The Truth..

I can't help but come in here and just say I spit my water on my screen when I saw this. As an Operation Iraqi Freedom vet I think you're very much like the character Mel Gibson played in Conspiracy Theory. Maybe that's just me.
 
Flawless Image said:
ok, well go on about your day. I do appreciate your input..
Click to expand...



What was in building #7 that was worth faking a terrorist attack and hi-jacking US aircraft killing all those people and bringing our markets down to their knees to begin with..........?





Following your logic requires an answer to that end of it..........





What's you got.......?
 
Dave1 said:
What was in building #7 that was worth faking a terrorist attack and hi-jacking US aircraft killing all those people and bringing our markets down to their knees to begin with..........?





Following your logic requires an answer to that end of it..........





What's you got.......?
Click to expand...



How can you ask that? Have you never seen "The X-Files" or "24"? :woohoo:
 
Flawless Image said:
most of you will think im nuts or a traitor, but i feel it is my responsibility to post this.. I was a soldier in the Army and I served in Iraq twice so patriotism is not a factor in this. I support the people, not the ones in charge..



Watch the series if interested.. PM for lots more info if still interested.. Watch with an open mind..



YouTube - 9/11 Coincidences (Part One)
Click to expand...



Flawless......



Having watched this video series and many others (as a member of ATS) on conspiracy theories I am led to ask a few questions here in regards to the "part 1". Let's deal with the your first post here before we move on to other things, at least this way rabbit trails won't start.........hopefully.



As I re-read this post at the end of my work day I had more time to think about it and this statement caught my eye first.

I was a soldier in the Army and I served in Iraq twice so patriotism is not a factor in this. I support the people, not the ones in charge..
Click to expand...



If you've been to Iraq twice then you do serve "the ones in charge", correct?



Tell us also please, do you get any type of benefits from your service and if so why do you continue to accept them? My point here is that for you to call the government "traitors" in some fashion but then accept their benefits for your service appears to be, to me and perhaps others, hypocritical.....or contradictory at least.



Now having watched the videos let's deal with part 1 first. This video claims that only 3 buildings in history have fallen on the same day, in the same manner and owned by the same man, correct?



Does he also own the Pentagon? If not then why was it attacked?



Now did this man own any other buildings/property and if so why no damage to those? It would seem that the creator of these videos thinks the "owner" of the 3 buildings which went down is a key player in all this, if not then why mention him at all right?



Is it possible that the same man owning all 3 buildings is a tragic coincidence rather than a government plot?



Anthony
 
Jakerooni said:
You still have never answered the very simple question I've repeatadly asked over and over on here.... So what? What the heck are you going to do if this is all true? Are either of you 2 going to rise to power or something? Become the new leader of the rebelion?
Click to expand...





Let's us be reminded of what Edmund Burke said:



"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."



What can we do? You can tell 5 friends. Tell them to tell 5 friends, and on and on. Soon, hundreds become thousands. Thousands become millions, etc, etc...

Before you know it, there's an army of people.
 
III said:
Let's us be reminded of what Edmund Burke said:



"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."



What can we do? You can tell 5 friends. Tell them to tell 5 friends, and on and on. Soon, hundreds become thousands. Thousands become millions, etc, etc...

Before you know it, there's an army of people.
Click to expand...





I'll fully admit that the only reason I'm still entertaining this thread is simply because there really just are not any other interesting threads going on right now on Autopia. I've made my point and it's still very valid. Again I say so what? Now you have millions of people that over throw their own govenment that now can't lead ourselves or play a part in the world economy.... Yea us we win such a huge victory there. :usa:
 
Anthony Orosco said:
Now did this man own any other buildings/property and if so why no damage to those?
Click to expand...



Did this "man" own the building where Flight 93 was going to hit before it crashed in the fields of PA?



Entertaining conspiracy theories is fruitless although entertaining. It's laughable at best and scary at worst since people actually believe two-bit YouTube videos. With the Internet age, facts, research, credibility, etc... all go out with the bath water.



I love how we're getting our "facts" and information from some video and all the journalists in all facets of the media over the past 7 years are somehow absent from this major scoop :p They've uncovered the likes Watergate, CIA rendition flights, government wiretapping, confidential sources in all levels of government, etc... but have nothing about government involvement in 9/11?! Further, to plot, plan and carry out such a massive attack would require an extraordinary detailed planning by many individuals. Oh and it was done with no leaks. Bush couldn't fart without the media on him in regards to covert actions. Yet nobody can mention a single name or detailed aspect of government involvement. Instead they use words like "them" or "government" or "CIA" or "wealthy elite" blah, blah, blah. Like the old saying goes, "who, what, when, where and why."



Like Scott said, the federal, state and local response to Katrina was so inept and so pathetic, that they couldn't even get fresh water to people. But they can carry off blowing up the Pentagon and WTC's and wherever Flight 93 was going; all without a single leak or mistake?



Again, I'm still waiting for the response to my other post.



In your research, who runs the Federal Reserve?



In your research, what media outlets do the "same people that run the Federal Reserve" own?



In essence, In your research, who are "they?"



I'm curious because my cousin was a senior fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School and spent seven years on the board of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, three of them as chairman.
 
Spilchy said:
Like Scott said, the federal, state and local response to Katrina was so inept and so pathetic, that they couldn't even get fresh water to people. But they can carry off blowing up the Pentagon and WTC's and wherever Flight 93 was going; all without a single leak or mistake?
Click to expand...



So what to you think about the wild-fires in California that burn down mega-million dollar homes? Those people do get paid from their insurance co's, but the Gov't is there pretty fast with help.
 
Spilchy said:
Did this "man" own the building where Flight 93 was going to hit before it crashed in the fields of PA?



Entertaining conspiracy theories is fruitless although entertaining. It's laughable at best and scary at worst since people actually believe two-bit YouTube videos. With the Internet age, facts, research, credibility, etc... all go out with the bath water.



I love how we're getting our "facts" and information from some video and all the journalists in all facets of the media over the past 7 years are somehow absent from this major scoop :p They've uncovered the likes Watergate, CIA rendition flights, government wiretapping, confidential sources in all levels of government, etc... but have nothing about government involvement in 9/11?! Further, to plot, plan and carry out such a massive attack would require an extraordinary detailed planning by many individuals. Oh and it was done with no leaks. Bush couldn't fart without the media on him in regards to covert actions. Yet nobody can mention a single name or detailed aspect of government involvement. Instead they use words like "them" or "government" or "CIA" or "wealthy elite" blah, blah, blah. Like the old saying goes, "who, what, when, where and why."



Like Scott said, the federal, state and local response to Katrina was so inept and so pathetic, that they couldn't even get fresh water to people. But they can carry off blowing up the Pentagon and WTC's and wherever Flight 93 was going; all without a single leak or mistake?



Again, I'm still waiting for the response to my other post.



In your research, who runs the Federal Reserve?



In your research, what media outlets do the "same people that run the Federal Reserve" own?



In essence, In your research, who are "they?"



I'm curious because my cousin was a senior fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School and spent seven years on the board of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, three of them as chairman.
Click to expand...



since you seem to have the only valid questions and not just pulling straws..



First I will start with the Federal Reserve.. Is it believed by you and your cousin that the Reserve is run and owned by the government??



To be fair, I will quote a question and answer from the Federal Reserves Website..



Who owns the Federal Reserve?

The Federal Reserve System is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution. Instead, it is an independent entity within the government, having both public purposes and private aspects.



What are these private aspects? Want to know who is part of these private aspects? The Rockefellers. Why does a private family have "aspects" in OUR currency? Does this mean that they get richer off the interest we must pay with our taxes to thier printed money that is basically backed by air? Need proof on Rockefellers ownership?



The Fed’s website insists that it is not a private corporation, is not operated for profit, and is not funded by Congress. But is that true? The Federal Reserve was set up in 1913 as a "lender of last resort" to backstop bank runs, following a particularly bad bank panic in 1907. The Fed’s mandate was then and continues to be to keep the private banking system intact; and that means keeping intact the system’s most valuable asset, a monopoly on creating the national money supply. Except for coins, every dollar in circulation is now created privately as a debt to the Federal Reserve or the banking system it heads.4 The Fed’s website attempts to gloss over its role as chief defender and protector of this private banking club, but let’s take a closer look. The website states:



* "The twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by Congress as the operating arms of the nation’s central banking system, are organized much like private corporations – possibly leading to some confusion about "ownership." For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year."



* "[The Federal Reserve] is considered an independent central bank because its decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms."



* "The Federal Reserve’s income is derived primarily from the interest on U.S. government securities that it has acquired through open market operations. . . . After paying its expenses, the Federal Reserve turns the rest of its earnings over to the U.S. Treasury."5



So let’s review:



1. The Fed is privately owned.



Its shareholders are private banks. In fact, 100% of its shareholders are private banks. None of its stock is owned by the government.



2. The fact that the Fed does not get "appropriations" from Congress basically means that it gets its money from Congress without congressional approval, by engaging in "open market operations."



Here is how it works: When the government is short of funds, the Treasury issues bonds and delivers them to bond dealers, which auction them off. When the Fed wants to "expand the money supply" (create money), it steps in and buys bonds from these dealers with newly-issued dollars acquired by the Fed for the cost of writing them into an account on a computer screen. These maneuvers are called "open market operations" because the Fed buys the bonds on the "open market" from the bond dealers. The bonds then become the "reserves" that the banking establishment uses to back its loans. In another bit of sleight of hand known as "fractional reserve" lending, the same reserves are lent many times over, further expanding the money supply, generating interest for the banks with each loan. It was this money-creating process that prompted Wright Patman, Chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee in the 1960s, to call the Federal Reserve "a total money-making machine." He wrote:



"When the Federal Reserve writes a check for a government bond it does exactly what any bank does, it creates money, it created money purely and simply by writing a check."



3. The Fed generates profits for its shareholders.



The interest on bonds acquired with its newly-issued Federal Reserve Notes pays the Fed’s operating expenses plus a guaranteed 6% return to its banker shareholders. A mere 6% a year may not be considered a profit in the world of Wall Street high finance, but most businesses that manage to cover all their expenses and give their shareholders a guaranteed 6% return are considered "for profit" corporations.



In addition to this guaranteed 6%, the banks will now be getting interest from the taxpayers on their "reserves." The basic reserve requirement set by the Federal Reserve is 10%. The website of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York explains that as money is redeposited and relent throughout the banking system, this 10% held in "reserve" can be fanned into ten times that sum in loans; that is, $10,000 in reserves becomes $100,000 in loans. Federal Reserve Statistical Release H.8 puts the total "loans and leases in bank credit" as of September 24, 2008 at $7,049 billion. Ten percent of that is $700 billion. That means we the taxpayers will be paying interest to the banks on at least $700 billion annually – this so that the banks can retain the reserves to accumulate interest on ten times that sum in loans.



The banks earn these returns from the taxpayers for the privilege of having the banks’ interests protected by an all-powerful independent private central bank, even when those interests may be opposed to the taxpayers’ -- for example, when the banks use their special status as private money creators to fund speculative derivative schemes that threaten to collapse the U.S. economy. Among other special benefits, banks and other financial institutions (but not other corporations) can borrow at the low Fed funds rate of about 2%. They can then turn around and put this money into 30-year Treasury bonds at 4.5%, earning an immediate 2.5% from the taxpayers, just by virtue of their position as favored banks. A long list of banks (but not other corporations) is also now protected from the short selling that can crash the price of other stocks.



Time to Change the Statute?



According to the Fed’s website, the control Congress has over the Federal Reserve is limited to this:



"[T]he Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by Congress, which periodically reviews its activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute."



As we know from watching the business news, "oversight" basically means that Congress gets to see the results when it’s over. The Fed periodically reports to Congress, but the Fed doesn’t ask; it tells. The only real leverage Congress has over the Fed is that it "can alter its responsibilities by statute." It is time for Congress to exercise that leverage and make the Federal Reserve a truly federal agency, acting by and for the people through their elected representatives. If the Fed can demand AIG’s stock in return for an $85 billion loan to the mega-insurer, we can demand the Fed’s stock in return for the trillion-or-so dollars we’ll be advancing to bail out the private banking system from its follies.



If the Fed were actually a federal agency, the government could issue U.S. legal tender directly, avoiding an unnecessary interest-bearing debt to private middlemen who create the money out of thin air themselves. Among other benefits to the taxpayers. a truly "federal" Federal Reserve could lend the full faith and credit of the United States to state and local governments interest-free, cutting the cost of infrastructure in half, restoring the thriving local economies of earlier decades.







And who owns the majority of those banks? The Rocks. Of course their name is not on the front door, but any sense will tell you that anyone with tons of money can create a 'front company' to keep everything legit.. The point is that the 'private aspect' is something that most people dont know about. They create money backed by NOTHING. Then reap off of the interest. That is where national debt comes from..



cont..
 
Spilchy said:
In essence, In your research, who are "they?"
Click to expand...



People that want nothing more than to control everything.. People that are not happy with the unconceivable amount of money they have at thier disposal.. Of course I do not know who 'they' are by name. But if you want all the info I do have, PM me. Obviously, alot of people on here are enjoying the 'show' here. but i have said my piece. now, i will continue to discuss things with those few that have PM'd me.



Take care all..



edit: this is the best I can come up with right now for who 'they' are.. If you think they are someone other than who I say they are, please leave your opinion.. thanks!

YouTube - Bilderberg exposed - Part 1/6

and actually, parts one and two are kinda boring. if you dont have the patience to watch them all, watch part 3.

YouTube - Bilderberg exposed - Part 3/6
 
Anthony Orosco said:
Flawless......



Having watched this video series and many others (as a member of ATS) on conspiracy theories I am led to ask a few questions here in regards to the "part 1". Let's deal with the your first post here before we move on to other things, at least this way rabbit trails won't start.........hopefully.



As I re-read this post at the end of my work day I had more time to think about it and this statement caught my eye first.





If you've been to Iraq twice then you do serve "the ones in charge", correct?



Tell us also please, do you get any type of benefits from your service and if so why do you continue to accept them? My point here is that for you to call the government "traitors" in some fashion but then accept their benefits for your service appears to be, to me and perhaps others, hypocritical.....or contradictory at least.



Now having watched the videos let's deal with part 1 first. This video claims that only 3 buildings in history have fallen on the same day, in the same manner and owned by the same man, correct?



Does he also own the Pentagon? If not then why was it attacked?



Now did this man own any other buildings/property and if so why no damage to those? It would seem that the creator of these videos thinks the "owner" of the 3 buildings which went down is a key player in all this, if not then why mention him at all right?



Is it possible that the same man owning all 3 buildings is a tragic coincidence rather than a government plot?



Anthony
Click to expand...



Flawless,



I am re-posting my second post in this thread because you seem to believe nothing in it is serious or worthwhile, as if the questions I have asked are pointless, why is it you disregard the questions? Not that I am hurt personally by it, in fact you have every right NOT to reply but based on this reply from you you obviously have a criteria for questions you deem "worthy".



since you seem to have the only valid questions and not just pulling straws..
Click to expand...



Now granted spilchy does in fact, in my opinion, provide some great questions that should be replied to but to state that his is the "only valid" question raised is puzzling, especially when added with "and not just pulling straws" because you have based your entire belief system or world view on conjecture, hearsay, strawman arguments, misinformation and Youtube.



So when you use words like "valid" and "Truth" you set yourself up to a high degree of scrutiny for Truth is Absolute, not relative and you are then stating that you have or know the Absolute Truth in regards to 9/11 and these secretive groups but in reality you have no facts only a theory born from a conspirators mind. If you did in fact have these "facts" then they would be out already. They would not be hidden and kept to the dark secretive caves of the internet. How many liberal newspapers would LOVE to hang 9/11 on President Bush?? Yet where is the proof, witnesses, any evidence?



So many of these conspiracy loons paint President Bush as the biggest moron to walk God's green earth yet attribute to him the greatest cover up in the history of mankind....so Flawless, you have every right to believe what you do (this is what you fought for and I thank you for your service) concerning this but don't claim it to be "fact" or "Truth" but rather "in my opinion". Also, when you build your entire world view on conjecture and rumors it's difficult for you to then state that you'll only answer "valid" questions.....this then opens up questions like, "Who is to then define what 'valid' is?" Is YouTube a "valid" place for facts and truth? Sure it is.....as long as it agrees with my preconceived ideas of what "truly" took place.



Anthony
 
Anthony Orosco said:
Flawless,



I am re-posting my second post in this thread because you seem to believe nothing in it is serious or worthwhile, as if the questions I have asked are pointless, why is it you disregard the questions? Not that I am hurt personally by it, in fact you have every right NOT to reply but based on this reply from you you obviously have a criteria for questions you deem "worthy".







Now granted spilchy does in fact, in my opinion, provide some great questions that should be replied to but to state that his is the "only valid" question raised is puzzling, especially when added with "and not just pulling straws" because you have based your entire belief system or world view on conjecture, hearsay, strawman arguments, misinformation and Youtube.



So when you use words like "valid" and "Truth" you set yourself up to a high degree of scrutiny for Truth is Absolute, not relative and you are then stating that you have or know the Absolute Truth in regards to 9/11 and these secretive groups but in reality you have no facts only a theory born from a conspirators mind. If you did in fact have these "facts" then they would be out already. They would not be hidden and kept to the dark secretive caves of the internet. How many liberal newspapers would LOVE to hang 9/11 on President Bush?? Yet where is the proof, witnesses, any evidence?



So many of these conspiracy loons paint President Bush as the biggest moron to walk God's green earth yet attribute to him the greatest cover up in the history of mankind....so Flawless, you have every right to believe what you do (this is what you fought for and I thank you for your service) concerning this but don't claim it to be "fact" or "Truth" but rather "in my opinion". Also, when you build your entire world view on conjecture and rumors it's difficult for you to then state that you'll only answer "valid" questions.....this then opens up questions like, "Who is to then define what 'valid' is?" Is YouTube a "valid" place for facts and truth? Sure it is.....as long as it agrees with my preconceived ideas of what "truly" took place.



Anthony
Click to expand...



Anthony,



I apologize for not adressing your questions. They are in fact great questions. I must have accidentally skipped your post. I had not been on for several hours and i just scanned all the responses and i missed yours. So no, I am not saying your questions are not 'valid'. I was referring to all of the smart *** responses.



I am going to give an over-view of my place in all of this..



I was a soldier in the US Army from 1999-2005. Joined my junior year of high school and left for basic 2 weeks after graduation. During that time, I was sent to Iraq twice. Once for 18 months, and once for 9 months. I do not regret serving my country in the least bit. I saw and was part of alot of things that the media never played across national TV. But that is a story for another day..



I married my wife a little over a year ago. We have been together for 3 years. She has had Lyme Disease for 4 years. For those of you that don't know what Lyme Disease is, it is something that was created by our government on Plum Island. Plum Island is where they do research on chemical and biological weapons and test them on animals. During a hurricane years and years ago, alot of these animals got loose and made the short swim to the mainland. From that point on, Lyme has spread (mainly from Deer Ticks) all across the country. Now, hundreds of thousands are infected. Thousands have died. All of this IS fact and I CAN show legitimate proof to anyone sincerely interested.

The bad thing about having this disease is that it is not recognized as a 'problem'. Someone gets bit by a tick and within days, they feel like pure death. Lyme attacks the blood stream, nervouse system, all organs, brain, and even drill into your bones to 'hide' from antibiotics, only to come back and 'play' when your system is clear. According to the rules of the CDC (Center for Disease Control) and the IDSA (Infectuous Disease Society of America), doctors are only 'allowed' to treat Lyme with 28 days of anti-biotics and then EVERYONE is magically cured! Yes, doctors must follow these 'rules' or else they risk losing thier medical license and face lawsuits. War Over Lyme Disease

So for fear of these consequences, there are but a handful of doctors in the COUNTRY that will treat Lyme patients. I have to drive my wife 17 hours round trip once a month to see her specialist. You must pay in cash because insurance companies refuse to cover treatment OR medication. My monthly tab for both is roughly 4 thousand dollars. Without her meds, within weeks or months (if she is lucky), she will be in a wheelchair at best.. At worse, dead.. So like I said, Lyme is something that is killing people. West Nile (which is blown way out of proportion) is not 1% of what Lyme is. All of this can be verified with hard facts. I have been researching this for years, and I know more than most..



This disease eats into your brain (there is less bloodflow there and it is a place of refuge for the little bastards). Here is a picture of a Lyme Spirochette and a video of 'who it affects'.

Breaking News | Latest News | Current News - FOXNews.com

spirochete_small.jpg




and here is a brief over view of WHAT lyme is..

YouTube - Lyme Disease



THIS is what sent me on my 'mission' to find out WHY Lyme was being ignored by our 'government'..

-Cont.-
 
-Continued from last post-



So at this point, I was focussed on JUST Lyme Disease. I dug and dug and dug.



About a year ago, I came across the 9/11 thing.. Remember, I was sent to FIGHT for my country because of this terrorist attack. So dont think that I just watched a few Youtube videos and decided that it was a conspiracy. I laughed at the fact that ANYONE could think that it was possible. What kind of government would be willing to kill its own in the name of terrorism? And what positive outcome could possible come of it? What would they have to gain?



Here is what I know as FACTS. Looking back thru the history of mankind, governments have committed acts of 'false flag terrorism'. The definition is - False flag operations are covert operations conducted by governments, corporations, or other organizations, which are designed to deceive the public in such a way that the operations appear as though they are being carried out by other entities. So this is not unheard of.. It HAS and DOES happen! For example, There are many examples of false flag attacks through history.



An example of False Flag Terrorism: It is widely known that the Nazis, in Operation Himmler, faked attacks on their own people and resources which they blamed on the Poles, to justify the invasion of Poland. And it has now been persuasively argued — as shown, for example, in this History Channel video — that Nazis set fire to their own parliament, the Reichstag, and blamed that fire on others. The Reichstag fire was the watershed event which justified Hitler's seizure of power and suspension of liberties. proof: Operation Himmler - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Another example of False Flag Terrorism: Recently declassified U.S. Government documents show that in the 1960s, the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a plan code-named Operation Northwoods to blow up American airplanes (using an elaborate plan involving the switching of airplanes), and also to commit terrorist acts on American soil, and then to blame it on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion of Cuba. The operation was not carried out only because the Kennedy administration refused to implement these Pentagon plans.



This is from a declassified document that is in the National Security Archives! No youtube mumbo jumbo or media mis-information. This is YOUR governments attempt at False Flag Terrorism (aborted at last minute)

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/northwoods.pdf



Need anymore examples? I can keep them coming all day long..



-Continued-
 
Sorry to hear about your wife.



Around here you hear about a few cases of Lyme every year. Never follow up stories to see if they are ok.



The last couple years i have been bite twice, but did notice them within hours. Actually tick time is coming, as they are bad in the spring around here.



A couple years ago i was ATVing with my buddy in some bush, he was the lead which is why he got most of them, when we were finished he had 13 tick's on him and his cloths, never seen a grown man strip down to his gotch in 2 seconds and do the panic dance before.
 
-Continued from last post-



So, on to the facts that I know about 9/11.



1: Science backs me up completely on this one.. Steel melts at 2500 degrees fahrenheit (What's the melting point of steel?). The MAXIMUM temperature possibly attained by an open-aired, dirty, or uncontrolled fire with aeroplane fuel is 549.5 degrees fahrenheit (Jet fuel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

All of these are scientific facts! none are from 9/11 conspiracy websites. These are just the laws of science applied to Steel.

So now you may ask, who ever said anything about melted steel? Well, here are a few pictures of the 9/11 remains..

WtcSteel.jpg


liro_molten_02.jpg


If you are still confused and you may think, "they said the steel didnt melt, it just weakened enough to collapse". Well here are the main support beams on the GROUND FLOOR. Why would they have melted steel dripping off of them? And why are they 'cut' at angles like that? I will answer the second question after this picture..

thermite-thermate-wtc-steel400.jpg




2: This one is even better. Anyone familiar with Thermite? Thermite is a pyrotechnic composition of a metal powder and a metal oxide, which produces an aluminothermic reaction known as a thermite reaction. It is not explosive, but can create short bursts of extremely high temperatures focused on a very small area for a short period of time.

343155.jpg




Thermite (or Thermate) is used in demolition to melt thru steel very fast and easy. It does not explode. It is applied at angles so the building will drop in the direction they want it to, also called 'controlled demolition'



Traces of Thermite were found and tested at the site.. Why would ANY thermite be found at the site? Dont know.. You tell me..



Also, Thermite produces temperatures of 4500 degrees fehrenheit, and because of this heat, the color is beyond any fire you would usually see (normally red, orange, and sometimes blue). Thermite is so hot that it is quite a bit brighter and more concentrated than anything.

240406thermite2.jpg


thermite3.jpg




-Continued-
 
3: This one is fast and easy.. If it was SOOO freakin hot that steel 'failed', causing the building to collapse, shouldnt it be really really hot WHERE THE PLANE CRASHED! This poor lady didnt seem to think so..

170105woman.jpg




4: WTC 7 was not hit by ANY plane, but seem to collapse just as easy! All 3 buildings fell at free fall speeds. The laws of physics defy this feat.. WITH resistance from the floors below, the buildings should have never come to free fall speeds. Veterans for 911 Truth, Operation Vigilant Truth



5: The steel H-Beams. Tell me how in the hell a beam could warp like this WITHOUT an explosive force applied to it? I dont know..

horseshoe_r1_c2_s.jpg




6: The Pentagon has more CCTV cameras that any other building in the world, but for some reason, none of them show a plane hitting the building.. They show the explosion, but no plane.. google any video you would like. the pentagons cameras to the hotel across the street. no plane.



But, here are a few discrepancies with the 'attack'.

A) Since there was NO debris from the plane, that means it vaporized right? Here is a picture with an SUV just a few feet from where the wing should have vaporized.

The SUV seems unscathed.

133_285-_3.jpg




B) No plane parts. The cable reels about 20-30 feet from the wall of the Pentagon here not damaged at all.

Its important to note the "belly" of the plane is about 15 feet LOWER than the wings.

The largest of the cable reels stand over 6 feet tall.

For the "belly" of the plane to clear the cable reels,

the whole fuselage would have had to hit between the second and third floors.

This leaves the top of the tail section hitting the TOP of the FOURTH floor !

no damage was done above the SECOND floor shown in the photos taken before the collapse!

07mxq-00-_2.jpg




C) It is quite apparant that the plane did not strike the lawn.

200109114a_h5_2.jpg


Since we know that the "plane" hit higher than this (it didn't scrape the ground as shown)

and the right wing also had to clear the generator, this picture is not accurate.

BUT, it does show the long fuselage ready to hit BETWEEN the first and second floors.

If we take this to be true, this long fuselage, would have had a lot of resistance hitting the continuous concrete floor, not just going through a wall.

sozen.pentagon-.jpg


The "wing root " is the strongest part of the plane. This is where the wing attaches to the fuselage.

The wing roots would have impacted the wall of the building on either side of this hole.

There is no damage shown here. (green arrows)

This picture also shows the clearance of the cable reels, and the height of the generator. (~10ft)

The "plane" was supposedly hugging the ground, knocking over lamp poles, therefore, it could NOT have dove into the Pentagon, so on a level path, the right wing should clearly have hit the second or third floor, not the bottom of the first floor where most of the damage was done.

356243--2.jpg




So please tell me anything I have 'wrong' so far.. I have done alot of research on this BECAUSE I refuse to trust when my government TELLS me what to believe..



-Continued-
 
ok, its 4 in the morning.. got to get a few hours of sleep before work.. I will continue on with my 'facts' on my crazy conspiracy theory later today..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top