9/11 film, first serious one, the only one you need to watch?

vet323
Posts
3575
Joined
7/31/2010
Location
Lead, SD US
12/12/2013 4:52pm
vet323 wrote:
Just a question: In several posts in this thread, you question the "official" narrative about WTC7 based partially on eyewitness accounts. Do you trust those eyewitnesses...
Just a question:

In several posts in this thread, you question the "official" narrative about WTC7 based partially on eyewitness accounts. Do you trust those eyewitnesses more than the several hundred eyewitnesses that watched the plane fly into the Pentagon? If so, why?
philG wrote:
Its not just the eye witness stuff , thats a small part of it , but its what the video shows that doesnt back up what...
Its not just the eye witness stuff , thats a small part of it , but its what the video shows that doesnt back up what its supposed to have done.

The thing with the Pentagon is about why they wont show us what would back up their story.... i can say i have a factory bike in my garage till the cows come home , but if i say , 'but im not allowed to show you ' .. you would call BS , and rightly so ... until i opened the door and showed you .. then you have the proof . Its one of so many anomalies and unanswered questions that i cant just 'let go'... i did manage to for a while , but stuff just keeps coming back..
If you told me you had a factory bike in your garage and hundreds of people saw it, I would be inclined to believe you.
XXVoid MainXX
Posts
8105
Joined
5/25/2012
Location
Schenectady, NY US
12/12/2013 5:07pm Edited Date/Time 12/12/2013 5:12pm
So it would have been very very convenient for us if it had been a missile that shot our airplane down. We would have been off...
So it would have been very very convenient for us if it had been a missile that shot our airplane down. We would have been off the hook for a lot of liability and a lot of lawsuits and maybe we would still be in business. But even with that, with as much study of evidence that I have put into 800 nothing that I have seen to this point makes me think it was a missile or anything other than some form of failure, most likely electrical in the main fuel tanks.

Regarding the videos I still don't know enough about the videos themselves to be able to have an opinion one way or the other but I would certainly be happy to look at anything suspicious and dig into it to the extent that I can. If we are talking about regular old building security cameras I wouldn't think there would be much of a chance of them capturing much of anything. If you look at how security cameras are installed on most buildings they are mounted on the edge of the building and point down the side of the building and maybe the ground up to around 50 feet away from the building. An airplane (or any other object) coming in at 500mph, passing through that 50 foot space would probably never even be seen. Even from across the parking lot where the camera had a much wider view the plane (object) was traveling so fast that it wasn't clearly caught in a single frame. I mean I'm sure security video at the Pentagon isn't "normally" released to the public.

Having said that, you might say, if it doesn't show anything why not release the video? Well, that's a good question I suppose but I don't know enough about what the official story is on these videos to know how to question that story. I'll do some more digging.
philG wrote:
Well i think that there is enough 'unusual' stuff in the reports i have read , but the difference for me on this one is that...
Well i think that there is enough 'unusual' stuff in the reports i have read , but the difference for me on this one is that its a cover up , rather than a premeditated act to persue an agenda. There is no 'pre story' as such .

I agree 100% for regular CCTV, but this is the Pentagon FFS... they arent looking out for petty thieves and car parking infringements. And when you watch the 'Caught on Camera' stuff on TV (not that i do much) its amazing how much of that is as a result of stuff it finds in the background.

They were in the control room watching it come in on radar , i dont think for a minute that the cameras there arent on remote control... if they show nothing , show them , to show that they show nothing. If they show something , then it will either be a) what they said.... or b) not what they said. If its a) , we all go away with our tails between our legs, but the fact that they not only choose not to , but steadfastly bat off any FoIA challenge , makes me think that option a) is not possible.

Forget the whole scenario for what it is , and replace events with X & Y... go right back to the beginning , and calculate the probabilities... 19 guys getting on planes when they aint on the manifest etc... you dont get far before the zero's are off the scale.
Even if they did have it on radar (the plane was flying very low) the security/military police who manage building security probably weren't aware of it in the short amount of time they might have been able to form an idea that the plane was coming in their direction and that they had any intention of flying the plane into the building I can't imagine them thinking "hey, the plane is getting ready to fly into our building, let's see if we can reposition the security cameras and get it on tape". If I had that kind of advanced warning (which I doubt they did) I would be looking for a hole to crawl into.

Regarding the 19 guys, the problem is we can't seem to pick a single thing and explore that to the end. I would love to stay on the thermite subject before moving on. I assume it is still your (and many others) belief that thermite brought down WTC7? And none of these engineers who want the truth have performed any experiments proving it is even possible for that to have happened?
philG
Posts
10884
Joined
5/12/2012
Location
GB
12/13/2013 12:05am
So it would have been very very convenient for us if it had been a missile that shot our airplane down. We would have been off...
So it would have been very very convenient for us if it had been a missile that shot our airplane down. We would have been off the hook for a lot of liability and a lot of lawsuits and maybe we would still be in business. But even with that, with as much study of evidence that I have put into 800 nothing that I have seen to this point makes me think it was a missile or anything other than some form of failure, most likely electrical in the main fuel tanks.

Regarding the videos I still don't know enough about the videos themselves to be able to have an opinion one way or the other but I would certainly be happy to look at anything suspicious and dig into it to the extent that I can. If we are talking about regular old building security cameras I wouldn't think there would be much of a chance of them capturing much of anything. If you look at how security cameras are installed on most buildings they are mounted on the edge of the building and point down the side of the building and maybe the ground up to around 50 feet away from the building. An airplane (or any other object) coming in at 500mph, passing through that 50 foot space would probably never even be seen. Even from across the parking lot where the camera had a much wider view the plane (object) was traveling so fast that it wasn't clearly caught in a single frame. I mean I'm sure security video at the Pentagon isn't "normally" released to the public.

Having said that, you might say, if it doesn't show anything why not release the video? Well, that's a good question I suppose but I don't know enough about what the official story is on these videos to know how to question that story. I'll do some more digging.
philG wrote:
Well i think that there is enough 'unusual' stuff in the reports i have read , but the difference for me on this one is that...
Well i think that there is enough 'unusual' stuff in the reports i have read , but the difference for me on this one is that its a cover up , rather than a premeditated act to persue an agenda. There is no 'pre story' as such .

I agree 100% for regular CCTV, but this is the Pentagon FFS... they arent looking out for petty thieves and car parking infringements. And when you watch the 'Caught on Camera' stuff on TV (not that i do much) its amazing how much of that is as a result of stuff it finds in the background.

They were in the control room watching it come in on radar , i dont think for a minute that the cameras there arent on remote control... if they show nothing , show them , to show that they show nothing. If they show something , then it will either be a) what they said.... or b) not what they said. If its a) , we all go away with our tails between our legs, but the fact that they not only choose not to , but steadfastly bat off any FoIA challenge , makes me think that option a) is not possible.

Forget the whole scenario for what it is , and replace events with X & Y... go right back to the beginning , and calculate the probabilities... 19 guys getting on planes when they aint on the manifest etc... you dont get far before the zero's are off the scale.
Even if they did have it on radar (the plane was flying very low) the security/military police who manage building security probably weren't aware of it...
Even if they did have it on radar (the plane was flying very low) the security/military police who manage building security probably weren't aware of it in the short amount of time they might have been able to form an idea that the plane was coming in their direction and that they had any intention of flying the plane into the building I can't imagine them thinking "hey, the plane is getting ready to fly into our building, let's see if we can reposition the security cameras and get it on tape". If I had that kind of advanced warning (which I doubt they did) I would be looking for a hole to crawl into.

Regarding the 19 guys, the problem is we can't seem to pick a single thing and explore that to the end. I would love to stay on the thermite subject before moving on. I assume it is still your (and many others) belief that thermite brought down WTC7? And none of these engineers who want the truth have performed any experiments proving it is even possible for that to have happened?
On the contrary, there is a lot of evidence to support the use of thermite... dust samples from the site are loaded with the traces of it .. i will find a link .

Or go look .
XXVoid MainXX
Posts
8105
Joined
5/25/2012
Location
Schenectady, NY US
12/13/2013 6:50am
philG wrote:
On the contrary, there is a lot of evidence to support the use of thermite... dust samples from the site are loaded with the traces of...
On the contrary, there is a lot of evidence to support the use of thermite... dust samples from the site are loaded with the traces of it .. i will find a link .

Or go look .
I have looked into those dust samples long before this thread and I honestly do not understand how they can be scientific evidence of anything considering where they were collected, when they were collected, how they were stored and how/when they were tested. It seems an "extreme" stretch to me. And like I said, with all of the engineers on the 911 petition list why haven't they performed any experiments/tests to show/prove to everyone that bringing a building down with thermite is even possible and what it would take? That would be real science in my mind.

The Shop

philG
Posts
10884
Joined
5/12/2012
Location
GB
12/13/2013 8:03am
philG wrote:
On the contrary, there is a lot of evidence to support the use of thermite... dust samples from the site are loaded with the traces of...
On the contrary, there is a lot of evidence to support the use of thermite... dust samples from the site are loaded with the traces of it .. i will find a link .

Or go look .
I have looked into those dust samples long before this thread and I honestly do not understand how they can be scientific evidence of anything considering...
I have looked into those dust samples long before this thread and I honestly do not understand how they can be scientific evidence of anything considering where they were collected, when they were collected, how they were stored and how/when they were tested. It seems an "extreme" stretch to me. And like I said, with all of the engineers on the 911 petition list why haven't they performed any experiments/tests to show/prove to everyone that bringing a building down with thermite is even possible and what it would take? That would be real science in my mind.
well seeing as NIST didnt do any testing , and everyone else wasnt allowed to by being denied access to the site , the only way the tests could be done is on the sly

http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/thermite/explosive_residues.html#pro…

Again, the question is ask , is how this stuff comes to be there , if it was nothing to do with the Towers. Irrespective of how it was collected , it exists, and is found even to this day .

To be honest, the existance of Thermate isnt a secret of any sort, and the existance of military grade stuff is accepted as fact also.
GuyB
Posts
35722
Joined
7/10/2006
Location
Aliso Viejo, CA US
12/13/2013 8:03am
How about if I trash this thread (because I think it's full of nutso), and then some of you can claim it was a government cover-up? Smile
XXVoid MainXX
Posts
8105
Joined
5/25/2012
Location
Schenectady, NY US
12/13/2013 8:27am
Oh I don't believe it's accepted as fact at all. Smile You have to make some great leaps to come up with thermite:

http://www.911myths.com/html/traces_of_thermate_at_the_wtc.html

And even if I were to be convinced that it was thermite in the sample (which I'm not) and even if I was then convinced that it came from key structural locations in the buildings that fell, but happened to be some that didn't ignite, which of course would have been dispersed all over the city evenly to end up in those samples, but I would also have to believe something like a commenter says in this link (just something I ran across that seems to sum up my struggles with the big picture of where that would have to lead):

http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2011/05/has-nanothermite-been-oversold-…

What is ludicrous is the idea that members of the government conspired to use hijacking by known Islamic terrorists as a cover for controlled demolition of WTC & the associated deaths of 3000 citizens by means of secret methods yet unexplained & unrevealed to provide justification for going to war against rogue and hostile states so as to enrich various parties. The conspiracy theories become increasingly elaborate & exotic as their flaws are revealed, but this only encourages the conspiracy theorists to press onward.

There was no molten steel observed by anyone. At most, there was glowing-hot steel, or steel that had been eroded at some point; but, no one saw molten steel at WTC.

Aluminum melts at a fairly low temperature. When it first melts, it is silvery in color, but as it is heated beyond its initial melting point, it begins to glow in other colors. Around 600° C, aluminum glows yellowish, & by 900° C, it glows orange.

WTC had a lot of things in it that would burn, ranging from paper & wood to the very iron & aluminum making up the columns. It is possible that water reacted with metallic aluminum to produce hydrogen gas, which then either burned hot enough to cause rapid oxidation of iron structures & breakdown of gypsum & concrete, or accumulated until it reached explosive concentration. This same process blew the concrete roofs off the buildings at the nuclear reactors in Japan, except the metal involved was zirconium instead of aluminum.

Iron oxidizes even at room temperature, but its rate of oxidation increases w/ increasing temperature. At sufficient temperature, iron oxidizes rapidly enough to sustain its own chemical reaction, that is, it burns.

WTC was a mass of 500k tons of concrete, steel & aluminum, plus various organics found in office buildings & airliners. Several floors were heated beyond 500° C by fires, some even reaching 1000° C. When these were buried under an insulating blanket of dust, they retained their heat & continued reacting chemically, releasing more heat.
XXVoid MainXX
Posts
8105
Joined
5/25/2012
Location
Schenectady, NY US
12/13/2013 8:36am Edited Date/Time 12/13/2013 8:36am
GuyB wrote:
How about if I trash this thread (because I think it's full of nutso), and then some of you can claim it was a government cover-up...
How about if I trash this thread (because I think it's full of nutso), and then some of you can claim it was a government cover-up? Smile
Come on B, free Lenny! Smile We're being respectful here, even the kooks. Smile P.S. It's generating revenue for you. Wink
philG
Posts
10884
Joined
5/12/2012
Location
GB
12/13/2013 9:54am
The fact that he compares Zirconium to Aluminium scores a pretty low score on the credibility stakes.

I work with Zirconium... its very strange stuff. And nothing like aluminium.

whichever way you look at it ... if you look at the whole picture, its just too many co-incidences and incompetencies for my liking... bear in mind nobody has been reprimanded or jailed , or sacked for incompetence .

I recall Fetzer being one of the early dissenting voices on this , but he seems to have changed his tune .

This whole subject is as immotive as religion , probably worse in some ways , but i am ultmately suspicious of anything that is so massively surpressed... they may have been able to pull it off in 1963, but in 2001 it was a different world.

We have already seen the Syrian Chemical weapons thing fall over , mainy thanks to people on the ground getting the info out before the MSM can get their act together, i guess because my general demeanour is to question everything , as a matter of course, i start at the opposite end of things to you.

Whether this is the place to carry this on ... maybe we just agree to disagree , and if we ever get the full access to the stuff we are forbidden from seeing , perhaps things will be a little clearer
XXVoid MainXX
Posts
8105
Joined
5/25/2012
Location
Schenectady, NY US
12/13/2013 11:19am
The problem is, even if they (the government) were to investigate every little theory from thermite to direct energy beam it wouldn't be enough to satisfy any one of you would it? They would just be lying no matter what they came back with. It's kind of like trying to nail Jello to a tree. It would be a complete waste of time, energy and my tax payer dollars. Now, if you all want to perform your own investigation and provide your own detailed report counter to the NIST report by all means, please do. So far there is no credible evidence or proof that anything other than what is described in detail in the NIST report happened. It's the only plausible comprehensive explanation for what happened to date.
GuyB
Posts
35722
Joined
7/10/2006
Location
Aliso Viejo, CA US
12/13/2013 11:37am
GuyB wrote:
How about if I trash this thread (because I think it's full of nutso), and then some of you can claim it was a government cover-up...
How about if I trash this thread (because I think it's full of nutso), and then some of you can claim it was a government cover-up? Smile
Come on B, free Lenny! Smile We're being respectful here, even the kooks. Smile P.S. It's generating revenue for you. Wink
You know my policy there. Free Lenny, with purchase of another Lenny of equal or greater value. Smile
wildbill
Posts
4382
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
Christmas Valley, OR US
12/13/2013 1:31pm
Don't trash it Steve, Void and Phil are being open minded kooks here.

Can Lenny post in the dumbgeon? Tongue Wink
philG
Posts
10884
Joined
5/12/2012
Location
GB
12/13/2013 2:29pm
The problem is, even if they (the government) were to investigate every little theory from thermite to direct energy beam it wouldn't be enough to satisfy...
The problem is, even if they (the government) were to investigate every little theory from thermite to direct energy beam it wouldn't be enough to satisfy any one of you would it? They would just be lying no matter what they came back with. It's kind of like trying to nail Jello to a tree. It would be a complete waste of time, energy and my tax payer dollars. Now, if you all want to perform your own investigation and provide your own detailed report counter to the NIST report by all means, please do. So far there is no credible evidence or proof that anything other than what is described in detail in the NIST report happened. It's the only plausible comprehensive explanation for what happened to date.
The thing is , they dont need to do much , show the videos, allow the stuff that they suppressed into open field , and it will either back up what they say and blow all us kooks out of the water, or it wont.

Its not the fact that they didnt do it .......its the fact that they stand in front of they way of anyone who is prepared to do a peer reviewed investigation. That tells me there is something to hide. Else they wouldnt be hiding it .. what other reason is there ??

Forget this 'they couldnt , they wouldnt' , and ask why they put more money and effort in to keeping stuff secret , then investigating it , and only a fraction of the money investigating Clintons BJ
XXVoid MainXX
Posts
8105
Joined
5/25/2012
Location
Schenectady, NY US
12/13/2013 3:48pm
What about the thermite and energy beams? What would you like them to do for that?
tunedlength
Posts
2777
Joined
12/9/2006
Location
Ontario, CA US
12/13/2013 5:34pm
That reminds me. I have to get my place tented for termites.
Thanks guys.
philG
Posts
10884
Joined
5/12/2012
Location
GB
12/14/2013 2:22am
What about the thermite and energy beams? What would you like them to do for that?
In what way........the chemical analysis of the dust has shown the presence of thermite.. that link i posted seems to be representative of what has been done.

As for the energy beams.... i have seen no evidence of that , but i havent paid particular attention to that either. What bit i have read , tells me its possble, but also unlikely , mainly due to the need of a huge power source... which would have stood out. Also the scenario didnt need it . Everything was pretty much covered.
XXVoid MainXX
Posts
8105
Joined
5/25/2012
Location
Schenectady, NY US
12/14/2013 6:14am Edited Date/Time 12/14/2013 5:46pm
So that's it? And this is the scenario you are referring to?

1) Thermite was placed at key locations of the 2 towers and bldg 7 by some government agency either without being detected by or in cooperation with building security at those locations, even though thermite has never previously been used to demolish a building.

2) The government hired known terrorists to fly passenger jets full of people into the towers as a cover story to the thermite demolition.

3) They confiscated all of the video from the Pentagon so you couldn't see that it wasn't a 3rd passenger jet that flew into it but instead a cruise missile. They immediately went out and knocked down some light poles and sprinkled bits of airplane around the courtyard and paid off many motorists on the freeway to say they saw an airplane.

4) They plotted all of this including the deaths of thousands of Americans so they had justification to invade other countries and spend the tax money of all the remaining living Americans (at least the rich ones) on unjust wars.

5) Everyone involved has stayed tight lipped about all of this.

Does that about sum up your scenario? Makes sense I guess.
GuyB
Posts
35722
Joined
7/10/2006
Location
Aliso Viejo, CA US
12/14/2013 7:45am
That reminds me. I have to get my place tented for termites.
Thanks guys.
Laughing

I'm waiting for Godzilla and flying saucers to show up here.
kongols
Posts
24220
Joined
9/22/2009
Location
Riga LV
12/14/2013 8:41am Edited Date/Time 12/14/2013 8:43am
So that's it? And this is the scenario you are referring to? 1) Thermite was placed at key locations of the 2 towers and bldg 7...
So that's it? And this is the scenario you are referring to?

1) Thermite was placed at key locations of the 2 towers and bldg 7 by some government agency either without being detected by or in cooperation with building security at those locations, even though thermite has never previously been used to demolish a building.

2) The government hired known terrorists to fly passenger jets full of people into the towers as a cover story to the thermite demolition.

3) They confiscated all of the video from the Pentagon so you couldn't see that it wasn't a 3rd passenger jet that flew into it but instead a cruise missile. They immediately went out and knocked down some light poles and sprinkled bits of airplane around the courtyard and paid off many motorists on the freeway to say they saw an airplane.

4) They plotted all of this including the deaths of thousands of Americans so they had justification to invade other countries and spend the tax money of all the remaining living Americans (at least the rich ones) on unjust wars.

5) Everyone involved has stayed tight lipped about all of this.

Does that about sum up your scenario? Makes sense I guess.
Nah, monkey`s were better scenario.
XXVoid MainXX
Posts
8105
Joined
5/25/2012
Location
Schenectady, NY US
12/14/2013 8:52am
Monkeys were pretty good right?
jndmx
Posts
9691
Joined
1/20/2008
Location
South Kingston, RI US
12/14/2013 3:11pm
Monkeys were pretty good right?
Don't go opening that barrel

Mr. G
Posts
4225
Joined
12/23/2009
Location
Riverside, CA US
12/14/2013 3:21pm
So that's it? And this is the scenario you are referring to? 1) Thermite was placed at key locations of the 2 towers and bldg 7...
So that's it? And this is the scenario you are referring to?

1) Thermite was placed at key locations of the 2 towers and bldg 7 by some government agency either without being detected by or in cooperation with building security at those locations, even though thermite has never previously been used to demolish a building.

2) The government hired known terrorists to fly passenger jets full of people into the towers as a cover story to the thermite demolition.

3) They confiscated all of the video from the Pentagon so you couldn't see that it wasn't a 3rd passenger jet that flew into it but instead a cruise missile. They immediately went out and knocked down some light poles and sprinkled bits of airplane around the courtyard and paid off many motorists on the freeway to say they saw an airplane.

4) They plotted all of this including the deaths of thousands of Americans so they had justification to invade other countries and spend the tax money of all the remaining living Americans (at least the rich ones) on unjust wars.

5) Everyone involved has stayed tight lipped about all of this.

Does that about sum up your scenario? Makes sense I guess.
Your list points to a lot of folks cooperating. Heck even the terrorists friends haven't said a word. I'm sure they don't want the US to look bad.
philG
Posts
10884
Joined
5/12/2012
Location
GB
12/15/2013 10:39am
So that's it? And this is the scenario you are referring to? 1) Thermite was placed at key locations of the 2 towers and bldg 7...
So that's it? And this is the scenario you are referring to?

1) Thermite was placed at key locations of the 2 towers and bldg 7 by some government agency either without being detected by or in cooperation with building security at those locations, even though thermite has never previously been used to demolish a building.

2) The government hired known terrorists to fly passenger jets full of people into the towers as a cover story to the thermite demolition.

3) They confiscated all of the video from the Pentagon so you couldn't see that it wasn't a 3rd passenger jet that flew into it but instead a cruise missile. They immediately went out and knocked down some light poles and sprinkled bits of airplane around the courtyard and paid off many motorists on the freeway to say they saw an airplane.

4) They plotted all of this including the deaths of thousands of Americans so they had justification to invade other countries and spend the tax money of all the remaining living Americans (at least the rich ones) on unjust wars.

5) Everyone involved has stayed tight lipped about all of this.

Does that about sum up your scenario? Makes sense I guess.
There is more right in there than wrong......
rebus
Posts
831
Joined
6/29/2013
Location
GB
12/15/2013 10:50am
So that's it? And this is the scenario you are referring to? 1) Thermite was placed at key locations of the 2 towers and bldg 7...
So that's it? And this is the scenario you are referring to?

1) Thermite was placed at key locations of the 2 towers and bldg 7 by some government agency either without being detected by or in cooperation with building security at those locations, even though thermite has never previously been used to demolish a building.

2) The government hired known terrorists to fly passenger jets full of people into the towers as a cover story to the thermite demolition.

3) They confiscated all of the video from the Pentagon so you couldn't see that it wasn't a 3rd passenger jet that flew into it but instead a cruise missile. They immediately went out and knocked down some light poles and sprinkled bits of airplane around the courtyard and paid off many motorists on the freeway to say they saw an airplane.

4) They plotted all of this including the deaths of thousands of Americans so they had justification to invade other countries and spend the tax money of all the remaining living Americans (at least the rich ones) on unjust wars.

5) Everyone involved has stayed tight lipped about all of this.

Does that about sum up your scenario? Makes sense I guess.
philG wrote:
There is more right in there than wrong......
I learned in my discussion with Void that he's quite closed minded. He'd prefer to call people kooks than think his government does anything dirty behind closed doors. Pity to live one's life that way.
Choppy
Posts
1931
Joined
12/16/2012
Location
US
12/15/2013 10:55am
So that's it? And this is the scenario you are referring to? 1) Thermite was placed at key locations of the 2 towers and bldg 7...
So that's it? And this is the scenario you are referring to?

1) Thermite was placed at key locations of the 2 towers and bldg 7 by some government agency either without being detected by or in cooperation with building security at those locations, even though thermite has never previously been used to demolish a building.

2) The government hired known terrorists to fly passenger jets full of people into the towers as a cover story to the thermite demolition.

3) They confiscated all of the video from the Pentagon so you couldn't see that it wasn't a 3rd passenger jet that flew into it but instead a cruise missile. They immediately went out and knocked down some light poles and sprinkled bits of airplane around the courtyard and paid off many motorists on the freeway to say they saw an airplane.

4) They plotted all of this including the deaths of thousands of Americans so they had justification to invade other countries and spend the tax money of all the remaining living Americans (at least the rich ones) on unjust wars.

5) Everyone involved has stayed tight lipped about all of this.

Does that about sum up your scenario? Makes sense I guess.
philG wrote:
There is more right in there than wrong......
rebus wrote:
I learned in my discussion with Void that he's quite closed minded. He'd prefer to call people kooks than think his government does anything dirty behind...
I learned in my discussion with Void that he's quite closed minded. He'd prefer to call people kooks than think his government does anything dirty behind closed doors. Pity to live one's life that way.
I guess it's easier to be closed minded to any possibility that it wasn't a government conspiracy?
philG
Posts
10884
Joined
5/12/2012
Location
GB
12/15/2013 11:16am
If the investigations and evidence led to that conclusion , then it would be dead easy.......but thats the point , there bloody isnt any , and what bit there is doesnt satisfy the official narrative..

The big issue is accepting that the govt serves their own interests, and not ours, and will do whatever it takes to ensure that carries on.

A lot of it is down to MSM being controlled by those that stand to benefit from playing the game.. and so most folk dont get to know what is really going on.
tunedlength
Posts
2777
Joined
12/9/2006
Location
Ontario, CA US
12/15/2013 11:35am
philG wrote:
If the investigations and evidence led to that conclusion , then it would be dead easy.......but thats the point , there bloody isnt any , and...
If the investigations and evidence led to that conclusion , then it would be dead easy.......but thats the point , there bloody isnt any , and what bit there is doesnt satisfy the official narrative..

The big issue is accepting that the govt serves their own interests, and not ours, and will do whatever it takes to ensure that carries on.

A lot of it is down to MSM being controlled by those that stand to benefit from playing the game.. and so most folk dont get to know what is really going on.
No evidence that it wasn't a government conspiracy?
Well there you have it.
APLMAN99
Posts
12270
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR US
Fantasy
12/15/2013 12:26pm
philG wrote:
If the investigations and evidence led to that conclusion , then it would be dead easy.......but thats the point , there bloody isnt any , and...
If the investigations and evidence led to that conclusion , then it would be dead easy.......but thats the point , there bloody isnt any , and what bit there is doesnt satisfy the official narrative..

The big issue is accepting that the govt serves their own interests, and not ours, and will do whatever it takes to ensure that carries on.

A lot of it is down to MSM being controlled by those that stand to benefit from playing the game.. and so most folk dont get to know what is really going on.
XXVoid MainXX
Posts
8105
Joined
5/25/2012
Location
Schenectady, NY US
12/15/2013 4:00pm
So that's it? And this is the scenario you are referring to? 1) Thermite was placed at key locations of the 2 towers and bldg 7...
So that's it? And this is the scenario you are referring to?

1) Thermite was placed at key locations of the 2 towers and bldg 7 by some government agency either without being detected by or in cooperation with building security at those locations, even though thermite has never previously been used to demolish a building.

2) The government hired known terrorists to fly passenger jets full of people into the towers as a cover story to the thermite demolition.

3) They confiscated all of the video from the Pentagon so you couldn't see that it wasn't a 3rd passenger jet that flew into it but instead a cruise missile. They immediately went out and knocked down some light poles and sprinkled bits of airplane around the courtyard and paid off many motorists on the freeway to say they saw an airplane.

4) They plotted all of this including the deaths of thousands of Americans so they had justification to invade other countries and spend the tax money of all the remaining living Americans (at least the rich ones) on unjust wars.

5) Everyone involved has stayed tight lipped about all of this.

Does that about sum up your scenario? Makes sense I guess.
philG wrote:
There is more right in there than wrong......
So tell me, which parts are right and which parts are wrong?
XXVoid MainXX
Posts
8105
Joined
5/25/2012
Location
Schenectady, NY US
12/15/2013 4:01pm
So that's it? And this is the scenario you are referring to? 1) Thermite was placed at key locations of the 2 towers and bldg 7...
So that's it? And this is the scenario you are referring to?

1) Thermite was placed at key locations of the 2 towers and bldg 7 by some government agency either without being detected by or in cooperation with building security at those locations, even though thermite has never previously been used to demolish a building.

2) The government hired known terrorists to fly passenger jets full of people into the towers as a cover story to the thermite demolition.

3) They confiscated all of the video from the Pentagon so you couldn't see that it wasn't a 3rd passenger jet that flew into it but instead a cruise missile. They immediately went out and knocked down some light poles and sprinkled bits of airplane around the courtyard and paid off many motorists on the freeway to say they saw an airplane.

4) They plotted all of this including the deaths of thousands of Americans so they had justification to invade other countries and spend the tax money of all the remaining living Americans (at least the rich ones) on unjust wars.

5) Everyone involved has stayed tight lipped about all of this.

Does that about sum up your scenario? Makes sense I guess.
philG wrote:
There is more right in there than wrong......
rebus wrote:
I learned in my discussion with Void that he's quite closed minded. He'd prefer to call people kooks than think his government does anything dirty behind...
I learned in my discussion with Void that he's quite closed minded. He'd prefer to call people kooks than think his government does anything dirty behind closed doors. Pity to live one's life that way.
Sorry but I've been taking in as much information as I can and so far I haven't heard anything that I haven't heard before and my conclusions are basically the same. I won't use the k* word anymore though because I don't want to hurt your feelings. Wink

Post a reply to: 9/11 film, first serious one, the only one you need to watch?

The Latest