9/11: How they Faked the Videos

[beachnut]

I have the damage evidence. I have eye witness reports. I have more missile evidence at Shanksville. I have the ability to admit error, unlike some of us.

another lie, you don't have a clue you are spreading lies

us? This is a skeptic forum, found on research and education, you are spreading woo, and you have no clue

 

[Axxman300]

It's become abundantly clear that Steve is either incapable or revising his thinking or refuses to do so for some perhaps political reason.

This is the point were you simply give up and essentially ignore him. Not unlike other truthers, revising their thinking never happens. They are locked into their beliefs... and as has been noted very much like what happens to cult members and even their leaders. They have left the reservation and they are not coming back... and logic and reasoning has no impact.

If you are aware of the history of truthers you will not very little to no evolution of their thinking toward more traditional science and explanations.

It appears to me they prefer to "make up their own science/engineering etc." as a means to justify what appears to be a political agenda. All of the truthers share one common element: The media, the authorities, the government are lying and doing so to hide something which is usually a motive or a hidden agenda.

++++

Our trillion dollar national security state at least at the time of 9/11 was not "geared up" to thwart low tech "terrorism".. bombs, hijackings etc. Crimes were rarely prevented from occurring as they required surveillance and proof of a conspiracy... and when proof was in hand the charge would be conspiracy to do A, B, C... Some crimes are prevented by entrapment... or some by stopping the criminals in the act. We are told that more surveillance will prevent terrorism. That seems to be untrue based on all the incidents of terrorism around the world post 9/11.

Yup. I'm done with this thread, it will end up being merged with his other moderated thread and die the appropriate death it deserves.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

Have you got any evidence of missiles?
For example: pieces of debris, radar tracking of missiles, specifics about where these missiles were fired from, specifics of who fired them, whistleblower statements from anyone involved in any part of the transport, launching or clean-up operations, inventory lists showing missing missiles....anything?
I am quite happy to examine your evidence with an open mind, but all you've done so far is post some pictures from (as has been pointed out) the same sources you claim are faked, with some arrows on them. That isn't what you'd call conclusive, is it?

Yes. Explained in detail in this thread.

Err...No. Let me say it again, in case you missed it.
I was asking for evidence like this:

For example: pieces of debris, radar tracking of missiles, specifics about where these missiles were fired from, specifics of who fired them, whistleblower statements from anyone involved in any part of the transport, launching or clean-up operations, inventory lists showing missing missiles....anything?

If you sincerely want to know what the evidence is that leads me to the conclusion that multiple cruise missiles were launched in broad daylight as a pretext to drum up public support for long planned aggressive wars, please read this post:

Taboo Truths: The Missiles of 9/11

I did as you asked. It answered every one of my questions, apart from these:

For example: pieces of debris, radar tracking of missiles, specifics about where these missiles were fired from, specifics of who fired them, whistleblower statements from anyone involved in any part of the transport, launching or clean-up operations, inventory lists showing missing missiles....anything?

Care to try again? Your answer has not improved your credibility, I'm afraid.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

I repeat:

[qimg]https://911crashtest.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/pinched-cladding.png[/qimg]

I will freely admit to being neither an engineer, nor a military operative.
However, in my layman's view, surely, if the building had been hit by a swarm of missiles that exploded inside it, the damaged walls would be bent outwards, not inwards?

 

[The Common Potato]

And? From the street a thousand feet down, someone might think they saw a small white plane (which were reported). Anyone who insisted they saw a missile, had a TV shoved in their face.

And that is why eye-witness testimony ought not be taken as a definitive answer to much at all.

 

[The Common Potato]

No. You saw it on television, therefore you assume thousands of people saw it. But the lightly damaged aluminum sheeting, and the sharply bent steel columns, say otherwise.

Discussions about conspiracies always seem to devolve into "how can we really know anything 100%".

The answer is, of course, we can't. Not really.

Just last night I had a dream in which I had the revelation that I was in fact a white mouse dreaming I was a dolphin and that the Vogons were coming to read me some poetry, whereas in fact I am Keanu Reeves and doing my part for society by acting as a battery.

Or am I?

 

[Andy_Ross]

And you have verified this, how?

Where are all the passengers and crew?
They were real people, they no longer exist.
Their remains and DNA were found at the sites.
Were they killed and dismembered before the crash and their body parts scattered by the conspirators?

 

[beachnut]

...
And? So what. There were more witnesses that said they saw small planes, missiles or no planes at all. Not all the witnesses can be right. The damage evidence (that you keep avoiding) can thin out which of the witness accounts match the evidence, and which match the "official story."

What does Radar say? Right, you ignore real evidence and quibble about perception. Good job. you can't figure out 9/11 given the evidence - that is Failure

No clue, the planes seen in NYC are verified by Radar! Ignore reality, embrace fantasy and lies.

You are calling thousand of people liars, as you spread lies.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Perhaps we could consider yankee451's favourite bent steel column, which he identified in two photos from different angles and concludes that is bent inward and to the right.

If he argues that it was bent in this direction by a small but heavy, solid impactor, where is the corresponding hole where it punched out of the opposite side of the building?

If it takes one impactor per bent or broken column, how many missiles were there altogether and where is the pattern of exit holes for those?

I'm also interested in the mechanism used to make the fireball: what kind of device projects thousands of pounds of jet fuel out of one side of the building at 500 mph without a similar ejection in the opposite direction? If you built this system in so that it was integral to the building and the structure absorbed the impact of setting it off, might we be able to detect its use from the building's swaying toward the purported aircraft crash rather than away from it?

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

When you're trying to make a math problem out of it, it must include the calculations of the building's construction too. It would require a finite element analysis of the impacting bodies. The wing would behave differently when striking the sharp steel knife-edges of the protruding column sides, or the flat face of the column, set-back from the protruding edges of the column sides, than it would when striking a window.This is why no one has ever done it. Because it will prove that a jet couldn't have possibly caused it. So the propaganda organs like Purdue, NIST, FEMA, MIT, et al, simply ignore the evidence. And their fawning sycophantic skeptics, dutifully follow suit.

No I only have to show that penitration of the weak steel by the much stronger steel alloy is more likely than your absurd theory. It's your theory and it is Falsified by your own evidence itself.

 

[sts60]

For the regulars still arguing with the OP, I’ll just borrow the words of a poster who assessed the FatFreddy88/DavidC/rocky Apollo “hoax” threads thusly:

“I think you guys spend too much time fighting with mental patients.“

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

I have the damage evidence. I have eye witness reports. I have more missile evidence at Shanksville. I have the ability to admit error, unlike some of us.

Have you ever fired aluminum bullets into steel?

At the equivalent energy value you are proposing and what was the result of that experiment?

 

[jimbob]

It's to do with density

Indeed, as described by Newton:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_depth#Newton's_approximation_for_the_impact_depth

 

[Cosmic Yak]

"Someone had fired missiles at the World Trade Center's north tower from atop the nearby Woolworth Building."

(Snipped for space saving)

Well, at least that's something to work with.
yankee451: is it your contention that the missiles were fired from the Woolworth Building?

 

[yankee451]

It's ok I believe you. Really have another double fudge cookie. Dip it in milk, you'll feel like a new man after.

Invisible missiles FTW! I have to wonder how a cop at ground level saw a missile launcher on top of a building.

They weren't invisible to the people who reported them. Unlike the people who say they saw a plane, the damage evidence is consistent with their reports. But you saw it on television.

 

[yankee451]

Well, at least that's something to work with.
yankee451: is it your contention that the missiles were fired from the Woolworth Building?

No.

 

[yankee451]

I will freely admit to being neither an engineer, nor a military operative.
However, in my layman's view, surely, if the building had been hit by a swarm of missiles that exploded inside it, the damaged walls would be bent outwards, not inwards?

You aren't paying attention.

I am often accused of being an operative by truthers too. It gets confusing. My work focuses on evidence that exposes the fraud and collusion of all nations, not just the USA. The only people who would benefit from my work are genuine truth seekers.

The agenda at sites like the Skeptics and JREF is obvious; to discourage an honest assessment of facts, and the same can be said about the misnamed 9/11 Truth Movement. You are two sides of the same coin. Who benefits from the revelation that the USA launched multiple cruise missiles at sites within the USA? Who benefits from the knowledge that the leaders of the entire world's nations were and are colluding in this colossal lie, and that the global media apparatus continues to cover it up?

Truthers and trusters get bitchy when I talk about the evidence of the use of cruise missiles because it shatters their illusions.

There really is no other explanation for the lightly pinched cladding and the progressively worse damaged steel columns than what I have described.

"Like most of the 9/11 Truth Movement the goals of the enemy nations were to cover up the truth, to reinforce established authority, and by all means to prevent the role of the worlds’ media from being exposed. The myth of the independent media must be protected at all costs. Without their media to control the perception of whole populations the global house of cards would tumble. Before you know it average people who were at one time more concerned with their Facebook “likes” will unplug and start identifying who is ultimately responsible for 9/11. If they keep digging they’ll find the same people are to blame for the uber-*******-up of the world today; the richest people of all nations."
https://911crashtest.org/how-9-11-missiles-equate-to-global-slavery/

 

[yankee451]

Yup. I'm done with this thread, it will end up being merged with his other moderated thread and die the appropriate death it deserves.

This is all I have come to expect from you guys. Predictable. And predicted.

Usually when confronted with this information they very quickly turn on me by questioning my motives, sanity and intelligence, but rarely do they address the evidence that leads me to my conclusions. If this was a real crime scene investigation the act of “reconstructing the crime” would be critical; every clue, no matter how small, would be collected and used as a basis for the formulation of a theory. But truthers don’t do that. They skip right to the theory and then look for supporting evidence, ignoring those clues that don’t fit, an activity known as, “cherry-picking,” not “truth-seeking.”

If you’re like me and just want to follow the evidence wherever it leads then the details discussed in this post can lead directly to the most likely cause and the most likely suspects. If I’m wrong then there must be a better explanation for it and I want to hear what that is but so far the response has been silence. It is as the late Harold Pinter described how Americans react when they hear “real news” about all the atrocities committed by the USA around the world since the end of World War II:

“It never happened. Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening it wasn’t happening. It didn’t matter. It was of no interest. The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them. You have to hand it to America. It has exercised a quite clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for universal good. It’s a brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis.”

It is this hypnosis that has kept the war on terror going strong, with both sides so entranced they will reject the evidence that can lead to the truth in favor of fantastical explanations straight out of Gene Roddenberry’s imagination. The truth is, no, planes can’t slice steel and no, buildings don’t turn to dust in the real world. For 16 years both sides (all sides) have bent over backwards to avoid the first step in any investigation; the scene of the crime, probably partly because it makes most of the truth movement’s hypotheses irrelevant, but also because of the staggering implications that accompany it.

Years ago a friend warned me that even if I did discover the truth about 9/11 nobody will give a damn, a prescient prediction. Not that I’m saying I’m right, but I have done my best to keep myself honest in my investigation, and although I am often wrong, I am also often not wrong. All I can say is, the fact that no one will address these clues is exactly what I would expect from controlled opposition if I did stumble on the right path.

Fake news is everywhere, but from what I can tell most people like it that way, Truthers included, which is a pity. The truth may hurt but it really does set you free.
https://911crashtest.org/9-11-truth-what-could-have-cut-the-plane-shaped-hole/

 

[yankee451]

And that is why eye-witness testimony ought not be taken as a definitive answer to much at all.

And there it is; the television show trumps all.

 

[yankee451]

Indeed, as described by Newton:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_depth#Newton's_approximation_for_the_impact_depth

Newton's laws support the conclusion that the lightly damaged aluminum sheeting visible at the far left side of both holes, was caused by something much less dense and much smaller than what sharply bent steel columns to the right.