TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- New 9/11 Documentary, The peoples voice.
Pages (4): « 1 2 [3] 4 »
| quote: |
| Originally posted by SherlockCrash Personally I believe that the government was behind it, so I think that their response is most important. And their response is as I said a fariytale. I have looked at information from both sides. Thats enough. My TA visit has come to an end for this time, one can only stand so much hatred in so little time  Not directed at you ofcourse, that seems a little more civil then the rest.Have a nice one. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN What’s even funnier about his shitty example, is that the real demolition looks nothing like the towers. In true controlled demolition form, the building collapses from the bottom up, where obviously the towers fell from the impact zone down. |
Thermite, duh.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trance-M Maybe I have missed something, but is there meanwhile an obvious explanation for WTC7 which even engineers as I can believe? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trance-M I'm still believing the demolition expert Danny Jowenko |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trance-M (died in a car accident) |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trance-M I'm really surprised looking at the amount of recent replies watching some videos again. |
He was my age. 
Oh shit, he’s older than me! well there goes that excuse. How embarrassing.
Are we still saying 9/11 was an inside job? The only way it could have been an inside job is if some black ops invaded a Taliban camp and learnt there plan to crash those plans and then the black ops talked to their higher ups and just did nothing to stop it. But that is a super long shot that probably really didn't happen.
The other issue is the plane that supposedly hit the Pentagon and the other plane that got taken down headed for Camp David. Both those wreckage footage leaves a lot of questions as they did not look like a typical plane crash. The airplane that hit the Pentagon would have done way more damage with it's wing span and the plane the passengers took down was just a hole in the ground with smoke coming from it, there was not enough plane wreckage visible when you compare it to other known plane crashes were you see carnage and pieces of said planes all over the crash site. I'm just saying those 2 crashes do leave a lot of question un answered.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Desiderata I'm just saying those 2 crashes do leave a lot of question un answered. |
I'll agree with the Pentagon and Pennsylvania crashes. Didn't look like a plane hit the Pentagon at all.
Also does anyone remember when the FBI went to all places like gas stations and stores around the Pentagon and took their surveillance tapes, then when they released it they showed like 5 frames of video...always thought that was strangest thing.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Syntonic I'll agree with the Pentagon and Pennsylvania crashes. Didn't look like a plane hit the Pentagon at all. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Syntonic Also does anyone remember when the FBI went to all places like gas stations and stores around the Pentagon and took their surveillance tapes, then when they released it they showed like 5 frames of video...always thought that was strangest thing. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN WTC7 was smashed by debris from WTC1 and burned, unfought, for 6 or 7 hours. all the firemen in the vicinity knew WTC7 was going to come down. knock yourself out: http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstud...c/faqs_wtc7.cfm |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN yeah they do, if you're a lazy fuck that hasn't bothered to read anything written on the subject in the last decade just because you're an ignorant tool doesn't mean we all are. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Desiderata Yeah man, I'm with you, I don't doubt I'm ignorant on this subject but if you were to be so kind to hip me on these reading you have found I would love to read them. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trance-M I think it's also strange that other buildings which caught fire in the past didn't collapse even after days of fire. And then this one does and also in a perfect way, which IMO at least is strange. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trance-M Just wondering, I heard firemen say "It's gonna blow", do you use "blow" also like "collapse"? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trance-M The car incident probably just was coincidence, they said he had been drinking, but the timing short after his interview was remarkable. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN mark roberts' site is a one-stop shop for all the nonsense and lies spread by the "truth" movement. here is the pentagon/flight 77 evidence: https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7l...evidencesummary |
you're welcome. i apologise for my previous reaction; i have no patience on these topics.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN you're welcome. i apologise for my previous reaction; i have no patience on these topics. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN WTC7 also didn’t collapse in a “perfect” way, it fell slightly to the side, and crashed into another building if I recall correctly. There’s no doubt that the videos available make it look like a controlled demolition though, but looks can be deceiving. If you have specific queries then the link I provided at NIST should address those issues. |
| quote: |
I don’t know. You’d have to ask the fireman. There are numerous quotes from firies at the site which indicated they knew the building was in trouble. |
I just meant in general for native English speaking.| quote: |
Jowenko was making statements about demolition years before he died in the car crash. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trance-M but at the same time also in the fact that the fire possibly wasn't severe enough to cause it. |
| quote: |
| The Writings of George Washington from the Original Manuscript Sources, 1745-1799. John C. Fitzpatrick, Editor. Mount Vernon, October 24, 1798. Revd Sir: I have your favor of the 17th. instant before me; and my only motive to trouble you with the receipt of this letter, is to explain, and correct a mistake which I perceive the hurry in which I am obliged, often, to write letters, have led you into. It was not my intention to doubt that, the Doctrines of the Illuminati, and principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more truly satisfied of this fact than I am. The idea that I meant to convey, was, that I did not believe that the Lodges of Free Masons in this Country had, as Societies, endeavoured to propagate the diabolical tenets of the first, or pernicious principles of the latter (if they are susceptible of seperation). That Individuals of them may have done it, or that the founder, or instrument employed to found, the Democratic Societies in the United States, may have had these objects; and actually had a seperation of the People from their Government in view, is too evident to be questioned. My occupations are such, that but little leisure is allowed me to read News Papers, or Books of any kind; the reading of letters, and preparing answers, absorb much of my time. With respect, etc. |
New 9/11 Documentary - Of His Own Free WIll, Truther Completely Reverses His Stand
That's a great video because it really does showcase the religious "faith" mentality of the conspiracy. This Veitch guy provides a series of rational explanations for everything and the other guy just goes back to some gut feeling - "It just feels impossible to me". The feeling comes first and everything - the motive, the evidence - is reverse engineered around that.
If you apply any logic at all, none of the 9/11 theory makes sense. Why would the American government need to demolish the towers, or hit the Pentagon with a missile, smuggle away all the plane passengers, kill them and dispose of their bodies, make the building fall in a certain direction, and so on and on and on? They could create the shock, awe and fear required just by planting pilots or operatives on the planes and flying them into the building. Hundreds die, public landmarks are ruined on international television, a state of fear is created. Or why even fly planes? Just blow the building up and claim it was a successful bombing - Al Qaeda had already tried it once in the 1990s. You don't even have to pick it apart point by point - it's just utterly ludicrous to mock up the scenario in such a ridiculously complex manner. The same result could be achieved with so much more simplicity and infallability. But of course, then there'd be no real evidence, nothing to work off. It'd be simply too plausible.
It all starts with a feeling - paranoid emotion, embodied in a visual image. The guy is right. It's exactly like a religion.
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.