Large Part Of 9/11 Answered In New Article

[Jeff]

wireless nano-thermite

Snicker while you can - Wireless nano-thermite is BEYOND PROVEN


If you're fooled by the facts cited in the original post you're beyond help.

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

wireless nano-thermite

Snicker while you can - Wireless nano-thermite is BEYOND PROVEN


If you're fooled by the facts cited in the original post you're beyond help.

Tell me specifically what part of this presentation of evidence you refute and why-

http://www.ae911truth.net/ppt/index.php

[barracuda]

Tell me specifically what part of this presentation of evidence you refute and why-

http://www.ae911truth.net/ppt/index.php

tl;dr - 583 pages

[orz]

Tell me specifically what part of this presentation of evidence you refute and why-

http://www.ae911truth.net/ppt/index.php

This part: http://www.ae911truth.net/ppt/index.php
Because it's a tedious slideshow on a 9/11 Truth fansite.

[nomo]

This part: http://www.ae911truth.net/ppt/index.php
Because it's a tedious slideshow on a 9/11 Truth fansite.

But dude, it's got pictures!!1!

[8bitagent]

It's dismaying how any of these threads turn into these mud-fests.

Thanks, 8bit, for a really interesting article and post.

Anyone with any sense of the real world knows that there are "good" FBI agents who were doing their damndest to investigate what happened. You can bet there are piles of evidence somewhere at the FBI, which if actually saw the light of day, could turn into a real investigation and draw some real conclusions.

This seems to be a case of someone actually finding this stuff.

Too many people here suffer from the "either/or" syndrome. Like the existence of one thing automatically rules out the other.

Back up a little bit and use some common sense -- What if the mission hadn't gone that well? What if these guys had been busted? Hm, let's see, there's a word I'm looking for to describe what would have been, at that point, found -- oh yeah, it's PATSIES.

They had PATSIES all set up in case the mission failed. Yes, Arabs. Yes, hijackers.

You know, like Lee Harvey Oswald.

Good grief ......

And the whole thing was set up for the buildings to completely disappear, to vanish with all those people inside them. That was the evil brillance of hte PSYOPS. I mean, we've all seen plane wrecks, even nasty ones, where everyone is killed. Had it just been a plane wreck into a building, that would have been a lot easier to deal with, psychologically, than the complete implosion, and the "now you see it, now it's GONE" affect that 9/11 had on everyone.

The whole thing was a PSYOPS operation, not just a plane wreck. And it was spectacularly successful, no matter who actually carried it out.

I mean, most people are extremely attached, emotionally and psychologically, to what they THINK happened that day.

That's why they get so emotional when you start pointing out the "smelliness" of the official story. People do NOT want their trauma to be rendered artificial, moot. They don't want to know they've been manipulated, that the whole emotional trauma they went through was nothing but the result of a horrible hoax.

Yep, not even the most fiercely anti imperialist far left educated thinker for the most part dares to question 9/11, citing it as "deadly blowback and grave intelligence failures".

Noam Chomsky, Naomi Klein, John Pilger...al people who KNOW whats up, even Reverend Wright, Ron Paul, ect call 9/11 "blowback". Blowback can blow it up people's asses.
The blowback/incompetence meme is an insult to anyone whose taken even a cursory look at the hijackers.

I don't know why the 9/11 truth movement as a whole seems to want to avoid talking about the mystery of the hijackers, Saudi/Pakistani/Dubai money trail, the FBI obstruction during Clinton and Bush, ect.

I don't know why the majority of "anti war" liberals buy into the official Bush 9/11 fable.

These I have no answers for, other than people like to stay inside their cushy feedback loop and cognitive dissonance. I actually applaud that 2006 South Park making fun of the "truth" movement. They hit it right on the dial.

[thegovernmentflu]

It's dismaying how any of these threads turn into these mud-fests.

Thanks, 8bit, for a really interesting article and post.

Anyone with any sense of the real world knows that there are "good" FBI agents who were doing their damndest to investigate what happened. You can bet there are piles of evidence somewhere at the FBI, which if actually saw the light of day, could turn into a real investigation and draw some real conclusions.

This seems to be a case of someone actually finding this stuff.

Too many people here suffer from the "either/or" syndrome. Like the existence of one thing automatically rules out the other.

Back up a little bit and use some common sense -- What if the mission hadn't gone that well? What if these guys had been busted? Hm, let's see, there's a word I'm looking for to describe what would have been, at that point, found -- oh yeah, it's PATSIES.

They had PATSIES all set up in case the mission failed. Yes, Arabs. Yes, hijackers.

You know, like Lee Harvey Oswald.

Good grief ......

And the whole thing was set up for the buildings to completely disappear, to vanish with all those people inside them. That was the evil brillance of hte PSYOPS. I mean, we've all seen plane wrecks, even nasty ones, where everyone is killed. Had it just been a plane wreck into a building, that would have been a lot easier to deal with, psychologically, than the complete implosion, and the "now you see it, now it's GONE" affect that 9/11 had on everyone.

The whole thing was a PSYOPS operation, not just a plane wreck. And it was spectacularly successful, no matter who actually carried it out.

I mean, most people are extremely attached, emotionally and psychologically, to what they THINK happened that day.

That's why they get so emotional when you start pointing out the "smelliness" of the official story. People do NOT want their trauma to be rendered artificial, moot. They don't want to know they've been manipulated, that the whole emotional trauma they went through was nothing but the result of a horrible hoax.

Yep, not even the most fiercely anti imperialist far left educated thinker for the most part dares to question 9/11, citing it as "deadly blowback and grave intelligence failures".

Noam Chomsky, Naomi Klein, John Pilger...al people who KNOW whats up, even Reverend Wright, Ron Paul, ect call 9/11 "blowback". Blowback can blow it up people's asses.
The blowback/incompetence meme is an insult to anyone whose taken even a cursory look at the hijackers.

I don't know why the 9/11 truth movement as a whole seems to want to avoid talking about the mystery of the hijackers, Saudi/Pakistani/Dubai money trail, the FBI obstruction during Clinton and Bush, ect.

I don't know why the majority of "anti war" liberals buy into the official Bush 9/11 fable.

These I have no answers for, other than people like to stay inside their cushy feedback loop and cognitive dissonance. I actually applaud that 2006 South Park making fun of the "truth" movement. They hit it right on the dial.

You're forgetting Michael Parenti. He has a large audience (though probably smaller than Chomsky) and he actually signed the original 911 Truth petition and breaches the 911 topic during speaking engagements.

It's always refreshing to see leftists getting involved in questioning 911. I've had enough of those right-wing "Patriot" types to last a lifetime.

[8bitagent]

It's always refreshing to see leftists getting involved in questioning 911. I've had enough of those right-wing "Patriot" types to last a lifetime.

I agree! Like Jeff, I get tired of the bullhorning Patriot Christian "everyone needs to own a gun, Mexicans are taking over!" types that make up a lot of the visible "truth movement" and anti New World Order brigade.

It's like "we must expose the Orwellian Nazi system...oh crap, whose letting these damn Mexicans in?"

That's why it's good to see Howard Zinn, Gore Vidal, Michael Parenti, and even Clinton apologist Naomi Wolf on the side of questioning 9/11.

Yet...Naomi Klein writes a book saying how governments use tragic events to steamroll preplanned agendas, YET calls it crazy to suggest they are sometimes actually engineering events.

A recent prominent African American news site had a gloriously scathing
article on the true evil of the US invasion of Afghanistan and the war on terror...yet calls 9/11 "deadly blowback". John Pilger who knows ALL about government staged genocide, also chides 9/11 as "blowback".

This is why 9/11 remains the ultimate litmus test; that which causes much cognitive dissonance. Thank GOODNESS for people like Peter Dale Scott.

[nathan28]

It's always refreshing to see leftists getting involved in questioning 911. I've had enough of those right-wing "Patriot" types to last a lifetime.

I agree! Like Jeff, I get tired of the bullhorning Patriot Christian "everyone needs to own a gun, Mexicans are taking over!" types that make up a lot of the visible "truth movement" and anti New World Order brigade.

It's like "we must expose the Orwellian Nazi system...oh crap, whose letting these damn Mexicans in?"

That's why it's good to see Howard Zinn, Gore Vidal, Michael Parenti, and even Clinton apologist Naomi Wolf on the side of questioning 9/11.

Yet...Naomi Klein writes a book saying how governments use tragic events to steamroll preplanned agendas, YET calls it crazy to suggest they are sometimes actually engineering events.

A recent prominent African American news site had a gloriously scathing
article on the true evil of the US invasion of Afghanistan and the war on terror...yet calls 9/11 "deadly blowback". John Pilger who knows ALL about government staged genocide, also chides 9/11 as "blowback".

This is why 9/11 remains the ultimate litmus test; that which causes much cognitive dissonance. Thank GOODNESS for people like Peter Dale Scott.

I am actually 100% okay with blowback theory. At least it, like, suggests that people should, like, learn history and study people that aren't from America and stuff.

that, and blowback is far more "actionalble" than the Deep State. What are you going to do? Have Congress pass a law that outlaws organized crime and accepting donations from organized crime? Government is the best scam there is, so it's not wonder that the mob wants in on the action, and unless any of us plan on moving into a hunter-gatherer society, the Libertania, or an energy-independent self-sustaining farm/commune, well, you aren't going to escape it anytime soon.

[smiths]

seriously 8bit, read the fucking book before you slag it off one more time

why the dialectical approach

CD versus phone logs and wire transfers,
true researchers versus gatekeepers

everytime you create the divide between the A's and the B's they win

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

Tell me specifically what part of this presentation of evidence you refute and why-

http://www.ae911truth.net/ppt/index.php

tl;dr - 583 pages

Yes, reading the material, or even scanning through to find the part on thermite, takes work, Jeff-orz-nomo.

[vigilant]

I know what a building should look like that simply falls under its own weight too from watching burning buildings on television.

How many of those buildings were 110 stories tall?

The manner in which this building suddenly disassembled itself at the top of the building, which didn't have the weight of the entire building on it, turned to powder and tiny chunks, and then hurled itself horizonatlly with massive force, has absolutely nothing to do with building height. It wouldn't matter if the building were ten stories or 1000, it would be strange for any building to do that without being aided by something that could deliver immense lateral force.


I do agree however that height would play a role in how far an object can fall away from the sidewalk because it would have further to "drift" as it fell. If a chunk of a building started to fall, it is likely that it might have a little bit of outward pressure and trajectory due to rolling off the debris under it or bouncing off something just under it. But this would be a much smaller pressure and the trajectory would still be "mostly" downward. The trajectory would by no means be as severly horizontal as what I have seen in the twin towers.

I didn't see pieces "drift" I saw pieces fly laterally with massive force. And height also doesn't explain how the top of the building, which didn't have the weight of the entire building on it, suddenly turned to powder. If it collapsed in the manner the official story describes, most of the debris, especially at the top of the building, should have been in enormous intact pieces that fell almost straight down into the street and sidewalk after coming unbound from the rest of the building. Not turned into powder and tiny chunks and hurled with such immense lateral force. I just can't see it...

[medicis]

Thanks 8bit and HMW et. al. for the info and points of view. No part of the psyop can be ignored. CD may have been focused on too much but the evidence supports that hypothesis rather better than the govt.'s absurdity. Regardless of what the naysayers and deriders like to dribble. Or should I say drool?

[vigilant]

Thanks 8bit and HMW et. al. for the info and points of view. No part of the psyop can be ignored. CD may have been focused on too much but the evidence supports that hypothesis rather better than the govt.'s absurdity. Regardless of what the naysayers and deriders like to dribble. Or should I say drool?

Which describes the event in a more believeable fashion based on what is there to actually see with your own eyes? For me that is the most important point in the entire CD debate.

You can throw out all the complicated physics and scale it down to a fifth grade science level and gain more clarity. If you think about it in the fashion I described it above it seems apparent enough for a fifth grader to understand.

A fifth grader can drop a rock off of a multi story building and understand this simple concept of downward vs massive lateral force. It seems to me that anyone that can't understand this simple concept is either letting someone else do their thinking, which is all to common these days due to the fact that we have commentary instead of news, or they are agenda driven...

[Nordic]

All you have to do is used your damn eyes with Building 7.

That building was destroyed from the bottom up.

No other building has ever collapsed in that fashion except in controlled demolition.

Not from earthquakes, not from fire, nothing. Show me one building, ever, that collapsed that way in an earthquake, anywhere in the world.

Just watch it for God's sake, without any preconceived notion about what "caused" it.

Then there's the very odd fact that the BBC reported it had collapsed BEFORE it had collapsed.

I mean, come on ......

What gets me is the level to which the PSYOPS worked on people! They have told the world that the sky is green, and most people are BELIEVING it! To me, THAT is the most astounding thing about 9/11. Exactly that. The degree to which most people, even intelligent people, have been told that down is up and black is white, and they fucking BELIEVE it.

It's really some sort of mass hypnosis/brainwashing thing unlike anything I've ever seen.

It really worked on the level of magic tricks. Illusionists. People who make those who view their tricks say "but I SAW that card (or girl, or horse, or plane) disappear! Right in front of my eyes!" It's EXACTLy like the Orson Welles "War of the Worlds" broadcast, except there was nobody, when it was over, saying "JUST KIDDING!"

So it stuck. I can't help but believe that the people who did 9/11 studied that broadcast and realized "hey, let's just fake it and tell them it's real, only we'll REALLY kill thousands of people and destroy huge, unsinkable landmarks!"