.
JAYBIRD (not verified) on Tue, 03/07/2006 - 10:38am.
If it is true Larry Silverstein is involved with the Sears Tower in Chicago what is his fascination with known potential terrorst targets if his involvement with the WTC was just a coincedence?
JAYBIRD (not verified) on Tue, 03/07/2006 - 10:43am.
no.... I simply meant that any "official Pentagon videos" that are released would obviously be faked. But would still be paraded on FOX as what happened
not just Fox, they may be the most shameless and right-wing, but they are far from alone in producing propaganda.CNN has been getting much worse lately.
Reynolds claims, among other things, that the airliners should not have been able to pierce, penetrate, and disappear well inside the 2 WTC Towers.
Reynolds states, in part: “In a violent encounter with between an aluminum plane weighting nearly 140 tons and a steel tower weighting 500,000 tons, the plane of course would be crushed. Aluminum has lower yield and failure strengths than steel and a Boeing 767 mass was minuscule....”
and
“...A plane flying into a WTC tower should break up, shatter, and scatter pieces everywhere....”
BUT REYNOLDS DOES NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE PLANES WERE GOING 450 MPH!
___________________________________--
How would Reynolds explain that 350 mph winds of a tornado can drive paper straws and blades of grass well into trees and even into bricks?
Straws are able to go through telephone poles, obviously, because of their extreme speeds...
This is based on what many textbooks refer to as the normal force, the force the surface of a solid object exerts to prevent another object from passing through it. Every surface has a maximum normal force. It can push no harder than its maximum. A straw moving at an incredible speed hits the phone pole. The pole pushes on the straw with its maximum force. Time is required to stop the straw. In that time, the straw moves a distance into the telephone pole. Force provides acceleration. Acceleration over time provides a change of velocity...
The mechanical properties of a projectile depends on its speed. For example, if I take a soft lead bullet and press it slowly against a steel plate, say 0.5 cm thick, using a mechanical press, it would deform into a lead disc and the steel plate would be largely unaffected. However, if I take the same soft lead bullet and it's fired from a 0.357 Magnum, it would easily blow a large hole in the same steel plate.
The difference is that deformation of a projectile takes a certain amount of time to occur. If the impact time is very short compared to this characteristic time of deformation, the mechanical properties of the object will be very different...
"Have the perpetrators of 9/11 been held to account yet? I'm tired of coming to this site."
Jon, that's the best post you've ever made here!
Jon Gold then wrote:
911blimp... "Gold, that is pure disinformation, left gatekeeping nonsense..."
A)nevermind my previous response
B)"left gatekeeping" is disinformative propaganda; it seeks to prevent people from being able to think about gatekeeping/gatekeepers without sucking them right back into the false fake phony left-right paradigm. (It seems to have caught on with Jon.) I wonder from where Jon picked up such nonsense.
C)Maybe one day Jon will put the quest for the full truth ahead of his desire to "belong". Then his fake friends won't be able to play him so...
______________________________________
911blimp (not verified) on Tue, 03/07/2006 - 2:17pm.
Hoffman is (half-)bunk: even though he knows that we cannot blame the collapses on "airplanes", he, apparently on behalf of the government, attacks anyone who does not accept that portion of the government's Big Lie.
Because, as we all know, once people realize that it was not the purported hijacked airliners which struck the buildings, the whole big government + media lie of 9/11 goes poof, enemy creation and all.
And Jim (along with a lot of other so-called 'leaders' within the fake movement, including many of the same not-all-fake winners of the same fake award) doesn't want to let that happen.
People who, like Hoffman, too-vehemently too-divisively too-underhandedly attack/suppress/marginalize those who disagree with the government on this critical aspect of The Big Lie betray themselves as wolves in sheepdogs clothing.
______________________________________
911blimp (not verified) on Tue, 03/07/2006 - 2:40pm.
Im not trying to pick a fight but I dont understand the last two comments. Your never going to prove what planes hit the towers (government version or alternative switched planes theory). If Hoffman fights for the truth the buildings were brought down with explosives which then cannot be dismissed as anything but a professional inside job Im with him all the way. I dont know what planes actually hit the towers. No plane theory is never going to get us anywhere with anyone. Maybe Hoffman is also doing us a favor trying to steer away from the Pentagon issue. I think the official Pentagon story is complete bullshit but I do have a bad feeling there will be some phoney video released eventually (just maybe a little feeling). Controlled demolition truely is the crux issue. Noone is going to take away what we already have in reguards to logical proof on that. This is only my opinion but Im glad Hoffman is on our side. If he is secrectly working for the government Im not sure what they are trying to accomplish. His website is killer! If I have to pick sides Im with Jim. Ill listen to your opinions but Im wondering whos really playing gatekeeper here now.
JAYBIRD (not verified) on Tue, 03/07/2006 - 3:45pm.
So why he tries to discredit most all other people who search for 911 truth?
Why isn't it possible to search for common knowledge to expose the official conspiracy theory as a fraud?
Why want so much people that only their vision the only one which is true?
Come on. We all agree that is was a inside job. So all our efforts should be to show the hard facts that hints to this conclusion to others instead of infighting what may be really happened and turn away jealously if it is not so.
Sitting-Bull (not verified) on Tue, 03/07/2006 - 6:10pm.
Almost every website out there has picked their sides, thats why i created this website ;) But seriously, he has every right to his opinions, just like everyone else. I have enough respect for him and a bunch of others out there that it is rediculous to me to divide the movement over differences of opinion, whereas some people only focus on doing just that.
dz, I agree with you to the point of different opinions. I don't want anybody to forswear, I just want to suggest to concentrate on the main issue: that the official conspiracy theory is a farce, that they done a cover up, and maybe that they have the motive and the possibility to work it out.
We should consider that maybe we never knew what really happened, because we couldn't prove it somehow.
Sitting-Bull (not verified) on Wed, 03/08/2006 - 1:07am.
reynolds was not debunked by the dept. of energy's "ask a scientist" site (above) -
the no plane theory has every bit of the merit that the plane hugger theory has, with the added benefit of being able to observe for oneself how fishy the 175/south impact looks -
James Ha (not verified) on Wed, 03/08/2006 - 1:25am.
James--Reynold's bold claim that airliners could not pierce, penetrate, nor disappear well inside of the WTC Towers is nonsense! I'm not a scientist (neither is he), yet I found compelling evidence rebuking this b.s. in about 2 minutes of Google. This is high school science! So why did Reynold's publish this junk on his website, promoting it as scientific fact? IMO, Reynolds has no credibility after publishing rubbish like this.
Furthermore, I think we should heed the words of Michael Ruppert:
"A honey pot, in intelligence jargon, is a tempting source of information or 'dangle' that is set out to lure intended victims into a trap. Ultimately the honey pot is violently and maliciously discredited so as to destroy the credibility of anything stuck to it by association."
-- Michael Ruppert, "Crossing the Rubicon," p. 184
high school science? - cartoons can be considered high school science as well - look at a clip of 175 hitting wtc2 - observe the plane as it is 1/2 way into the side of wtc2 - the wall is still intact; there is no hole until after the plane has disappeared thru the side like a ghost -
and you say well inside of the WTC -
there doesn't seem to be any well inside.
James Ha (not verified) on Wed, 03/08/2006 - 2:24am.
furthermore, high school science should tell us that the very instant that the aluminum of 175 comes into contact with the hardened steel and concrete of south it would begin crumpling and distorting out of shape, yet it does not - why is that?
James Ha (not verified) on Wed, 03/08/2006 - 2:59am.
I read MR's article, with comprehension, and know that to argue this point to death only, and illogically, serves the lying government:
"fraud vitiates everything"
"September 11 was a well-planned psy-ops, deceptive at every level, intended to manipulate public opinion, and wildly successful in the short run. Given this background, virtually everything the government and its media stenographers parrot to this day must be construed as deception until proven otherwise."
Some readers might object that critical examination of the official airplane stories is silly because everybody saw a plane hit the WTC south tower that morning. But that was only one of four events and seeing is not believing in a world of special effects. Something fantastic shown on TV is not the end of a criminal investigation but the beginning. Any important proposition delivered by the media must be established by evidence independent of their sleight-of-hand. They have been repeatedly exposed as liars, usually on behalf of the social apparatus of compulsion they must appease daily to continue their high-revenue businesses over the public airwaves. The media are not so much “embedded” with the U.S. government and military as “in bed” with them. Even if you reject this “echo chamber” view, there is no doubt that the technology exists to insert prepared images into pixels in real time and make the images prepared in advance look (mostly) real.
It is not my burden to prove what really happened. That burden lies entirely with apologists for the official plane story like Hoffman. Mr. Hoffman, not the skeptics, must prove that four Boeing airliners crashed as government and corporate media say they did. Proof must be verifiable, corroborated, physical facts and not contradictory reports from witnesses, including those bought off or pressured into a predetermined result by media coverage that morning. Evidence offered by so-called plane huggers like Hoffman should be obvious and powerful. After all, land crashes by big planes in populated areas are quite easy to identify. Skeptics, by contrast, need only point to one verified fact contrary to the official theory to send it crashing into oblivion.
The onus is clearly, and logically, on those who support the government and deceptively, underhandedly attack those 911 truthers who do not, as has been consistently practiced by (the likes of) Hoffman (example).
______________________________________
911blimp (not verified) on Wed, 03/08/2006 - 4:18am.
James--Yes, the video looks odd, but then again the plane is going 450 mph.
450 mph = 724 ftps, which is faster than some .38 caliber handgun bullets! (Not easy to get regular video of bullets either, is it?)
According to basic physics (above) the plane does not begin crumpling/distorting for the same reason a drinking straw in a tornado becomes imbedded far inside a tree. (The straw remains RIGID far into the tree because it was traveling so fast.) (Also like soft 1-ounce lead bullet penetrating through heavy steel plates.) (And don't forget, WTC Towers were not solid mountains. The outsides were basically a grid of windows, with much space inside.)
IMO, Reynolds is building sand castles in air that will further muddle & weaken the 911 truth movement.
I read MR's article, with comprehension, and know that to argue this point to death, as if it's some kind of toss-up decision, only, and illogically, serves the lying government (as if that's what some people were sent here to do):
"fraud vitiates everything"
"September 11 was a well-planned psy-ops, deceptive at every level, intended to manipulate public opinion, and wildly successful in the short run. Given this background, virtually everything the government and its media stenographers parrot to this day must be construed as deception until proven otherwise."
Some readers might object that critical examination of the official airplane stories is silly because everybody saw a plane hit the WTC south tower that morning. But that was only one of four events and seeing is not believing in a world of special effects. Something fantastic shown on TV is not the end of a criminal investigation but the beginning. Any important proposition delivered by the media must be established by evidence independent of their sleight-of-hand. They have been repeatedly exposed as liars, usually on behalf of the social apparatus of compulsion they must appease daily to continue their high-revenue businesses over the public airwaves. The media are not so much “embedded” with the U.S. government and military as “in bed” with them. Even if you reject this “echo chamber” view, there is no doubt that the technology exists to insert prepared images into pixels in real time and make the images prepared in advance look (mostly) real.
It is not my burden to prove what really happened. That burden lies entirely with apologists for the official plane story like Hoffman. Mr. Hoffman, not the skeptics, must prove that four Boeing airliners crashed as government and corporate media say they did. Proof must be verifiable, corroborated, physical facts and not contradictory reports from witnesses, including those bought off or pressured into a predetermined result by media coverage that morning. Evidence offered by so-called plane huggers like Hoffman should be obvious and powerful. After all, land crashes by big planes in populated areas are quite easy to identify. Skeptics, by contrast, need only point to one verified fact contrary to the official theory to send it crashing into oblivion.
James & Blimp--how does insisting on & publicizing dubious, divisive, deep-fringe SUB-ISSUES (like "no planes" "pod planes" "flash planes", etc.) help the 9/11 truth movement???
look at a clip of 175 hitting wtc2 - observe the plane as it is 1/2 way into the side of wtc2 - the wall is still intact; there is no hole until after the plane has disappeared thru the side like a ghost -
that alone is enough to convince me that what we all saw was a cartoon -
James Ha (not verified) on Wed, 03/08/2006 - 5:27am.
Blimp--try not to let your disregard-for-the-obvious taint the whole truth movement too much, ok? (Given: 2 aircraft did strike the WTC, not holograms.)
anonymous, I don't try to force feed any no plane theories on people even though I believe that when an aluminum airliner strikes a steel and concrete tower it should immediately begin changing it's shape. at the very least.
Hopefully the rest of us will focus on key issues.
ya. so far you've managed to focus on myself and blimp captain - take a break maybe.
James Ha (not verified) on Thu, 03/09/2006 - 1:42am.
James--"I believe that when an aluminum airliner strikes a steel and concrete tower it should immediately begin changing it's shape. at the very least."
Not to keep beating a dead horse, but how could the paper drinking straw penetrate far inside of a tree? Why doesn't the straw merely get flattened, crunched, or at least deformed rather than being imbedded in the much harder tree? (Hint: the answer is clearly explained in this thread, above, & the same principle applies to the aircraft piercing the WTC.)
you should be able to see for yourself that when the plane is only 1/2 way thru the side of the tower, there is still no hole in the side of the tower - and the hardened steel and concrete of the WTC is not a tree.
James Ha (not verified) on Thu, 03/09/2006 - 6:07am.
Heres a thought. After the North Tower got hit there had to be a ton of people videotapeing the scene includeing views from all over the city we havent even seen. I dont see how they could pull off the no plane hitting the South Tower with all the private film there must be. Seems kind of risky and I dont see much reason for it. What about all the pictures? All fakes? Just curious.
JAYBIRD (not verified) on Thu, 03/09/2006 - 11:23am.
-A little off topic?
Not really, all part of this global conspiracy:
Mar. 23 LA chemtrail/weather mod protest hopes to be BIG
info at chemtrailtrackingusa.
you think 9-11 is a big coverup (it is) chemical spraying is worldwide and the above site has the photos
illuminate9_11 (not verified) on Thu, 03/09/2006 - 6:11pm.
Working early there on
Working early there on Monday, dz?
Have the perpetrators of
Have the perpetrators of 9/11 been held to account yet? I'm tired of coming to this site.
I believe Moussaoui's trial
I believe Moussaoui's trial starts today...
911blimp... "Gold, that is pure disinformation, left gatekeeping nonsense..."
Thought I'd beat him to the punch.
bb, stupid sinus infection
bb,
stupid sinus infection woke me up at 5:30am.. thanks for noticing tho ;)
gold, anyone going to be
gold,
anyone going to be doing reports on the trial that you know of? asside from the MSM of course.
I have a 9/11 question...
I have a 9/11 question... you know the tower that started to tilt... did the building start to tilt towards the direction the plane impacted, or did it fall to a different side?
gold, watch this clip, i
gold, watch this clip, i think it goes through the begining of 'global collapse' as the NIST report called it:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2991254740145858863&q=camerapla...
The reason I ask... look at
The reason I ask... look at this simple drawing I just made...
http://home.comcast.net/~gold9472/building.gif
#4 is what should have happened if the steel was damaged by the impact, which I don't think it was. #5 is what happened which tells me that explosives caused the collapse.
the most damage was on the
the most damage was on the opposite side of the impact.. the exit wound.. watch that video i linked.
I don't need to watch the
I don't need to watch the video (and can't while at work). Any of you... take a pen or a pencil, and stand it up... strike the pen or pencil at the bottom, and tell me which direction it falls. It should fall in the direction of the impact. That's what should have happened to the tower if the steel was damaged, which I don't think it was. Instead, it tilted to the opposite direction which indicates to me that there were explosives used.
jon, stick away from demo
jon,
stick away from demo theory, its not your strongsuit ;) and you do need to watch the videos, because the primary damage was on the exit, not the entry.. also, if i stike a pencil on oneside is much different than if i go through the pencil and blowout on the opposite side.. plus it was then 30 minutes later that it fell, not instant like knocking someones feet out from under them..
check out the videos from the 'terrorize.dk' site in the international sites panel, they have every angle on both collapses..
When you chop a tree down,
When you chop a tree down, which direction does it fall towards? The side that you strike it, or the opposite end?
The damage to the floors,
The damage to the floors, the building material is immaterial. Only damage to the steel could have caused it to tilt. If there was damage to the steel, which I don't think there was, it should have been damaged towards to the side the plane impacted it.
Anyway... I'm just thinking.
Anyway... I'm just thinking. The fact that it didn't topple over when it started to tilt, and instead, the building fell from the bottom up fast enough to prevent that from happening is also a good indication explosives were used.
From what I can
From what I can deduce...
The plane entered the south tower at approx 30 degree angle, aiming towards the far right corner (viewed looking towards entry point).
The top portion fell to the rightside of entry point (towards WTC4).
I'm pretty certain.
Hope this helps
Anonymous... I have no idea
Anonymous... I have no idea what I'm talking about... I'm no engineer... just something I thought of... thanks though.
However, when you look at
However, when you look at the size of the steel columns in pictures, etc... those things don't look like anything on Earth could budge them.
anyways.... i just got
anyways....
i just got offered a full time position (was a contract worker) at my employer, gunna celebrate tonight.. be sure to get in any news that comes in before i head out to celebrate around 7ish.
Congratulations. Now maybe
Congratulations. Now maybe you can afford to donate to the YBBS.
"Port deal is nothing
"Port deal is nothing compared to Ptech -- US computer infrastructure compromised by terrorist-owned company; Cheney 'friends' with owner"
6 March 2006
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0603/S00079.htm
For P-tech background, view the Indira Singh videos on page
http://911busters.com/911-Commission.html
...music for effect...
http://www.freechannel.org/InBedWithTheEnemy.mp3
Congrats, dz!!!
Congrats, dz!!!
jon, ill get right on
jon,
ill get right on that
frank,
thanks :)
THIS LOOKS LIKE A GREAT
THIS LOOKS LIKE A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO SPREAD SOME 9/11 TRUTH! (Although I'm not sure if it's a topic of the evening.) (But, Cooper Union is an engineering school.)
Democracy Now! and WBAI invite you to join us for an evening of conversation with Harry Belafonte, Amy Goodman, Juan Gonzalez and WBAI's Bernard White as we mark the 3rd anniversary of the invasion of Iraq
and
the 10th anniversary of Democracy Now!
Saturday, March 18, 2006
The Great Hall at Cooper Union
East 7th Street at Third Avenue
New York City
http://www.democracynow.org/belafonte.shtml
Does anyone know whether the
Does anyone know whether the 9/11 Commission has at least one valid defense against criticism that it didn't cover important issues, in that some of those issues are matters of criminal investigation and that it couldn't discuss them?
9/11 Commission was a
9/11 Commission was a whitewash.
Anyone want to help me build an online database of admin lies and false media headlines? I am a CF/SQL Server developer.
bb, hamilton was asked that
bb,
hamilton was asked that on a cspan book tv interview by a caller.. he went into their standard schpeil about how they went through 50,000+ documents and couldnt look at everything, blah blah blah..
they interviewed 1 secret service guy i think, but they didnt grill him or ask any tough questions.. i beleive griffin covered it in his second book..
as for supoenaing anything i guess they didnt see the need.. they never bothered getting the footage from the pentagon, etc. etc.
http://alias.gnn.tv/blogs/134
http://alias.gnn.tv/blogs/13490/Wager_a_Guess
iS THIS OLd ?
Seems this page has been
Seems this page has been updated with some "new" documentaries:
http://www.question911.com/links.php
Never seen "File 911 Unsolved" before..
I would pay good money to
I would pay good money to see this used on Dick and George.
"Dance monkeys, DANCE!"
http://www.xs4all.nl/~stgvisie/VISIE/Microwave-gun.html
Directed Energy Weapons were
Directed Energy Weapons were used by the helicopters (series of bright flashes) as seen in 911 Eyewitness.
Amanda: Why would such a
Amanda: Why would such a thing be neccessary?
What to hell is going on
What to hell is going on here?
http://letsroll911.org/ipw-web/bulletin/bb/viewtopic.php?t=12867
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=634
...the building fell from
...the building fell from the bottom up...
did it? or did it dissolve from the top down?
The Professional- Directed
The Professional- Directed Energy Weapons were used to initiate the Superthermate (Sulfur added) charges. This produced a shock wave which ejected a huge pyroclastic plume, and set off a downward shock wave that detonated the other charges. This design overcame the problem of connecting to a wireless detonation system (to risky).
From Phil Jayhan... "All the
From Phil Jayhan...
"All the 9/11 people want a leader or people who show leadership and can get attention, then when we come along, you guys chew us up like we are a 'doggy-pull-toy'."
Sorry Phil... you're no "leader" of mine.
Incidentally, I'm no
Incidentally, I'm no "leader" either. I just do my thing.
Imagine a fleet of orbiting
Imagine a fleet of orbiting spacecraft armed with Directed Energy Weapons operated by a wing of non-terrestrial US Air Force officers. Ever been to Google Earth? Imagine GPS positioning enabled Directed Energy Weapons from outer space. Maybe imagine is the wrong word.
Sitting-Bull... I gave my
Sitting-Bull... I gave my two cents. Hope it helps.
...the building fell from
...the building fell from the bottom up...
did it? or did it dissolve from the top down?
James... however it happened, it happened fast enough to not give time for that piece to come toppling over...
Thx Jon. Wise words.
Thx Jon. Wise words.
That's me... a wise ass. ;)
That's me... a wise ass. ;)
I'm going to write to the
I'm going to write to the Federal Trade Commission and suggest that they put warning labels on Directed Energy Weapons that say:
WARNING - Do not use weapon on protesters wearing tin foil hats. Use may cause serious injury or death.
(Ever see what happens when you put tin foil in the microwave?)
I just replied to Mia
I just replied to Mia Dolan's idiotic comment on Daily Kos. I won't be able to continue tonight, but I hope some of you guys have the time to participate on my behalf:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/3/3/191044/4066#86
Larry Silverstein has
Larry Silverstein has connections to Hollywood and Yale
http://www.nypost.com/realestate/comm/64461.htm
Don't know what that means...
Sorry for posting a link of this crap magazine.
Who cares sitting-bull... it
Who cares sitting-bull... it has a picture of Halley Berry, and that's fine with me.
EMP weapon used to bring
EMP weapon used to bring Senator Wellstone's plane down. It fried all the avionics.
Sitting-Bull, just for you,
Sitting-Bull, just for you, a music video along with your requested Hamilton video from a previous thread;
German music video: We're all living in Amerika
http://www.indybay.org/news/2004/11/1703751.php
C-Span callers interrogate 911 Commission Vice Chairman Lee Hamilton, 12 minutes
http://911truth.org/ram/hamiltonCSPAN52605.ram
...while you're at it;
Brett Folk, host of Revere Radio's 'Fate of Nations', questions Lee Hamilton about 9-11.
Landon Lecture w/ Lee Hamilton
March 29, 2005
Video - 10 minutes, beginning at 42:50 - end at ~ 52:00
http://ome.ksu.edu/lectures/landon/video/hamilton.ram
The Professional, Good find,
The Professional,
Good find, I emailed him asking for permission.
Prof Jones paper is now
Prof Jones paper is now draft version 5.2
Anyone know what he added/changed? I cannot tell..
http://www.leftgatekeepers.co
http://www.leftgatekeepers.com/
jaybird, your first comment
jaybird,
your first comment about the weather camera on top of the wtc north tower is true.. as is the doors to the roof being locked..
regarding Silverstein
regarding Silverstein connected to Yale and Hollywood:
http://www.nypost.com/realestate/comm/64461.htm
Someone should send Bruce Willis and those other people the paper by Dr Jones, and the DVD
Bruce Willis is a jackass,
Bruce Willis is a jackass, the guy is putting up 1 million dollars of his own money if somebody "catches or kills" Bin Laden or Zarqawi. somebody needs to tell Bruce they are most likely already dead, and more importantly, they work for the CIA. and they say Hollywood is liberal huh?
Perhaps he's a shill
Perhaps he's a shill
new links on
new links on st911.org:
http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=we_have_holes
I seem to remember hearing
I seem to remember hearing on 911 that there was normally a operateing video camera at the top of one of the WTC towers that was used for live observation (web-cam?). Anyway I remember hearing for whatever reason it was not working that day prior to the attack. Am I imagineing this or does anyone know anything about this? If this could be proven it would be another amazeing coincedence.
If it is true Larry
If it is true Larry Silverstein is involved with the Sears Tower in Chicago what is his fascination with known potential terrorst targets if his involvement with the WTC was just a coincedence?
any info on that camera?
any info on that camera? (news sources, etc...)
great link CB.
great link CB.
Here's an interesting
Here's an interesting observation...
ST911.org is calling for the release on the Pentagon crash tapes.
Morgan Reynolds (former Bush employee) writes:
http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=we_have_holes
which gives a link to
http://www.nodeception.com/articles/pixel.jsp
which explains that the government has the technology to alter live video in real time.
Can anyone guess what might happen? I certainly hope I am wrong.
uh oh. this is gonna
uh oh. this is gonna hurt.the Pentagon is dead.
is that what you mean?
is that what you mean? because if so, you better be wrong, or this will hurt.
no.... I simply meant that
no.... I simply meant that any "official Pentagon videos" that are released would obviously be faked. But would still be paraded on FOX as what happened
not just Fox, they may be
not just Fox, they may be the most shameless and right-wing, but they are far from alone in producing propaganda.CNN has been getting much worse lately.
In a link given above by
In a link given above by CB:
Morgan Reynolds (former Bush employee) writes:
http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=we_have_holes
Reynolds claims, among other things, that the airliners should not have been able to pierce, penetrate, and disappear well inside the 2 WTC Towers.
Reynolds states, in part: “In a violent encounter with between an aluminum plane weighting nearly 140 tons and a steel tower weighting 500,000 tons, the plane of course would be crushed. Aluminum has lower yield and failure strengths than steel and a Boeing 767 mass was minuscule....”
and
“...A plane flying into a WTC tower should break up, shatter, and scatter pieces everywhere....”
BUT REYNOLDS DOES NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE PLANES WERE GOING 450 MPH!
___________________________________--
How would Reynolds explain that 350 mph winds of a tornado can drive paper straws and blades of grass well into trees and even into bricks?
Reynolds claims are refuted by: http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/phy00/phy00325.htm
Which states in part:
Straws are able to go through telephone poles, obviously, because of their extreme speeds...
This is based on what many textbooks refer to as the normal force, the force the surface of a solid object exerts to prevent another object from passing through it. Every surface has a maximum normal force. It can push no harder than its maximum. A straw moving at an incredible speed hits the phone pole. The pole pushes on the straw with its maximum force. Time is required to stop the straw. In that time, the straw moves a distance into the telephone pole. Force provides acceleration. Acceleration over time provides a change of velocity...
The mechanical properties of a projectile depends on its speed. For example, if I take a soft lead bullet and press it slowly against a steel plate, say 0.5 cm thick, using a mechanical press, it would deform into a lead disc and the steel plate would be largely unaffected. However, if I take the same soft lead bullet and it's fired from a 0.357 Magnum, it would easily blow a large hole in the same steel plate.
The difference is that deformation of a projectile takes a certain amount of time to occur. If the impact time is very short compared to this characteristic time of deformation, the mechanical properties of the object will be very different...
REYNOLDS IS DEBUNKED!!!
Jon Gold wrote: "Have the
Jon Gold wrote:
"Have the perpetrators of 9/11 been held to account yet? I'm tired of coming to this site."
Jon, that's the best post you've ever made here!
Jon Gold then wrote:
911blimp... "Gold, that is pure disinformation, left gatekeeping nonsense..."
A)nevermind my previous response
B)"left gatekeeping" is disinformative propaganda; it seeks to prevent people from being able to think about gatekeeping/gatekeepers without sucking them right back into the false fake phony left-right paradigm. (It seems to have caught on with Jon.) I wonder from where Jon picked up such nonsense.
C)Maybe one day Jon will put the quest for the full truth ahead of his desire to "belong". Then his fake friends won't be able to play him so...
______________________________________
Dear Anonymous: Hoffman is
Dear Anonymous:
Hoffman is (half-)bunk: even though he knows that we cannot blame the collapses on "airplanes", he, apparently on behalf of the government, attacks anyone who does not accept that portion of the government's Big Lie.
Hoffman, a "most respected 9-11 researcher" award winner, has also been caught gatekeeping contrary info; same as the government and the MSM and alternative media (ie, Democracy Now, commondreams, counterpunch, alternet, newtopia, etc). IOW, if it doesn't fit, Hoffman must omit, lest the dishonesty of his position be made evident. (That is the same tactic used by the 9-11 Commission.)
Why?
Because, as we all know, once people realize that it was not the purported hijacked airliners which struck the buildings, the whole big government + media lie of 9/11 goes poof, enemy creation and all.
And Jim (along with a lot of other so-called 'leaders' within the fake movement, including many of the same not-all-fake winners of the same fake award) doesn't want to let that happen.
People who, like Hoffman, too-vehemently too-divisively too-underhandedly attack/suppress/marginalize those who disagree with the government on this critical aspect of The Big Lie betray themselves as wolves in sheepdogs clothing.
______________________________________
I agree with 911blimp in
I agree with 911blimp in this case. We should create a list with hints why this behaviour contradicts our common goals.
Im not trying to pick a
Im not trying to pick a fight but I dont understand the last two comments. Your never going to prove what planes hit the towers (government version or alternative switched planes theory). If Hoffman fights for the truth the buildings were brought down with explosives which then cannot be dismissed as anything but a professional inside job Im with him all the way. I dont know what planes actually hit the towers. No plane theory is never going to get us anywhere with anyone. Maybe Hoffman is also doing us a favor trying to steer away from the Pentagon issue. I think the official Pentagon story is complete bullshit but I do have a bad feeling there will be some phoney video released eventually (just maybe a little feeling). Controlled demolition truely is the crux issue. Noone is going to take away what we already have in reguards to logical proof on that. This is only my opinion but Im glad Hoffman is on our side. If he is secrectly working for the government Im not sure what they are trying to accomplish. His website is killer! If I have to pick sides Im with Jim. Ill listen to your opinions but Im wondering whos really playing gatekeeper here now.
His website is killer!
His website is killer!
***
So why he tries to discredit most all other people who search for 911 truth?
Why isn't it possible to search for common knowledge to expose the official conspiracy theory as a fraud?
Why want so much people that only their vision the only one which is true?
Come on. We all agree that is was a inside job. So all our efforts should be to show the hard facts that hints to this conclusion to others instead of infighting what may be really happened and turn away jealously if it is not so.
Sitting-Bull, Almost every
Sitting-Bull,
Almost every website out there has picked their sides, thats why i created this website ;) But seriously, he has every right to his opinions, just like everyone else. I have enough respect for him and a bunch of others out there that it is rediculous to me to divide the movement over differences of opinion, whereas some people only focus on doing just that.
if "Reynolds is debunked!"
if "Reynolds is debunked!" as you say, why not have the courage to go by a name instead of "Anonymous"?
REYNOLDS PROVIDES
REYNOLDS PROVIDES PHYSICS/ENGINEERING EXPLANATIONS, BUT HIS PROPAGANDA IS EXPOSED IN A PHYSICS 101 DEBUNK ABOVE!!!
WHY DO CERTAIN PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD CONTINUALLY SUPPORT THINGS THAT MAKE 9/11 TRUTHERS LOOK FOOLISH???
dz, I agree with you to the
dz, I agree with you to the point of different opinions. I don't want anybody to forswear, I just want to suggest to concentrate on the main issue: that the official conspiracy theory is a farce, that they done a cover up, and maybe that they have the motive and the possibility to work it out.
We should consider that maybe we never knew what really happened, because we couldn't prove it somehow.
reynolds was not debunked by
reynolds was not debunked by the dept. of energy's "ask a scientist" site (above) -
the no plane theory has every bit of the merit that the plane hugger theory has, with the added benefit of being able to observe for oneself how fishy the 175/south impact looks -
anonymous, look foolish like
anonymous,
look foolish like typing in all caps? ;)
just jokin wit ya.
James--Reynold's bold claim
James--Reynold's bold claim that airliners could not pierce, penetrate, nor disappear well inside of the WTC Towers is nonsense! I'm not a scientist (neither is he), yet I found compelling evidence rebuking this b.s. in about 2 minutes of Google. This is high school science! So why did Reynold's publish this junk on his website, promoting it as scientific fact? IMO, Reynolds has no credibility after publishing rubbish like this.
Furthermore, I think we
Furthermore, I think we should heed the words of Michael Ruppert:
"A honey pot, in intelligence jargon, is a tempting source of information or 'dangle' that is set out to lure intended victims into a trap. Ultimately the honey pot is violently and maliciously discredited so as to destroy the credibility of anything stuck to it by association."
-- Michael Ruppert, "Crossing the Rubicon," p. 184
high school science? -
high school science? - cartoons can be considered high school science as well - look at a clip of 175 hitting wtc2 - observe the plane as it is 1/2 way into the side of wtc2 - the wall is still intact; there is no hole until after the plane has disappeared thru the side like a ghost -
and you say well inside of the WTC -
there doesn't seem to be any well inside.
furthermore, high school
furthermore, high school science should tell us that the very instant that the aluminum of 175 comes into contact with the hardened steel and concrete of south it would begin crumpling and distorting out of shape, yet it does not - why is that?
I read MR's article, with
I read MR's article, with comprehension, and know that to argue this point to death only, and illogically, serves the lying government:
"fraud vitiates everything"
"September 11 was a well-planned psy-ops, deceptive at every level, intended to manipulate public opinion, and wildly successful in the short run. Given this background, virtually everything the government and its media stenographers parrot to this day must be construed as deception until proven otherwise."
Some readers might object that critical examination of the official airplane stories is silly because everybody saw a plane hit the WTC south tower that morning. But that was only one of four events and seeing is not believing in a world of special effects. Something fantastic shown on TV is not the end of a criminal investigation but the beginning. Any important proposition delivered by the media must be established by evidence independent of their sleight-of-hand. They have been repeatedly exposed as liars, usually on behalf of the social apparatus of compulsion they must appease daily to continue their high-revenue businesses over the public airwaves. The media are not so much “embedded” with the U.S. government and military as “in bed” with them. Even if you reject this “echo chamber” view, there is no doubt that the technology exists to insert prepared images into pixels in real time and make the images prepared in advance look (mostly) real.
It is not my burden to prove what really happened. That burden lies entirely with apologists for the official plane story like Hoffman. Mr. Hoffman, not the skeptics, must prove that four Boeing airliners crashed as government and corporate media say they did. Proof must be verifiable, corroborated, physical facts and not contradictory reports from witnesses, including those bought off or pressured into a predetermined result by media coverage that morning. Evidence offered by so-called plane huggers like Hoffman should be obvious and powerful. After all, land crashes by big planes in populated areas are quite easy to identify. Skeptics, by contrast, need only point to one verified fact contrary to the official theory to send it crashing into oblivion.
The onus is clearly, and logically, on those who support the government and deceptively, underhandedly attack those 911 truthers who do not, as has been consistently practiced by (the likes of) Hoffman (example).
______________________________________
James--Yes, the video looks
James--Yes, the video looks odd, but then again the plane is going 450 mph.
450 mph = 724 ftps, which is faster than some .38 caliber handgun bullets! (Not easy to get regular video of bullets either, is it?)
According to basic physics (above) the plane does not begin crumpling/distorting for the same reason a drinking straw in a tornado becomes imbedded far inside a tree. (The straw remains RIGID far into the tree because it was traveling so fast.) (Also like soft 1-ounce lead bullet penetrating through heavy steel plates.) (And don't forget, WTC Towers were not solid mountains. The outsides were basically a grid of windows, with much space inside.)
IMO, Reynolds is building sand castles in air that will further muddle & weaken the 911 truth movement.
Yet more evidence of the use
Yet more evidence of the use of Hollywood special effects in the WTC "plane" (oops! Pop goes the 'plane' myth) impact:
http://home.debitel.net/user/andreas.bunkahle/plate33.htm
_______________________________________
I read MR's article, with
I read MR's article, with comprehension, and know that to argue this point to death, as if it's some kind of toss-up decision, only, and illogically, serves the lying government (as if that's what some people were sent here to do):
"fraud vitiates everything"
"September 11 was a well-planned psy-ops, deceptive at every level, intended to manipulate public opinion, and wildly successful in the short run. Given this background, virtually everything the government and its media stenographers parrot to this day must be construed as deception until proven otherwise."
Some readers might object that critical examination of the official airplane stories is silly because everybody saw a plane hit the WTC south tower that morning. But that was only one of four events and seeing is not believing in a world of special effects. Something fantastic shown on TV is not the end of a criminal investigation but the beginning. Any important proposition delivered by the media must be established by evidence independent of their sleight-of-hand. They have been repeatedly exposed as liars, usually on behalf of the social apparatus of compulsion they must appease daily to continue their high-revenue businesses over the public airwaves. The media are not so much “embedded” with the U.S. government and military as “in bed” with them. Even if you reject this “echo chamber” view, there is no doubt that the technology exists to insert prepared images into pixels in real time and make the images prepared in advance look (mostly) real.
It is not my burden to prove what really happened. That burden lies entirely with apologists for the official plane story like Hoffman. Mr. Hoffman, not the skeptics, must prove that four Boeing airliners crashed as government and corporate media say they did. Proof must be verifiable, corroborated, physical facts and not contradictory reports from witnesses, including those bought off or pressured into a predetermined result by media coverage that morning. Evidence offered by so-called plane huggers like Hoffman should be obvious and powerful. After all, land crashes by big planes in populated areas are quite easy to identify. Skeptics, by contrast, need only point to one verified fact contrary to the official theory to send it crashing into oblivion.
The onus is clearly, and logically, on those who support the government and deceptively, underhandedly attack those 911 truthers who do not, as has been consistently practiced by (the likes of) Hoffman (example of lying-government-assisting contrary-evidence-suppression ["gatekeeping"] by Jim Hoffman).
______________________________________
James & Blimp--how does
James & Blimp--how does insisting on & publicizing dubious, divisive, deep-fringe SUB-ISSUES (like "no planes" "pod planes" "flash planes", etc.) help the 9/11 truth movement???
It doesn't!!!
I already pointed out what I
I already pointed out what I have observed ::
look at a clip of 175 hitting wtc2 - observe the plane as it is 1/2 way into the side of wtc2 - the wall is still intact; there is no hole until after the plane has disappeared thru the side like a ghost -
that alone is enough to convince me that what we all saw was a cartoon -
Ok James, keep watching your
Ok James, keep watching your cartoons of 724 ftps planes. Hopefully the rest of us will focus on key issues.
Blimp--try not to let your
Blimp--try not to let your disregard-for-the-obvious taint the whole truth movement too much, ok? (Given: 2 aircraft did strike the WTC, not holograms.)
anonymous, I don't try to
anonymous, I don't try to force feed any no plane theories on people even though I believe that when an aluminum airliner strikes a steel and concrete tower it should immediately begin changing it's shape. at the very least.
Hopefully the rest of us will focus on key issues.
ya. so far you've managed to focus on myself and blimp captain - take a break maybe.
James--"I believe that when
James--"I believe that when an aluminum airliner strikes a steel and concrete tower it should immediately begin changing it's shape. at the very least."
Not to keep beating a dead horse, but how could the paper drinking straw penetrate far inside of a tree? Why doesn't the straw merely get flattened, crunched, or at least deformed rather than being imbedded in the much harder tree? (Hint: the answer is clearly explained in this thread, above, & the same principle applies to the aircraft piercing the WTC.)
you should be able to see
you should be able to see for yourself that when the plane is only 1/2 way thru the side of the tower, there is still no hole in the side of the tower - and the hardened steel and concrete of the WTC is not a tree.
Nor is the tree hollow, as
Nor is the tree hollow, as is much of the WTC.
Heres a thought. After the
Heres a thought. After the North Tower got hit there had to be a ton of people videotapeing the scene includeing views from all over the city we havent even seen. I dont see how they could pull off the no plane hitting the South Tower with all the private film there must be. Seems kind of risky and I dont see much reason for it. What about all the pictures? All fakes? Just curious.
JAYBIRD, that's a good
JAYBIRD, that's a good thought/question - here's a guy that was just addressing that ::
videotaping the second hit
here's his blog ::
covertoperations.blogspot.com
-A little off topic? Not
-A little off topic?
Not really, all part of this global conspiracy:
Mar. 23 LA chemtrail/weather mod protest hopes to be BIG
info at chemtrailtrackingusa.
you think 9-11 is a big coverup (it is) chemical spraying is worldwide and the above site has the photos
So much for the no plane
So much for the no plane therory. Good nite.