Well, two of these buildings got hit by fully fueled commercial jetliners going at full speed. This was the first time in history such a thing occured.
Doesn't that eleviate some fo your doubts?
Who Disrespects NYPD & NYFD
- Thread starter Usual Suspect
- Start date
Well, two of these buildings got hit by fully fueled commercial jetliners going at full speed. This was the first time in history such a thing occured.
Doesn't that eleviate some fo your doubts?
Who says they didn't. They do mention they found no evidance of explosives in the Twin WTC NIST report.
If you want more details I suggest you send them a FOIA which they are now accepting.
Also NIST has publicly stated in their latest update that they are looking into an explosives hypothesis for WTC7. http://wtc.nist.gov/media/WTC7_Approach_Summary12Oct06.pdf
Last edited:
One could do the same thing with operations lead by the US government.
Can you name one of these so-called plots that ever considered murdering thousands of American citizens?
Last edited:
jessicarabbit
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2006
- Messages
- 555
This is an interesting comment.
Are we now to accept that any major event which occurs, whether in the US or other countries, should be open to investigation by amatuers, simply because a few people have a pathological mistrust of government?
Do you not trust the police to investigate a crime?
The police, FBI, FEMA, NIST et al, are your neighbours, friends, relatives...are they to considered suspects in this 'conspiracy' because it was they who carried out the investigation and not the amatuer slueths of the internet?
It's a strange world we are living in, to be sure.
I first found out about CT's regarding 9/11 when I was posting on another forum which had nothing to do with conspiracy theories. To be honest, although I had a vague idea that some kind of conspiracy theory was floating around (aren't they always?) I did not know the specifics until people started posting these incredible claims about how the WTC towers couldn't have come down the way the official version described.
But I know construction and I know that the claims made by these people (the CT advocates) were simply not true with regard to the collapse.
Yes I put my trust in structural engineers and other professionals who are competent to investigate such an event, and unless they come forward and complain that evidence was witheld, destroyed or tampered with, no amount of wild fantasies about termites or holograms is going to make me believe that anyone else out their has more competence or integrity than those who have already published their findings based upon the available evidence.
This isn't scooby doo or CSI or the X files.
If you really believe that your government and it's institutions are murderous conspirators then I expect you to be doing more about it than posting on an internet forum or making bad videos.
Rant over
It has been proved that government conspiracies do exist. Just look at the Luther King trial in 1999. The jury found that elements of government had conspired to kill King and that James Earl Ray was an unwitting accomplice.
Usual Suspect
Unregistered
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2006
- Messages
- 228
Good point Jessica. Not to mention did they ever look into explosives?? Imact, fire and structural failure was the story before the sunset on 9/11. OH but that would be working an investigation backwards which I know you guys hate but so easily except from the official story. Someone just watch 9/11 Mysteries. There's news footage of a "Regular Joe" being interviewed. Listen to the way the official story rolls off his lips before it's even the official story. Watch it and tell me it doesn't sound scrpited.
Russ why do you bother seriously?? Gravy's going to tell you what's unbecoming when he does something like this...............
Now that's not unbecoming?? You're wasting your time here Russ.
So your superficial research, found on you web site, is due to the fact you believe they did it. (pnac?)
So when are these facts going to be revealed and we can pinpoint who in our current administration did this? (pnac?)
Good luck. I remember Nixon fell in less that 2 years, and he did do a coverup. Five years, and no facts to backup the CT beliefs?
mortimer
NWO Janitor
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2004
- Messages
- 3,517
In 1993, should they have investigated the possibility that, aside from the truck bomb, planes were also flown into the buildings?
A firefighter saying that "it seemed like" there was a secondary device during an unprecedented incident. Yeah, that's proof that bombs were planted. Excellent find.
THEORETICAL:
Terrorists research and plan an attack.
They know the control center for the WTC is WTC 7.
They find a cover to plant some explosives over time.
The unexpected damage to the building displaces elements of that plan. The original explosions do not occur.
Then throughout the day explosives discharge as a result of fire.
The explosives are discovered. A team decides to detonate them given the situation.
The building collapses as a result of structural damage, fire and explosives.
It is obviously a very sensitive issue and the USG doesn't want to admit it.
Think freely.
Russell
Terrorists research and plan an attack.
They know the control center for the WTC is WTC 7.
They find a cover to plant some explosives over time.
The unexpected damage to the building displaces elements of that plan. The original explosions do not occur.
Then throughout the day explosives discharge as a result of fire.
The explosives are discovered. A team decides to detonate them given the situation.
The building collapses as a result of structural damage, fire and explosives.
It is obviously a very sensitive issue and the USG doesn't want to admit it.
Think freely.
Russell
I agree its a complete joke. Among the silly claims, they state: "An open air fire can only reach 1200F"
This one has it all, mysterious blowing paper, (yes I kid you not), Judy Wood, Louie Cacchiolli, Leslie Robinson's molten metal claims, Pyroclasic Surge...etc etc.
Its almost if they picked the most discredited claims on purpose.
jessicarabbit
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2006
- Messages
- 555
I think this is the footage you mean.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7807592959569136609&q=fake+911+eyewitness
This guy is the worst actor in the world.
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
I've been meaning to watch that. Are you saying they claim to have seen evidence of explosives? I'd think that would be trumpeted far and wide by the CTs.
12. Did the NIST investigation look for evidence of the WTC towers being brought down by controlled demolition? Was the steel tested for explosives or thermite residues? The combination of thermite and sulfur (called thermate) "slices through steel like a hot knife through butter."
NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel.
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel.
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
jessicarabbit
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2006
- Messages
- 555
there was no skill flying, zip, the worst turn I have ever seen, think 175 was aiming at the center, he missed
we did intervene cause the terrorist were not on time, flight 93 voluteers stood up and attacked the terrorist first,
what have you done to find the truth, repeat useless junk form the truth movement
skilled pilots are not needed to fly the 757/767! Any kid off the street can fly and hit a building and I bet most would do better at flying that the terrorist
Skilled, where did you pick up that lie?
Cooridinated, yes, but they failed. PROOF is flight 93 was late.
Where did you pick up this skilled stuff?
You seem to play both sides, call Dylan names, yet talk up CT junk???
What is up? Jessicapuppet
Usual Suspect
Unregistered
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2006
- Messages
- 228
And it's beyond the gov't to make stuff up?? WMDs..... Iraq connection to Al-Qaeda
That should be the JREF motto for 2007
They respect you here Russ
At least you're doing research unlike say..... everyone here.Is it? Why would that matter anyways?
Of course one would need evidence of that, which I haven't seen any.
Science fiction.
Proof?
Proof that there were explosives set in the building?
Proof that said explosives charges were set by fire?
You just said they were discharged, how can they be discovered and detonated after they blow up?
Who then?
Proof of explosives in the building?
Why? If the terrorists did it, then it would greatly help their "PNAC" plan. The more they could blame this on the terrorists, the better for them.
jessicarabbit
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2006
- Messages
- 555
I've been meaning to watch that. Are you saying they claim to have seen evidence of explosives? I'd think that would be trumpeted far and wide by the CTs.
Watch it. They do talk of anomalies they haven't seen before. And they report steel that was almost molten. They said they have no idea how it could have occured and they deal with steel all the time
Argue away.
My point was there was a valid reason to test for explosives which they did not do.
You had a bunch of gibberish a bout elves and overlooked a valid consideration.
jessicarabbit
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2006
- Messages
- 555
If wtc7 housed the bunker and the secret service surely it would be stronger than most buildings not weaker??