Posted:
#26
Quote Originally Posted by SirJohnDrake:
You don't say...very interesting smdio!
0
September 11, 2001 (long read)
Posted:
#30
Quote Originally Posted by shootzbra:
Sounds more like a show I saw on tv some time ago.Word for word,to the tee.Now thats sad....Oh,I lost a good friend on Flight 93...where is the plane if it did not crash?
Sounds more like a show I saw on tv some time ago.Word for word,to the tee.Now thats sad....Oh,I lost a good friend on Flight 93...where is the plane if it did not crash?
I was hoping for this question.
Right after I hit "submit" for the original post, I realized that I hadn't included where Flight 93 actually went.
Flight 93 landed in Cleveland at roughly 11:15 AM. At approximately 10:45 AM, all people inside the terminal and waiting areas of the airport were told they had to evacuate immediately. They were told they could not drive or take any of their vehicles. They were forced to WALK away from the airport, and not ask any questions.
Some people refused and tried to get back to gather their personal belongings. These people were told that if they did not comply and tried to gain access back to the airport, they would be shot on site.
At 11:15 AM, Flight 93 landed. At 11:45, it was evacuated and the passengers were taken to an inactive NASA hanger. What happened from there? It's anyone's guess. I highly doubt the government would have killed those passengers, but I absolutely believe that if they are capable of staging such attacks as the ones on the WTC, they are more than capable of sitting down 200 people, and giving them an ultimatum:
"You will not contact your famlies ever again. We will give you new lives with unlimited access to whatever you desire. We will place you in a very undisclosed location and give you new identities. We will watch every move you make and monitor every minute of your daily lives. Should you contact your family or speak of this to anyone, we will kill both them, and you."
Would you agree? I don't think you would have a choice..
0
Posted:
#31
Quote Originally Posted by Spitfire15:
Sorry, I clearly didn't read your post at all
Smdio,
What was the point of the set up?
Sorry, I clearly didn't read your post at all
Smdio,
What was the point of the set up?
Great question
The point was on 2 fronts: Our country desperately needed access to the middle-east's oil supply. Our gasoline prices were nearly $4/gallon, and oil prices were the highest on record. The economy was suffering and we needed to take control of the most abundent resource that the middle east had to offer. Saddam Hussein was used as a logical excuse to invade Iraq, since his past actions have essentially set the stage for another war. We used every excuse to go to war with Iraq, except the real reason: we needed the oil, and we needed it badly.
I do NOT believe this was the primary reason, however. As a matter of fact, I believe this was just a "bonus". The real reason? You won't like this..
I've referred many times in my original post to the entity know as the "Bilderberg Group". This group is a "secret society" of Global juggernauts. Past presidents, congressman, foriegn ambassedors, parliment members, foriegn Heads of State, wealthy and powerful business CEO's, mainstream media cooridinators, etc etc. I can go on, but you'd probably rather just googling "The Bilderberg Group". A list of members can be found somewhere.
This group operates in complete secrecy. They meet once a year, and have since 1952. They control absolutely -everything- that we see and hear on a daily basis. Their main goal is to create a "Global Government", in which they use the United Nations as the "enforcer" and main military weapon. They plan to disarm the United States and other countries, so that we must rely on them for protection.
Their goal of September 11th was to create fear. It was the first of a series of events that will ultimately lead to the "New World Order" (which they will call it) taking control of the Global every day actions of this planet. They will have 1 global currency, 1 global army, and 1 global economy. This group will essentially "monopolize" our planet to their own benefit. We will have no choice but to accept the NWO as our new government, because at that point, the series of events they have created will have us living in fear on a daily basis. We will succumb to their entrance as the new World Government, basically out of fear.
I know it sounds far fetched, but if you look closer as I have, and stop being naive and believing everything you hear on the media, you will find the truth.
0
Posted:
#32
Quote Originally Posted by tiasman:
I will go in order of your "facts"
1. FALSE. There were bomb sniffing dogs in the buildings, just like there had always been since the first bomb attack in the 90's. In fact, one bomb sniffing K9, Sirius, and his handler, Officer David Lim, perished in WTC one. The dogs were all on the ground floor, and always were, and were there to check vehicles entering the parking garages. Most made it out due to the location. They were there on 9/11. This myth began because of a newsday story where one officer stated that she wished they had been there that day, but her unit had been reassigned a few days earlier. The internet ran with it. The dogs were there to catch car bombs, not 767's.
I will go in order of your "facts"
1. FALSE. There were bomb sniffing dogs in the buildings, just like there had always been since the first bomb attack in the 90's. In fact, one bomb sniffing K9, Sirius, and his handler, Officer David Lim, perished in WTC one. The dogs were all on the ground floor, and always were, and were there to check vehicles entering the parking garages. Most made it out due to the location. They were there on 9/11. This myth began because of a newsday story where one officer stated that she wished they had been there that day, but her unit had been reassigned a few days earlier. The internet ran with it. The dogs were there to catch car bombs, not 767's.
This is simply not true. You are reading aticles that you found on the internet. I have first hand knowledge from my father just 48 hours before the attacks happened. He was at the towers every single day. His life was his work. I barely saw my dad, and when I did, he would always talk about work. He was not the type of person to have mentioned something like the dogs being pulled if he did not feel it was of significance. At the time, we both sort of "shrugged it off". I didn't even draw the line from his statement to the actual attacks until a few weeks after 9/11. His statement to me of the dogs being pulled and "something is up" has driven to me start asking questions.
My questions, however, do not get answered. They lead down a road with no end. I constantly get thrown to the side and given to low-level bureucrats that don't know their ass from a hole in the ground.
Do not believe what you read on the internet tiasman. Those dogs were pulled 2 days prior to the attacks. That is a fact that you should not overlook.
0
Posted:
#33
Quote Originally Posted by tiasman:
2. I admit I had to look this "freefall" stuff up. There are many sites out there just devoted to this, and times for each tower to fall range from 8 seconds to 20 seconds, all hotly contested with their very own handy dandy formulas. So I guess on this one you just get to pick and choose which formula fits your belief.
One thing I found interesting is that if you watch the collapses, the debris coming out from the buildings beats the buildings to the ground, which would lead one to say that the buildings had to be falling slower than "freefall" because the debri could not be falling "faster than free fall".
2. I admit I had to look this "freefall" stuff up. There are many sites out there just devoted to this, and times for each tower to fall range from 8 seconds to 20 seconds, all hotly contested with their very own handy dandy formulas. So I guess on this one you just get to pick and choose which formula fits your belief.
One thing I found interesting is that if you watch the collapses, the debris coming out from the buildings beats the buildings to the ground, which would lead one to say that the buildings had to be falling slower than "freefall" because the debri could not be falling "faster than free fall".
Your "debris" arguement is not a very good one. I've just watched the videos again numerous times, and any piece of debris that had fallen to the ground before the actual "mass" of the towers had start to fall BEFORE the towers initial collapse. If you could point out otherwise, I'll succumb to your arguement. But I doubt you can. In fact, you can't
Secondly, on the "Speed of Freefall", I have no idea what "other formulas" you are speaking of. The formula for freefall speed is universally defined. There are not multiple formulas for this. An experiment was done by the University of Columbia years before the attacks. They dropped a billiard ball from the very top of the WTC to the ground below to determine Free Fall speed. Their results?
https://www.contrarianthinker.com/WTC%20pr1.jpg
It took the billiard ball 9.22 seconds to hit the ground once dropped from the top of WTC South Tower. They estimate if you drop the ball 100 times, it would always land between 8.79 and 9.22 seconds, with the higher number coming in more often than not.
Now let's watch the same tower collapse again:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CG7I4UnoBnA
Okay okay, you still don't believe me? Well let's watch this video. This guy is a Yale University professor in physics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ml_n5gJgQ_U&p=3D30132C75A35683&playnext=1&index=13
Let's say I'll believe you, and the South and North towers did not fall in free-fall speed.
Are you telling me that Tower #7 was not a controlled demolition? And if it was (which you have to admitt), WHY? Why would they demolish Tower #7, and how would they have known before September 11th that these attacks would have occured?
Then go and look what was inside of Tower #7. I think you can start drawing the lines...
0
Posted:
#34
Quote Originally Posted by tiasman:
3.
WTC 7: The NYCFD Battalion chief John Norman reported, immediately after the collapse of the first two towers, that 7 was unstable and would go down next. It was immediately evacuated and if you google it, you can see the massive structural damages it took before it collapsed. There are photos taken from NYPD choppers that show it clearly. One corner of the building is completely sheered away from debris.
3.
WTC 7: The NYCFD Battalion chief John Norman reported, immediately after the collapse of the first two towers, that 7 was unstable and would go down next. It was immediately evacuated and if you google it, you can see the massive structural damages it took before it collapsed. There are photos taken from NYPD choppers that show it clearly. One corner of the building is completely sheered away from debris.
I've already answered this with my above post. I'll await your reply.
Quote Originally Posted by tiasman:
Of the two buildings in your "facts" that were actually hit by a plane and can be used for comparison:
Empire State State Building: In 1945, the B-52 did not exist 
. It was a much smaller plane, a B 25, the pilot knew he was going to hit something, he dodged for sky scrapers, he was banking hard and PULLING UP at stall speed when he hit the building. Most of the fuel spilled down the side of the building and did not ignite. 11 people were killed, some burned, but the fire was quickly put out. This building also differed as dramatically from the construction of the WTC as a 767 differs from a B 25
Venezuela, it was a small plane that hit the FIRE DEPT at the airport, no 57 story building was hit in 2004 or "burned for hours", whereever you got this story from, is not telling the truth.
18 November 2004; Rutas Aereas Venezolanas (RAVSA) BAe Jetstream 31; Caracas, Venezuela: The aircraft was on a scheduled domestic flight from El Vigia to Caracas and crashed after landing during heavy rain at the Caracas airport. After landing, the aircraft departed the runway and crashed into the airport fire department headquarters and caught fire. That fire was quickly put out by the fire fighters in the building.
Both crew members survived, but four of the 19 passengers were killed.
So one building was hit by a pilot desperately trying to avoid it (instead of full throttle into it), and another was a FIRE DEPT hit by a small plane skidding on the runway. Hardly comparable.
None of the other fires you describe could mimick the intense heat caused by the thousands of gallons of jet fuel that slammed into the WTC at full speed.
I will continue tomorrow with this, see you then.
https://www.upi.com/Top_News/2004/10/17/Blaze-torches-Venezuelas-tallest-tower/UPI-63151098056923/
^^^^ This is the article from the 56 story building that burned for over 26 hours. No, it was not hit by a place. But did burn for over 26 hours and stretched 16 floors.
Intense heat from the thousands of gallons of jet fuel? No, sir. When the planes initially hit the towers, it's been universally estimated that 75% of the jet fuel burned off at impact, and the remaining fuel burned off relatively quickly, having minimal time to spread to neighboring floors. If you watch the initial impact of the 747's hitting the towers, the huge "fireball" that you see if the jet fuel explosion.
Now to debunk your Empire State building claims:
https://www.associatedcontent.com/article/731183/the_day_a_b52_bomber_crashed_into_the.html
Nuff said there.
Anything else? Because that took me all of 45 seconds to find those articles.
0
Posted:
#37
Quote Originally Posted by smdio:
You need a whole team of psychiatrists smidoI was hoping for this question.
Right after I hit "submit" for the original post, I realized that I hadn't included where Flight 93 actually went.
Flight 93 landed in Cleveland at roughly 11:15 AM. At approximately 10:45 AM, all people inside the terminal and waiting areas of the airport were told they had to evacuate immediately. They were told they could not drive or take any of their vehicles. They were forced to WALK away from the airport, and not ask any questions.
Some people refused and tried to get back to gather their personal belongings. These people were told that if they did not comply and tried to gain access back to the airport, they would be shot on site.
At 11:15 AM, Flight 93 landed. At 11:45, it was evacuated and the passengers were taken to an inactive NASA hanger. What happened from there? It's anyone's guess. I highly doubt the government would have killed those passengers, but I absolutely believe that if they are capable of staging such attacks as the ones on the WTC, they are more than capable of sitting down 200 people, and giving them an ultimatum:
"You will not contact your famlies ever again. We will give you new lives with unlimited access to whatever you desire. We will place you in a very undisclosed location and give you new identities. We will watch every move you make and monitor every minute of your daily lives. Should you contact your family or speak of this to anyone, we will kill both them, and you."
Would you agree? I don't think you would have a choice..
Not joking here....seek professional help
0
Posted:
#38
Quote Originally Posted by VegasMaxx:
You need a whole team of psychiatrists smido
You need a whole team of psychiatrists smido
Not joking here....seek professional help
That's the easy way out. Try to dis-prove what I said above. Show me evidence that Flight 93 crashed. Wheres the black box? Where's the wreckage? Where's the bodies?
Saying "you need help HAHAHA LOLZ" is no kind of substantial arguement to contradict my claims. It's the easy way out of an arguement, and an incident that your brain would rather not believe
You can do better than that..
0
Posted:
#39
Quote Originally Posted by smdio:
I was hoping for this question.
Right after I hit "submit" for the original post, I realized that I hadn't included where Flight 93 actually went.
Flight 93 landed in Cleveland at roughly 11:15 AM. At approximately 10:45 AM, all people inside the terminal and waiting areas of the airport were told they had to evacuate immediately. They were told they could not drive or take any of their vehicles. They were forced to WALK away from the airport, and not ask any questions.
Some people refused and tried to get back to gather their personal belongings. These people were told that if they did not comply and tried to gain access back to the airport, they would be shot on site.
At 11:15 AM, Flight 93 landed. At 11:45, it was evacuated and the passengers were taken to an inactive NASA hanger. What happened from there? It's anyone's guess. I highly doubt the government would have killed those passengers, but I absolutely believe that if they are capable of staging such attacks as the ones on the WTC, they are more than capable of sitting down 200 people, and giving them an ultimatum:
"You will not contact your famlies ever again. We will give you new lives with unlimited access to whatever you desire. We will place you in a very undisclosed location and give you new identities. We will watch every move you make and monitor every minute of your daily lives. Should you contact your family or speak of this to anyone, we will kill both them, and you."
Would you agree? I don't think you would have a choice..
smdio ... I also lost loved ones on that day .... matter of fact I was there that day.
I could dispute much of what you wrote in your original post simply by cutting and pasting stuff from numerous websites where this debate has previously taken place. Bottom line is, for every point there is a counterpoint.
As for your post to which I responded ... I'm not sure what to say about this theory, other than to say it is one of the more far fetched ones I have read yet.
The so called conspiracy was already complete with the crashing of the other planes, why would govt risk blowing their grand scheme by allowing so many witnesses to live? And then tell them to never contact their loved ones again and hope that actually happens, lest the greatest con job in the history of man gets blown out of the water? Sounds not only risky, but rather foolish for a group of people who are genius enough to pull off this scam, and to allow so many loose ends to exist. If this was in fact a govt scandal, wouldn't they have just killed everyone on flight 93? They killed thousands at the WTC, yet were concerned about those on flight 93?
In addition, so much of your original post, as well as the one above is simply internet rumors, with ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY no factual basis whatsoever.
It is a sad reflection on this country in general when so many actually want to believe that this attack on the U.S. was orchestrated by the U.S.
bigreds daddy
0
Posted:
#40
Quote Originally Posted by Hugh_Jorgan:
smdio ... I also lost loved ones on that day .... matter of fact I was there that day.
I could dispute much of what you wrote in your original post simply by cutting and pasting stuff from numerous websites where this debate has previously taken place. Bottom line is, for every point there is a counterpoint.
As for your post to which I responded ... I'm not sure what to say about this theory, other than to say it is one of the more far fetched ones I have read yet.
The so called conspiracy was already complete with the crashing of the other planes, why would govt risk blowing their grand scheme by allowing so many witnesses to live? And then tell them to never contact their loved ones again and hope that actually happens, lest the greatest con job in the history of man gets blown out of the water? Sounds not only risky, but rather foolish for a group of people who are genius enough to pull off this scam, and to allow so many loose ends to exist. If this was in fact a govt scandal, wouldn't they have just killed everyone on flight 93? They killed thousands at the WTC, yet were concerned about those on flight 93?
In addition, so much of your original post, as well as the one above is simply internet rumors, with ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY no factual basis whatsoever.
It is a sad reflection on this country in general when so many actually want to believe that this attack on the U.S. was orchestrated by the U.S.
Internet rumours that the South Tower, North Tower, and Tower #7 fell in free-fall speed?
Rumours that only 3 bulidings in our history have ever fallen because of fire?
Rumours that -zero- wreckage was ever recovered from Flight 93?
I want someone, ANYONE, to counter-act the point of WTC #7 had fallen in free-fall speed. I want someone to step up to the plate, and explain to me how, a 47 story building can collapse on itself, into a neat little pile, in the exact speed of free-fall, without the use of explosive devices.
When someone can do that, I'll agree to eliminate all my other points that I'm trying to make in this thread.
0
Posted:
#42
This is very sad.
People searching for answers but ignoring the most obvious explanation -- militant Islamists killed many people that day, motivated by an ideology based on hate of an out-group. If you study the history of AQ/militant Islam, you will see this was merely the next escalation in their war against the West. Listen to their words, speeches, and promises prior to 9/11 and hopefully that will lead you to greater understanding. A group of well-coordinated individuals carried out a well-timed attack successfully. The USA didn't guard against it because we never thought (1) that it would actually happen and (2) that someone would actually have the balls to try to pull it off. They did, and it worked.
Occam's Razor is the answer. It really, truly makes me sad that people continue to search for answers and look for "the man behind the curtain" when the real answer is staring them in the nose but they refuse to accept it.
My condolences smdio for your loss. I hope you find peace someday.
People searching for answers but ignoring the most obvious explanation -- militant Islamists killed many people that day, motivated by an ideology based on hate of an out-group. If you study the history of AQ/militant Islam, you will see this was merely the next escalation in their war against the West. Listen to their words, speeches, and promises prior to 9/11 and hopefully that will lead you to greater understanding. A group of well-coordinated individuals carried out a well-timed attack successfully. The USA didn't guard against it because we never thought (1) that it would actually happen and (2) that someone would actually have the balls to try to pull it off. They did, and it worked.
Occam's Razor is the answer. It really, truly makes me sad that people continue to search for answers and look for "the man behind the curtain" when the real answer is staring them in the nose but they refuse to accept it.
My condolences smdio for your loss. I hope you find peace someday.
0
Posted:
#43
But yet we still don't have anyone willing to engage the question of HOW IN THE NAME OF HELL Tower #7 fell in free fall speed.
Just people that say "boo haa it was the islamic militants" because that's what the Government wants you to believe
It's nice of you to give your opinion Kaponofor, but you're doing very little to speak in factual terms, or engage in debate
0
Posted:
#44
Quote Originally Posted by kaponofor3:
This is very sad.
People searching for answers but ignoring the most obvious explanation -- militant Islamists killed many people that day, motivated by an ideology based on hate of an out-group. If you study the history of AQ/militant Islam, you will see this was merely the next escalation in their war against the West. Listen to their words, speeches, and promises prior to 9/11 and hopefully that will lead you to greater understanding. A group of well-coordinated individuals carried out a well-timed attack successfully. The USA didn't guard against it because we never thought (1) that it would actually happen and (2) that someone would actually have the balls to try to pull it off. They did, and it worked.
Occam's Razor is the answer. It really, truly makes me sad that people continue to search for answers and look for "the man behind the curtain" when the real answer is staring them in the nose but they refuse to accept it.
My condolences smdio for your loss. I hope you find peace someday.
This is very sad.
People searching for answers but ignoring the most obvious explanation -- militant Islamists killed many people that day, motivated by an ideology based on hate of an out-group. If you study the history of AQ/militant Islam, you will see this was merely the next escalation in their war against the West. Listen to their words, speeches, and promises prior to 9/11 and hopefully that will lead you to greater understanding. A group of well-coordinated individuals carried out a well-timed attack successfully. The USA didn't guard against it because we never thought (1) that it would actually happen and (2) that someone would actually have the balls to try to pull it off. They did, and it worked.
Occam's Razor is the answer. It really, truly makes me sad that people continue to search for answers and look for "the man behind the curtain" when the real answer is staring them in the nose but they refuse to accept it.
My condolences smdio for your loss. I hope you find peace someday.
the pot calling the kettle black 
You completely ignored the OP, Okay so if it was Al Kayeeda or Qaeda howcomes our fantastic Army has not tracked him down? Howcomes Mossad have not found him? Simple Answer they dont want to and they dont need to. Islamic Militants are just scapegoats a nice target to direct the blame at and the media brainwashes innocent souls like you into believing they did it...and it worked i mean look at you and woopdurritis.
0
Posted:
#45
4.) Nothing even remotely close to an airplane crashed
in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. This is the famous "Let's Roll" passenger
group from Flight 93.
I lost a co-worker and good friend on that flight. Left behind two kids and one on the way. So you are saying there was no Flight 93? Or are you saying all the people on this flight, including my friend is somewhere in hiding !? That is downright ridiculous. Oh and people were able to use cell phones at the height they were flying at. Next time you are on a plane, keep your cell phone on, mine still works for quite a bit, however, not at 30k feet though.
I lost a co-worker and good friend on that flight. Left behind two kids and one on the way. So you are saying there was no Flight 93? Or are you saying all the people on this flight, including my friend is somewhere in hiding !? That is downright ridiculous. Oh and people were able to use cell phones at the height they were flying at. Next time you are on a plane, keep your cell phone on, mine still works for quite a bit, however, not at 30k feet though.
0
Posted:
#46
Quote Originally Posted by smdio:
Internet rumours that the South Tower, North Tower, and Tower #7 fell in free-fall speed?
Rumours that only 3 bulidings in our history have ever fallen because of fire?
Rumours that -zero- wreckage was ever recovered from Flight 93?
I want someone, ANYONE, to counter-act the point of WTC #7 had fallen in free-fall speed. I want someone to step up to the plate, and explain to me how, a 47 story building can collapse on itself, into a neat little pile, in the exact speed of free-fall, without the use of explosive devices.
When someone can do that, I'll agree to eliminate all my other points that I'm trying to make in this thread.
this is from the engineer of building 7.
view it with an open mind
bigreds daddy
0
Posted:
#47
Quote Originally Posted by smdio:
I was hoping for this question.
Right after I hit "submit" for the original post, I realized that I hadn't included where Flight 93 actually went.
Flight 93 landed in Cleveland at roughly 11:15 AM. At approximately 10:45 AM, all people inside the terminal and waiting areas of the airport were told they had to evacuate immediately. They were told they could not drive or take any of their vehicles. They were forced to WALK away from the airport, and not ask any questions.
Some people refused and tried to get back to gather their personal belongings. These people were told that if they did not comply and tried to gain access back to the airport, they would be shot on site.
At 11:15 AM, Flight 93 landed. At 11:45, it was evacuated and the passengers were taken to an inactive NASA hanger. What happened from there? It's anyone's guess. I highly doubt the government would have killed those passengers, but I absolutely believe that if they are capable of staging such attacks as the ones on the WTC, they are more than capable of sitting down 200 people, and giving them an ultimatum:
"You will not contact your famlies ever again. We will give you new lives with unlimited access to whatever you desire. We will place you in a very undisclosed location and give you new identities. We will watch every move you make and monitor every minute of your daily lives. Should you contact your family or speak of this to anyone, we will kill both them, and you."
Would you agree? I don't think you would have a choice..
Wow. I sure hope you don't believe something like that. If so that is saying alot about how intelligent you are. No offense, however, what you wrote is absolutely hilarious.
0
Posted:
#48
Smdio, it takes a lot of guts to come out and say what you have considering what happened to your father, and I commend you for that.
The evidence is overwhelming, and in my opinion, impossible to ignore. I assume you have already seen the documentary "loose change" on U Tube, which is one of the most compelling documentaries I have ever seen.
Unfortunately, this wasn't the first time a false flag operation was conducted, and they don't plan on it being the last either. When you control the media, you control everything. How could the news lie to us?
People ask why dwell on an event in the past? The answer is simple... they haven't completed their plan yet. Keep your head up man, your on the right path here.
0
Posted:
#49
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rhY9c_iemA
people who WANT to believe in something rarely see the truth, should that truth differ from that in which they desire to be reality.
anyone care to refute this video?
bigreds daddy
0
Hot Forum Topics
