Unreleased wtc7 photos withheld by "they"

Magenta said:
Further to that, can anyone give an instance where a truther either acknowledged that they'd misinterpreted a photo or where they changed their stance upon being shown photographic evidence?
Click to expand...

No. But as long as someone is wrong on teh internet, I'm not going to let it slide!!:p
 
The Popular Mechanics' article concerning 9/11 is the worst case of cherry picking I have ever seen. Let's hide the almost certain fact that they had foreknowledge underneath retarded and easily debunkable claims of pods and fly-overs.....

So PM had inside access to classified pictures;yet you all claim that if a 'legitimate journalist' requested the same 'they' would comply; Did PM have to pay for these pictures? How did they learn that said pictures even existed?
 
ImANiceGuy said:
The Popular Mechanics' article concerning 9/11 is the worst case of cherry picking I have ever seen. Let's hide the almost certain fact that they had foreknowledge underneath retarded and easily debunkable claims of pods and fly-overs.....

So PM had inside access to classified pictures;yet you all claim that if a 'legitimate journalist' requested the same 'they' would comply; Did PM have to pay for these pictures? How did they learn that said pictures even existed?
Click to expand...

Oh stop it. The PM piece was written 3 years ago, and at that time, the topics covered were many of the most popular theories the TM was promoting at the time. It is not their fault that those claims, like 99.99% of TM theories, were so easily debunked.

"Almost certain fact"? Gonna back that up with any real evidence, or at least do the honest thing and declare that that is your opinion and nothing more?

As to your other questions, I do not work for PM, so go ask someone who does.

TAM:)
 
Last edited:
ImANiceGuy said:
So PM had inside access to classified pictures...
Click to expand...
I've already pointed to a 911blogger story that says truthers can have anything they want, subject to reproduction fees and the permission of the rights holder, which apparently works out at around a $10,000 bill and 50% of the total. So, go to it: get organised and obtain all the evidence you can.
 
ImANiceGuy said:
The Popular Mechanics' article concerning 9/11 is the worst case of cherry picking I have ever seen. Let's hide the almost certain fact that they had foreknowledge underneath retarded and easily debunkable claims of pods and fly-overs.....
Click to expand...

So pray tell exactly what should PM have addressed 3 years ago?
Keep in mind that it is a magazine not a full length book.

So PM had inside access to classified pictures;yet you all claim that if a 'legitimate journalist' requested the same 'they' would comply; Did PM have to pay for these pictures? How did they learn that said pictures even existed?
Click to expand...

"Classified" classified as what, by whom? Oh, do you mean not for the general public, available to NIST but still owned by those who took the pictures who retain copyright on them?

hey Nice Guy, I asked this above, care to address it;
Sooo, the theory goes that in order to make sure that PM published a story backing the 'official story' THEY showed the writers of the article the photos that contradict the 'official story'
Click to expand...

Is that how you see it? If not then by all means flesh out for us exactly what is suspicious about PM seeing the photos they did see?
 
Oh god TAM, if you still believe that they had no idea "terrorists would use planes like missles"(Condi), then you are beyond help.

What I would like to know is, did PM have to pay 10k for access to the photos? How did they even learn they existed? As you respond, please keep in mind I have never at any time claimed these pictures reveal a government conspiracy.

p.s. I am a nice guy.....
 
eirik said:
I heard a rather strange claim today on a local skeptics network.

The claim is that "they", the gubmint I suspect, have incriminating photos of wtc7 on 9/11, that supposedly are withheld from the public. The photos were however available for Popular Mechanics on their famous story.

Sorry if this has been posted before, but I googled this claim, I used the search function on this forum, I checked Gravy's sites, but nothing. Probably because it is a moot point.

I think the point was raised in the debate between Mark Roberts and some troofers on youtube I saw ages ago, but I can't seem to find it anywhere.

Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

From what I recall most of those photos have been released since this time. I believe at least one of the photos that was referred to was the one that showed the large "scoop" taken out of the building.

Just another case of twoofers claiming that something is suspicious because they don't understand it.

I agree with the other posters, though...if the truth is so important to them then perhaps their fearless money-grabbing leaders should shell out the expense money to acquire the rights to any additional media they require.
 
ImANiceGuy said:
Oh god TAM, if you still believe that they had no idea "terrorists would use planes like missles"(Condi), then you are beyond help.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that you have evidence saying that they did know. No, who am I kidding? You are a twoofer, and as such evidence free.
 
ImANiceGuy said:
Oh god TAM, if you still believe that they had no idea "terrorists would use planes like missles"(Condi), then you are beyond help.

What I would like to know is, did PM have to pay 10k for access to the photos? How did they even learn they existed? As you respond, please keep in mind I have never at any time claimed these pictures reveal a government conspiracy.

p.s. I am a nice guy.....
Click to expand...

Not all knowledge comes thru the eyes.
 
Hey Dtugg.....how about the presidential breifing entitled "Bin Laden Determined to strike within United States"?

I guess it was too vague, never mentioned planes, yadda yadda yadda....I never claimed they knew the moment each holograph would be projected and missile launched...just that they couldn't possibly have known nothing.

Have a great weekend, I'll be back for more abuse Sunday night.
 
Last edited:
And in the eternal round-robin resurrection of the ghosts of truther myths past, we see a resurrection of the infamous Presidential Daily Brief produced.

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/August_6_PDB

911myths said:
The fact remains that the memo is not a convincing warning of 9/11, it does not suggest attacks might be imminent in weeks, and it suggests the FBI are already involved in detailed investigations of the situation. On the specific point of Bush’s reaction to the document (which is what we’re discussing here), there’s no evidence to show he should have done anything differently.
Click to expand...
 
ImANiceGuy said:
Hey Dtugg.....how about the presidential breifing entitled "Bin Laden Determined to strike within United States"?

I guess it was too vague, never mentioned planes, yadda yadda yadda....
Click to expand...

Ok, let' say it wasn't (too vague). Please tell us, based on the contents of that particular PDB, what could have been done to stop the 9/11 attacks.

Oh and by the way, it did mention planes, IIRC, just not using them as weapons.

TAM:)
 
Just as an FYI to other readers: Some of us veterans are a bit terse with our responses because we've seen it all before. Even the latest Bentham publication is simply an attempt to solidify evidence of thermite use to demolish the Twin Towers, and that will continue to fail for the reasons it has always failed: There's no sign of thermite use on the recovered remains itself. At any rate, back to the "PDB" I mentioned above: Read that link, and if you want to see more info, do a search in this forum for that term (either "PDB" or "Presidential Daily Brief"). Or any other terms that seem appropriate. You'll see that it's not only been brought up before, but has been discussed ad nauseum. You'll also see that there's truly nothing new in the truther world, and that all they can do is relob the same old arguments to see if one will stick. Remember the definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. That's well illustrated in this forum. The truthers never stop trying them. And they always fail for the reasons they failed before (which I take as a very cynical and negative commentary on their opinion of the masses: They're shown the myths are refuted, yet they still try 'em anyway to see if they can get someone to believe them. What does that tell you, the novice-to-9/11 reader, what they think of you?).
 
Last edited:
Here it is in it's entirety, for your convenience,

Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US
------------------------------------

Clandestine, foreign government, and media reports indicate Bin Ladin
since 1997' has wanted to conduct terrorist attacks in the US. Bin Ladin
implied in US television interviews in 1997 and 1998 that his followers would
follow the example of World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef and "bring
the fighting to America."

After US missile strikes on his base in Afghanistan in 1998, Bin Ladin
told followers he wanted to retaliate in Washington, according to
a [redacted] service.

Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) operative told an [redacted] service
at the same time that Bin Ladin was planning to exploit the operative's
access to the US to mount a terrorist strike.

The millennium plotting in Canada in 1999 may have been part of
Bin Ladin's first serious attempt to implement a terrorist strike in the
US. Convicted plotter Ahmed Ressam has told the FBI that he conceived the
idea to attack Los Angeles International Airport himself, but that Bin
Ladin lieutenant Abu Zubaydah encouraged him and helped facilitat the
operation. Ressam also said that in 1998 Abu Zubaydah was planning his
own US attack.

Ressam says Bin Ladin was aware of the Los Angeles operation.

Although Bin Ladin has not succeeded, his attacks against the US
Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 demonstrate that he prepares
operations years in advance and is not deterred by setbacks. Bin Ladin
associates surveilled our Embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam as early
as 1993, and some members of the Nairobi cell planning the bombings were
arrested and deported in 1997.

Al-Qa'ida members-including some who are US citizens-have resided
in or traveled to the US for years, and the group apparently maintains a
support structure that could aid attacks. Two Al-Qaida members found guilty
in the conspiracy to bomb our Embassies in East Africa were US citizens, and a
senior EIJ member lived in California in the mid-1990s.

A clandestine source said in 1998 that a Bin Ladin cell in New York
was recruiting Muslim-American youth for attacks.

We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational
threat reporting, such as that from a [redacted] service in
1998 saying that Bin Ladin wanted to hijack a US aircraft to gain the
release of "Blind Shaykh" 'Umar 'Abd al-Rahman and other US-held
extremists.

Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of
suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for
hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of
federal buildings in New York.

The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full field investigations
throughout the US that it considers Bin ladin-related. CIA and the
FBI are investigating a call to our Embassy in the UAE in May saying
that a group or Bin Ladin supporters was in the US planning attacks
with explosives.
Click to expand...

http://www.911myths.com/images/e/e6/August_6_PDB.pdf

Go ahead.

TAM:)
 
ImANiceGuy said:
So PM had inside access to classified pictures [...]
Click to expand...


"Classified" and "not available to the public for free" are two very different things.

ImANiceGuy said:
Hey Dtugg.....how about the presidential breifing entitled "Bin Laden Determined to strike within United States"?

I guess it was too vague, never mentioned planes, yadda yadda yadda....
Click to expand...


So why even bring it up...?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom