Shimmy, shimmy, coco bop.Originally posted by: event8horizon
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Did you even pay even the least bit of attention to what I told you? Doesn't seem as if you did. If there were explosions then it completely invalidates your theory about thermate because thermate doesn't explode. Nor does someone claiming that they thought they heard an explosion mean a damn thing.Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc- ill answer your questions a few at a time. gotta do the mr mom thing today.
the movie also had wtc 7 in it.
1. did u listen to that eyewittness account of hearing a loud explosion at the base of wtc7.
there are multiple videos/accounts of "explosions".
as for the whole "did they rig demoliton where the airliners hit.....this is an interesting article.
Start explaining that discrepancy in your own words and stop cutting and pasting from wingnut websites that are headed by proven habitual liars and distorters of facts. Start explaining how demolitions could have been rigged in advance to begin the collapse on BOTH towers precisely where the airliners hit the building too. Stop evading and avoiding. If you can't do any of that, just plain stop because once again you are not providing answers, you are flinging conspiracies to and fro, none of which have any credibility and none of which are answers to my questions.
tlc-i havent forgot about ya!! i just got alot i have to do today!! im trying to get through your long rebuttal. its just going to take awhile.
thats all hypothetical and off topic for this thread b/c we are concentrating on wtc 7 that did not get hit by an airplane. but i admit, it was damaged. only we dont know how much because they did not analyze the steel. did the steel buckle or was it cut?? we will never know.
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
So what? Israelis aren't allowed to own companies? Nor did you acknowledge the fact that the article you posted was wrong in many factual areas. You chose to ignore it instead and blindly move on.Originally posted by: event8horizon
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Actually, ICTS is a Dutch company, not an Israeli company. Addionally Huntleigh USA only oversaw checkpoint security for United at Boston Logan airport. American Airlines security at Logan was provided by Globe Aviation Services (British). Security at Dulles and Newark was provided by Argenbright (Swedish). So, as you can see, it was not unusual in the least for foreign owned companies to provide security for US airports.Originally posted by: event8horizon
Strangely, Huntleigth USA, an airport passenger screening company owned by Israel?s International Consultants on Targeted Security (ICTS), led by ?former Israeli military commanders and members of its intelligence and security agencies,? received congressional immunity for failed airport security at Boston and Newark airports where three of the four doomed planes originated on September 11.
So, once again, the 9/11 conspiracy goobers can't get the actual facts of the matter straight. They embellish, and flat out lie to attempt to raise a spectre where none really exists. Besides that, stop trotting out articles from the kool-aid swilling nutjob websites. Tom Flocco has no credibility. He's a wing-nut and a proven liar.
how about this-
http://www.thebarrychamishwebs...etters/atzmon70506.htm
Menachem Atzmon resigned as president of Friedman's IDF following his
1996 conviction of Friedman's IDF following his conviction for
Israeli election campaign finance fraud.But his later U.S. activities
would prove to be much more disturbing.Atzmon and his business partner Ezra Harel are the majority owners(57%)of ICTS - International
Consultants on Targeted Security, run by 'former(Israeli)military
commanding officers and veterans of government intelligence and
security agencies' according to its website.In 1999, Atzmon's
Netherlands based firm took over management of security at Logan
Airport in Boston Massachusetts through ICTS' subsidiary Huntleigh
USA.This convicted Likud criminal's firm was in charge of security at
Logan Airport - inspecting the validity of passports and visas,
searching cargo, screening passengers-when two airliners were hijacked
from there on September 11,2001, and demolished the World Trade Center
Towers in New York.........
This implication that because an Israeli owns this company that 9/11 was some Zionist conspiracy is anti-semitism at its finest, not to mention an idiotic assumption.
What is your major malfunction that you can't provide answers to the questions put to you? You continually go off on some strange tangent or copy & paste some oddball website.Originally posted by: event8horizon
u said it was dutch not israeli. well this guy states bollyn got his info from this article.
But his later U.S. activities would prove to be much more disturbing.Atzmon and his business partner Ezra Harel are the majority owners(57%)of ICTS - International
Consultants on Targeted Security, run by 'former(Israeli)military
commanding officers and veterans of government intelligence and
security agencies' according to its website.In 1999, Atzmon's
Netherlands based firm took over management of security at Logan
Airport in Boston Massachusetts through ICTS' subsidiary Huntleigh
USA.
well didnt fkight 11 come out of logan??
American Airlines Flight 11 was a scheduled U.S. domestic passenger flight from Logan International Airport. did that first faa report state there was a gun on board and daniel lewin got shot. well, it looks like huntleigh was in charge of security there from what the article states. as for daniel lewin:Lewin was born in Denver, Colorado and raised in Jerusalem, where he served for four years in the Israel Defence Forces. He was an officer in Sayeret Matkal, an elite and secretive intelligence unit.
He attended the Technion university in Haifa, Israel while simultaneously working at IBM's research laboratory in Haifa.
this guy was a BAD ASS and they got the best of him with a boxcutter or a gun as the first faa memo states!! who was in charge of security?? from sayeret matkal: Its main roles are counter-terrorism, deep reconnaissance and intelligence gathering, but the unit is first and foremost a field intelligence-gathering unit, used to obtain strategically important intelligence far behind enemy lines.
from tlc "This implication that because an Israeli owns this company that 9/11 was some Zionist conspiracy is anti-semitism at its finest, not to mention an idiotic assumption. "
come on tlc, is that italian ex prez's quote about cia,mossad, and zionist world antisemetic?? these guys are part of the 911 story. it not my fault they are in the locations they were in. u know, one mossad guy getting caught celebrating with the towers burning in the background. what are the chances of even catching a mossad agent considering there are only 1500-2000 of them from what ive read.
ps- mossad motto- by way of deception thou shalt do war.
Don't tell me that you're really THAT ignorant.Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc-u said that company was dutch. as for your attack "not to mention your anti-semitic paranoid delusions" statement, i was just showing how one can find israeli's under many rocks on 911. that article was just shedding light on the fact that the "International Consultants on Targeted Security, run by 'former(Israeli)military
commanding officers and veterans of government intelligence and
security agencies".
anyway, ill have go back and look at those questions
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
So what? Israelis aren't allowed to own companies? Nor did you acknowledge the fact that the article you posted was wrong in many factual areas. You chose to ignore it instead and blindly move on.Originally posted by: event8horizon
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Actually, ICTS is a Dutch company, not an Israeli company. Addionally Huntleigh USA only oversaw checkpoint security for United at Boston Logan airport. American Airlines security at Logan was provided by Globe Aviation Services (British). Security at Dulles and Newark was provided by Argenbright (Swedish). So, as you can see, it was not unusual in the least for foreign owned companies to provide security for US airports.Originally posted by: event8horizon
Strangely, Huntleigth USA, an airport passenger screening company owned by Israel?s International Consultants on Targeted Security (ICTS), led by ?former Israeli military commanders and members of its intelligence and security agencies,? received congressional immunity for failed airport security at Boston and Newark airports where three of the four doomed planes originated on September 11.
So, once again, the 9/11 conspiracy goobers can't get the actual facts of the matter straight. They embellish, and flat out lie to attempt to raise a spectre where none really exists. Besides that, stop trotting out articles from the kool-aid swilling nutjob websites. Tom Flocco has no credibility. He's a wing-nut and a proven liar.
how about this-
http://www.thebarrychamishwebs...etters/atzmon70506.htm
Menachem Atzmon resigned as president of Friedman's IDF following his
1996 conviction of Friedman's IDF following his conviction for
Israeli election campaign finance fraud.But his later U.S. activities
would prove to be much more disturbing.Atzmon and his business partner Ezra Harel are the majority owners(57%)of ICTS - International
Consultants on Targeted Security, run by 'former(Israeli)military
commanding officers and veterans of government intelligence and
security agencies' according to its website.In 1999, Atzmon's
Netherlands based firm took over management of security at Logan
Airport in Boston Massachusetts through ICTS' subsidiary Huntleigh
USA.This convicted Likud criminal's firm was in charge of security at
Logan Airport - inspecting the validity of passports and visas,
searching cargo, screening passengers-when two airliners were hijacked
from there on September 11,2001, and demolished the World Trade Center
Towers in New York.........
This implication that because an Israeli owns this company that 9/11 was some Zionist conspiracy is anti-semitism at its finest, not to mention an idiotic assumption.
Originally posted by: vhx
I have some skepticism regarding 9/11 and have talked to others around here about their thoughts as well and have come up with the 3 main ones that people discuss and talk about.
WTC 7 - Fell at feel fall speeds, the inner column died before the rest of the building which a lot of people attribute to demolitions or some secondary explosions. News agencies reported on scene "Oh the building is collapses!" only to have a shot of the building not budging. Then a minute later it collapses.
Flight 93 - Just hunks of metal everywhere, little evidence of actual pieces. Investigators on the scene report things like it's like someone just dumped metal scraps everywhere or something to that effect. Also the fact that the metal pieces were scatted over a huge area? I could see that happening if it was shot down or something.
Originally posted by: event8horizon
wolf
we can talk egyptian with ali mohammed
saudi with that article describing that cia interogation where i think 3 princes and an airforce major (or a high rank, i cant remember which) that was pakistani was connected to 911......then all died after the guy talked!!!!
or pakistani wih general mehood ahmed (ex leader of isi) sending atta 100g.
on the states side, one finds israeli's and israeli "art students" right down the street from the alleged terrorists.
u can find that info in the other thread.
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Originally posted by: vhx
I have some skepticism regarding 9/11 and have talked to others around here about their thoughts as well and have come up with the 3 main ones that people discuss and talk about.
WTC 7 - Fell at feel fall speeds, the inner column died before the rest of the building which a lot of people attribute to demolitions or some secondary explosions. News agencies reported on scene "Oh the building is collapses!" only to have a shot of the building not budging. Then a minute later it collapses.
the building took over 18 second to collapse. that's no where near free fall. in fact, it's downright slow.
Flight 93 - Just hunks of metal everywhere, little evidence of actual pieces. Investigators on the scene report things like it's like someone just dumped metal scraps everywhere or something to that effect. Also the fact that the metal pieces were scatted over a huge area? I could see that happening if it was shot down or something.
an aluminum can hits the ground at 580 mph. what do you expect is going to happen? everything sits in one nice little pile easily identifiable as an airliner? the vast majority of debris was found buried in the crater or in the immediate vicinity. the cockpit voice recorder was 12 feet underground! the bits of debris found downwind were nylon, paper, insulation, etc. stuff that could easily be carried in the wind.
Originally posted by: vhx
I have some skepticism regarding 9/11 and have talked to others around here about their thoughts as well and have come up with the 3 main ones that people discuss and talk about.
WTC 7 - Fell at feel fall speeds, the inner column died before the rest of the building which a lot of people attribute to demolitions or some secondary explosions. News agencies reported on scene "Oh the building is collapses!" only to have a shot of the building not budging. Then a minute later it collapses.
Pentagon attack - Not sure what to make of this but apparently the accounting section with the records was hit. Then the discovery of the Pentagon missing like 20% of it's annual budget, didn't help conspiracy matters much. You also have that and the fact they confiscated all of the videos taken involving the crash from stores and places around. Yet they release 3 frames of something so blurry it could be anything. Why choose footage that a Webcam from the 1990's could outperform? Why not give us all of them? Why confiscate them in the first place? National security is no excuse, the two towers were being hit by airplanes over and over all day in the media.
Flight 93 - Just hunks of metal everywhere, little evidence of actual pieces. Investigators on the scene report things like it's like someone just dumped metal scraps everywhere or something to that effect. Also the fact that the metal pieces were scatted over a huge area? I could see that happening if it was shot down or something.
I think people cling to most of the coincidences that happened on 9/11 to the conspiracy theories. Examples: 3 Jets at Andrews AFB flew 180 miles away on 9/11, a simulated hijacking of planes taken place ON 9/11 to add to the confusion, another exercise on 9/11 morning to simulate crashing planes into government buildings, etc. Then you compound to the fact you have the war in Iraq being on false information and deliberate lies, I don't blame anyone at this point for not believing the government stories.
The point is, we'll never know. Even if you had proof or documents, the fact the MSM being so tightly controlled means, you wouldn't get anything on the air/
Anyways, someone sent me a list awhile ago of 250 coincidences regarding 9/11. http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html The guys site is retarded, however I think they did a good job of sourcing each of their claims in the media with links. Flame me on I suppose.
Maj. Gen. Larry Arnold
Our standard, we have agreements with the FAA. And by the way, we are looking outward, this is an advantage to us. And so we have agreements for clearance. When we scramble an aircraft, there is a line that?s picked up and the FAA and everyone is on that line and the aircraft take off and they have a predetermined departure route. And, of course, it?s out over water because our mission, unlike law enforcement?s mission is to protect things coming towards the United States. And I might even add in all of our terrorist scenarios that we run, the aircraft, if we were to intercept an aircraft, it is usually always from outside the United States coming towards us. So, our peacetime procedures are (garbled) to de-conflict with civil aviation so as to not have, endanger civil aviation in any particular way.
Originally posted by: event8horizon
wolf
we can talk egyptian with ali mohammed
saudi with that article describing that cia interogation where i think 3 princes and an airforce major (or a high rank, i cant remember which) that was pakistani was connected to 911......then all died after the guy talked!!!!
or pakistani wih general mehood ahmed (ex leader of isi) sending atta 100g.
on the states side, one finds israeli's and israeli "art students" right down the street from the alleged terrorists.
u can find that info in the other thread.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A That clip is only 9 seconds long, only 6 seconds of it shows it collapsing (Of course there's probably 4 seconds more of it falling to the ground). I didn't see any of the flying debris shown in your picture, however.Originally posted by: BeauJangles
1. WTC 7 did not fall at "free fall speeds." If you dropped a ball off the roof of the WTC towers without wind resistance, it would take about 9.22 seconds to hit the ground. Therefore, the claims that the WTC fell in less than 9 seconds or less than 10 seconds are physically impossible.
Look at this photo - http://www.911myths.com/assets/images/Collapse.jpg
Notice how large pieces of debris are clearly falling faster than the rest o fhte building. Therefore, the entire building could not have collapsed at "free fall speeds" because those pieces ARE in free fall.
I think a better established collapse time for the towers is around 14 seconds, much slower than free fall speeds.
Was referring to at the time.2. 20% of the budget WASN'T MISSING. I detailed this in a previous post, but the DOD had been having accounting issues for years (1990s). There was 2.3 trillion dollars which hadn't been properly accounted for in a report released in February 2001. By 2003, all but $700 million dollars had been properly accounted for. If the DoD was having budgetary issues for decades, why did it make sense to attack the Pentagon in Sept 2001?
Your quibble about the camera is ridiculous. The plane was traveling at 400 mph. These aren't high-speed cameras, they're regular 32 - 35 fps security cameras. At 400 mph, the plane would only be visible for three or four frames.
4. Until after 9/11, the USAF only kept 15 jets on standby across the country. Standby means they're ready to roll at a moment's notice. Andrews AFB had no fighters or aircraft on standby on Sept 11, the nearest planes took off from Otis AFB, in MA. Because of rules in place prior to Sept 11, those planes could not fly at supersonic speeds, though the pilots testified that they did exceed supersonic speeds.
Otis AFB is about 192 miles away from the Twin Towers in a straight shot. It isn't unreasonable to think that these planes may have headed out to sea in order to avoid civilian air traffic and to avoid flying over densely populated areas... that would increase the flight distance by about 35 miles.
Originally posted by: vhx
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A That clip is only 9 seconds long, only 6 seconds of it shows it collapsing (Of course there's probably 4 seconds more of it falling to the ground). I didn't see any of the flying debris shown in your picture, however.
Was referring to at the time.
What kind of response is this? Your useless rant to this IS ridiculous. Not all the camera's were the same distance as the one who took the released 3-4 frames. By your logic, there shouldn't of been any security cam footage of the WTC's being hit. :roll: Cams further away could no doubt see a plane flying through the air and positioning itself towards the Pentagon, coming down, and hitting the Pentagon. Unless of course you are saying the pilot was an expert flying practically on the road to avoid any detection.
Also, it still doesn't explain why the confiscated it. Since apparently nothing was on it, being so fast the footage would be 'useless' (accord to you), they would have no reason to confiscate useless evidence.
I never said it was unreasonable, in fact I am aware of this. However, I'm sure most people would expect some sort of aviation emergency plan (or something) to where they could get places faster without having to go around long enough to become useless. Even if they went out to sea, they'd still have to contend with international civilian airlines. (Atleast until one tower got hit and they stopped air travel) Also this example you are referring to isn't really that big. I wrote it off as just taking too long (long ago), rather than anything 'sinister', as I am sure most people have.
this is really for the other thread-Originally posted by: BeauJangles
Originally posted by: event8horizon
wolf
we can talk egyptian with ali mohammed
saudi with that article describing that cia interogation where i think 3 princes and an airforce major (or a high rank, i cant remember which) that was pakistani was connected to 911......then all died after the guy talked!!!!
or pakistani wih general mehood ahmed (ex leader of isi) sending atta 100g.
on the states side, one finds israeli's and israeli "art students" right down the street from the alleged terrorists.
u can find that info in the other thread.
You never answered my questions. After your extensive analysis, who is responsible for 9/11? What did they have to gain? What was their plan? How did they execute their plan?
Originally posted by: event8horizon
this is really for the other thread-Originally posted by: BeauJangles
Originally posted by: event8horizon
wolf
we can talk egyptian with ali mohammed
saudi with that article describing that cia interogation where i think 3 princes and an airforce major (or a high rank, i cant remember which) that was pakistani was connected to 911......then all died after the guy talked!!!!
or pakistani wih general mehood ahmed (ex leader of isi) sending atta 100g.
on the states side, one finds israeli's and israeli "art students" right down the street from the alleged terrorists.
u can find that info in the other thread.
You never answered my questions. After your extensive analysis, who is responsible for 9/11? What did they have to gain? What was their plan? How did they execute their plan?
cossiga said it best when he said "[Bin Laden supposedly confessed] to the Qaeda September [attack] to the two towers in New York [claiming to be] the author of the attack of the 11, while all the [intelligence services] of America and Europe ... now know well that the disastrous attack has been planned and realized from the CIA American and the Mossad with the aid of the Zionist world in order to put under accusation the Arabic Countries and in order to induce the western powers to take part ... in Iraq [and] Afghanistan."
and with mossad celebrating with the twin towers in the background.
and with people coming out and giving us this:
In addition to overhearing in Hebrew, the statements, ?The Americans will learn what it is to live with terrorists after the planes hit the twins in September?, and ?Don?t worry, we have people in high places and no matter who gets elected, they will take care of everything?, the source also reports that he overheard one of the three men in the Gomel Chesed Cemetery say, ?The Arabs are so stupid. They don?t even imagine that we are using them.? This comment should not be overlooked.
as for gaining, as greenspan said about the oil in iraq then restated the whole oil routes ,(thats not a direct quote) bases in iraq (which probably arent going to happen) pipeline through afghanistan which enron was trying to work out with the taliban.
didnt a rockefellar talk to russo about an attack (911) and bases and a pipeline. according to russo, they were going to overthrough or take out chavez in venezuela. damn chavez nationalizing oil and their central bank. found that vid-
http://video.google.com/videop...id=1263677258215075609
lets not forget iran. bush has already mentioned iran and ww3!!!
as for execution, look into the ptech software and the war games that day. what the cia was doing in those wargames is classified i remember reading about. also look into who daquired the software and the financers. u might find some interesing folks with stange ties.
I'll reiterate, because I've been nagging him for some time now to spell out his beliefs. event8horizon will avoid making any stance because he knows he will have to provide answers to a barrage of questions related to that stance if he does. Therefore he completely evades any possibility of being put on the defensive by bobbing and weaving around the subject. This is a standard ploy by the CT crowd. I've seen it a hundred times from them and event8horizon is no different. It's as if it's a standard playbook tactic for them that they employ. That's why the guy is a complete waste of time. He's scared shitless of making his beliefs known, which indicates that he has no real conviction or security in his knowledge of 9/11. He only knows what little he knows and clings to that as a security blanket.Originally posted by: BeauJangles
You named a lot of people, but haven't yet told me exactly what anybody who supposed orchestrated this huge conspiracy actually DID. What brought down the WTC and who did it? This question shouldn't be that complicated.
Originally posted by: dualsmp
I think NIST needs to have a chat with Larry Silverstein the owner of the WTC complex. Silverstein states they "pulled" WTC 7 and watched it collapse. "Pulled" being a term for blowing up a building in demolition lingo. Video here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100