Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums
Over 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers (it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

Gifts and supplies for the musician
SEARCH
the Forums & Piano World

This custom search works much better than the built in one and allows searching older posts.
Ad (Piano Sing)
How to Make Your Piano Sing
(ad) Pearl River
Pearl River Pianos
(ad 125) Sweetwater - Digital Keyboards & Other Gear
Digital Pianos at Sweetwater
(ad) Pianoteq
(ad) P B Guide
Acoustic & Digital Piano Guide
Who's Online
153 registered (36251, ajames, accordeur, Achilleas, 32 invisible), 1852 Guests and 29 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Quick Links to Useful Piano & Music Resources
Our Classified Ads
Find Piano Professionals-

*Piano Dealers - Piano Stores
*Piano Tuners
*Piano Teachers
*Piano Movers
*Piano Restorations
*Piano Manufacturers
*Organs

Quick Links:
*Advertise On Piano World
*Free Piano Newsletter
*Online Piano Recitals
*Piano Recitals Index
*Piano & Music Accessories
*Music School Listings
* Buying a Piano
*Buying A Acoustic Piano
*Buying a Digital Piano
*Pianos for Sale
*Sell Your Piano
*How Old is My Piano?
*Piano Books
*Piano Art, Pictures, & Posters
*Directory/Site Map
*Contest
*Links
*Virtual Piano
*Music Word Search
*Piano Screen Saver
*Piano Videos
*Virtual Piano Chords
(ad) Estonia Piano
Estonia Pianos
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Topic Options
#705262 - 01/30/05 07:12 AM Fahrenheit 9/11
Takeshi_Jay Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 01/30/05
Posts: 7
Do people believe this documentary? I kinda do, in a way. The movie definitely proved it's point. Also, for those living in England, had a chance to see it on TV on Channel 4. This was a terrible attack and I doubt anybody would ever forget this. New York will never be the same.
_________________________
How YOU Doin'?

Top
#705263 - 03/24/08 05:57 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11
luapparc Offline
Full Member

Registered: 03/02/08
Posts: 22
Loc: Massachusetts
Not only do I believe the movie Fahrenheit 9/11, I believe a lot worse.

You see, immediately after 9/11 it was considered unpatriotic, indeed even evil, to suggest any of the following opinions:

1) The wtc disaster was not orchestrated by Osama Bin Laden

2) Iraq had no connection with Al Quaeda or the 9/11 disaster.

In my heart of hearts, with an intimate familiarity as a veteran with my country, with what I have done in its name, and with what it has continued to do around the world since I left the military, I did believe the above opinions were true, and as a result I suffered humiliation, verbal and physical hostility, and loss of friends. I was threatened that my home would be burned down if I did not remove a sign that showed that I did not support the invasion of Iraq. Reluctantly I removed it for the safety of my family. I was forced to admit that I did not live in a free country. And it’s not just me. I'm no hero. But look at what happened to the Dixie Chicks and what they did in response. And who do you think is right today?

Immediately following 9/11 Americans believed they were attacked, and they wanted revenge. In true American style they didn’t even care to whom that revenge was directed. They just wanted blood, John Wayne style. There was no reasoning. Almost all Americans blamed the Muslim world, which they called evil.

As the years passed, most Americans have realized that at least one of above opinions (the second one) was very true all along. Iraq and Sadam Hussein had absolutely nothing to do with the 9/11 disaster or with Al Quaeda, and the government knew it. I predict that a time will come when most Americans will also realize and admit that the first above opinion was also true all along.

I am not young. I remember Kennedy’s assassination as if it were yesterday. That was the first time in my life that I realized I lived in a country that was so evil that would murdered its own president in broad daylight because he was viewed, not by the public, but by certain powerful individuals in both government and industry as not acting in the best interests of America, which of course was the best interests of themselves. No, Oswald did not do it. Yes, there was a security stand-down ordered from the highest levels of authority in the country. Yes the vehicle was fired on from multiple directions. And finally, yes, the evidence is staring at you right in the face.

So too today with 9/11, the evidence is staring at you right in the face. There were explosives placed in the World Trade Center prior to 9/11, these explosives were systematically detonated to make it appear that aircraft driven by Islamic terrorists took the buildings down, and yes, there was a milirary stand-down in order to allow these things to happen. I recommend that you go beyond Michael Moore’s film, which just scratches the surface, and look at documentaries like “Loose Change”, “Painful Questions” and many others which are all viewable on YouTube.

The good news about your post is that it was made almost two months ago and you have not been hit by a deluge of extremists calling you a commie, terrorist, or just unpatriotic. Perhaps no one has really noticed your post, or perhaps it means that America's period of insanity and irrationality may be passing and people are beginning, just beginning mind you, to realize that everything that Michael Moore said in his film has turned out to be true. Sadly, even more than that is true.
_________________________
When a door is partially open, it is ajar. So, when a jar is partially open why isn't it adoor?

Top
#705264 - 03/24/08 09:26 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11
Fraggle Offline
Full Member

Registered: 02/26/07
Posts: 384
Loc: Nottingham, U.K.
It is impossible to keep such a large scale operation secret for all this time under such scrutiny, without anyone talking. That is what is staring me in the face.
_________________________
Will

Top
#705265 - 03/25/08 04:32 AM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11
luapparc Offline
Full Member

Registered: 03/02/08
Posts: 22
Loc: Massachusetts
 Quote:
Fraggle wrote:
It is impossible to keep such a large scale operation secret for all this time under such scrutiny, without anyone talking. That is what is staring me in the face.
You'd think so. However there are simply too many examples in history that contradict that. Before rejecting out of hand the idea that 9/11 was a "false flag" operation, why not look at the photographic evidence that exists online. I don't think it takes a demolition expert to see that the buildings, especially building 7, are falling as a result of controlled demolition.

And even if you are unwilling to consider that, what about the explosions that occured in the lower basement that blew the windows of the lobby out a few seconds before the aircraft actually hit. And if you don't believe the timing evidence, answer how an aircraft slamming into the building at the 85th floor could blow the windows out in the lobby on the ground floor, and not blow out any windows in between? There are plenty of documentaries that show the destruction in the lobby and that show people who were injured by flying glass, people who had been walking outside the building near the windows at the time of the explosion. The evidence of a very large explosion occurring at the base of the building independent of the aircraft crash is overwhelming. It's staring at you in the face! Then ask yourself, "Who is more likely to plan and implement the simultaneous events of a plane crashing into the 85th floor and a very large explosion at the base of the building, some guy living in a cave on the other side of the world, or the CIA?"

Sometimes I think that the reason such operations succeed is the unwillingness of most people to even consider that their own government is not only capable, but very willing to conduct such evil operations. The evidence that 9/11 was a false flag is not a secret. The photographic evidence is all over the internet. However, people's fear keeps them from acknowledging the evidence. And those few people who do have real knowledge won't talk for the simple reason that they themselves are guilty of playing a part in it.

The very same was true of Kennedy's assassination. There is photographic evidence that the president's vehicle was fired on from the front. Yet, the official story ... well, you know the rest.

Since you are in the UK, are you aware of the fact that your media in your country announced the falling of Building 7 a full 23 minutes before the event actually happened? The irony is that as the anchor woman announces it live from New York with the skyline in her background, you can see Building 7 behind her and it is still standing. That video is also on the internet. Of course someone at the time who was familiar with the New York skyline realized it, informed the right people, and the circuit was cut just in time so the collapse of the building would not be viewed live on British television occurring after it was announced, which would bring to people's attention the fact that someone knew ahead of time that the building was going to fall. How could that even happen if it was not planned in advance? Who cut the circuit? This also raises a question about the heavy scrutiny that you mention. It turns out that the British newscast went completely unnoticed for two years. Although it was broadcast on British television on the day of 9/11 for everyone to see, no one noticed it. It took two years to be recognized. It was eventually discovered by a researcher looking at archived news videos. No matter how many times we look at something, often our internal fears of the evil truths in this world prevent us from seeing the obvious.

The US government orchestrated the 9/11 disaster in order to justify the invasion of Iraq, which it had previously planned, in order to gain control of the world's oil supplies. Of course some people of muslim decent were used as unsuspecting actors in the operation to help make it seem like a terrorist attack, just as how Oswald was used as an actor for the assassination of Kennedy.

If you question whether the US government is capable of evil, false flag operations, remember how the invasion of Vietnam war was authorized. President Johnson orchestrated a false flag operation in the Bay of Tonkin, which convinced Congress to authorized and finance a large scale invasion. It turns out that the incident never occurred. It was a complete and outright lie. Fifty thousand American lives were lost in a war that had no basis other than supporting the military industrial complex. This of course was the whole reason Kennedy was assassinated in the first place. Kennedy was going to pull out of Vietnam. But now, even after the recent release of documents that prove that the Bay of Tonkin was a false flag, no one seems to care. Fifty years from now no one will care about the over 1,000,000 Iragi lives lost and 4,000 American lives lost (so far) in the immoral invasion of Iraq that was justified by the false flag operation that we call the 9/11 disaster.

By the way, one of the best ways to keep a false flag operation away from the attention of the general public is to kill anyone who even threatens to disclose it. Ever wonder why many of the eyewitnesses to Kennedy's assassination met with mysterious deaths shortly after the event? Check it out. A country that is capable and willing to murder its own president in broad daylight is certainly capable and willing to orchestrate the 9/11 disaster.

When I was in the military we had a saying, "Before you die you will realize that everything you were rasied to believe about God and your country is an outright lie." It was a lesson that I realized the day Kennedy was assassinated. It was a lesson that remains with me to this day.
_________________________
When a door is partially open, it is ajar. So, when a jar is partially open why isn't it adoor?

Top
#705266 - 03/27/08 04:02 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11
luapparc Offline
Full Member

Registered: 03/02/08
Posts: 22
Loc: Massachusetts
I just saw an ABC news report where forensic scientists claim that there were multiple shooters and RFK’s assassination. More evidence staring at you in the face! It never ends.
_________________________
When a door is partially open, it is ajar. So, when a jar is partially open why isn't it adoor?

Top
#705267 - 03/27/08 06:03 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11
Fraggle Offline
Full Member

Registered: 02/26/07
Posts: 384
Loc: Nottingham, U.K.
With regards to the evidence of the use of explosives in the towers, I imagine that you`ve already heard the rebuttals I could offer so there`s no need to cover old ground.
I am quite willing to believe that governments are capable of this sort of thing but not if their security is so tight that foreign news anchors are in on it \:D
_________________________
Will

Top
#705268 - 03/27/08 08:14 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11
luapparc Offline
Full Member

Registered: 03/02/08
Posts: 22
Loc: Massachusetts
 Quote:
Fraggle wrote:
I am quite willing to believe that governments are capable of this sort of thing but not if their security is so tight that foreign news anchors are in on it
I don’t think the British press was “in on it” at all. They simply received a report, from whom I do not know, that Building 7, which the British refer to as the Solomon Building, had collapsed when in fact it was still standing. Here is a link to the broadcast:

British Broadcast

My hunch is that during the approximate twenty minutes that the broadcast was being made, someone, either in England or here in USA, noticed that the building was still standing behind the commentators head and advised the media. From there it probably traveled up the management chain to some point where an order was issued to cut the circuit. It doesn’t even prove that whoever ordered the circuit cut had any knowledge of any organized military operation to destroy the World Trade Center in progress at the time. It’s quite conceivable that they simply did not want to suffer the embarrassment of reporting the news out of sequence with the time in which it actually happened. Perhaps such details will never be known for sure. It’s also possible that a CIA agent in England noticed the error and reported it to higher command. But it doesn’t really matter how the error was reported. My nagging question is, “Who the heck reported to the British press in the first place that the building was going to fall a full 23 minutes before the event actually happened?” That information had to have come from somewhere.

Incidentally, there is plenty of evidence that a lot of people at the crash site knew ahead of time that Building 7 was about to collapse. Many firefighters were videotaped warning people to clear the area because the building was about to fall. These videos are posted on YouTube.

The real problem with the Building 7 aspect of the World Trade disaster is that if Building 7 was in fact destroyed by control demolition, there had to have been a plan to do so well in advance of the actual aircraft attack. It takes weeks to set up all the proper explosives to pull down a building like that. So who set those explosives? Certainly that is something that is beyond the capability of some Arab living in a cave on the other side of the world.

A very similar media error occurred at the time of Kennedy's assassination. There was a newspaper, I believe it was in the Phillipines - but I'm not sure, that announced Kennedy's death a short time before it actually occurred. These kinds of logistic mistakes are common in such false flag, military operations.

 Quote:
Fraggle wrote:
With regards to the evidence of the use of explosives in the towers, I imagine that you`ve already heard the rebuttals I could offer so there`s no need to cover old ground.
I actually have not heard any legitimate rebuttals against the theory that explosives were used in any of the buildings. Well yes, there is the pancake theory, but I don’t accept that as a legitimate explanation. My personal experience with this subject is that most people I mention it to do not actually look at the evidence. They simply become enraged at me for raising the subject. But if you do have some rebuttals that explain how the glass windows in the lobby at the ground floor were blown out, or how Building 7 collapsed, as well as a wide variety of questions that documentaries like “Loose Change” and “Painful Questions” raise, I would certainly like to hear them.

With regards to explosions at the towers themselves, here are a couple links:

Explosive Video

Another Explosive Video

This second link starts by showing a firefighter talking on the phone and suddenly you hear a large explosion. The evidence that an explosion occurred is indisputable. What could explain that explosion?
_________________________
When a door is partially open, it is ajar. So, when a jar is partially open why isn't it adoor?

Top
#705269 - 03/28/08 06:14 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11
Fraggle Offline
Full Member

Registered: 02/26/07
Posts: 384
Loc: Nottingham, U.K.
You mention the main argument in your post above - enough explosives to fell an unweakened building would have created a HUGE blast. Weakening the building for demolition involves cutting major structural members and could not be accomplished on an occupied building without it collapsing, I can find no qualified testimonial that indicates otherwise.
With regards to the windows being blown out at the base of the tower, I don`t think that means anything when the whole structure is coming down. Vibrations perhaps? Air pressure from the piston effect of the upper floors descending?
Finally, the fact that the firefighters knew of the collapse in advance really means nothing either - they are trained to recognise the signs.
_________________________
Will

Top
#705270 - 03/29/08 03:41 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11
luapparc Offline
Full Member

Registered: 03/02/08
Posts: 22
Loc: Massachusetts
 Quote:
Fraggle wrote:
You mention the main argument in your post above - enough explosives to fell an unweakened building would have created a HUGE blast.
The total explosive power may be HUGE, but when distributed around the building it is not noticeably so, especially where the supporting structure is in the center of the building. The collapse of Building 7, which you can view on the internet, appears exactly like the controlled demolition of similar buildings that you see often on the news.

 Quote:
Fraggle wrote:
With regards to the windows being blown out at the base of the tower, I don`t think that means anything when the whole structure is coming down.
The windows were blown out a few seconds BEFORE an aircraft hit and about 40 minutes before the building collapsed. I wish I could dispense with this aspect of the event as flippantly as you do. But I cannot. I am reminded of a popular documentary about 9/11 (I believe I saw it on NPR) that contains interviews with Mayor Guliani. In it he states how when they entered to lobby to set up a command center, they were puzzled by the type of destruction that they saw. His words were, “Obviously a major event had occurred in the lobby.” The documentary showed video taken from inside the lobby. It was clear that a massive explosion had occurred in close proximity. That’s what I mean when I say the evidence is staring at you in the face! Despite the fact that the mayor has spoken of this event in a documentary, and the despite the video evidence of the event, the official 9/11 story does not even recognize that any event ever took place at the base of the building. But the Internet contains lots of evidence. Indeed, there is even a janitorial person who experienced the blast and survived, and has spoken openly about it. Of course his experience in not considered in the official 9/11 story.

 Quote:
Fraggle wrote:
Finally, the fact that the firefighters knew of the collapse in advance really means nothing either - they are trained to recognise the signs.
There were no signs that Building 7 was going to collapse. It was relatively undamaged and contained only minor fires. There is photographic proof of that. Again, it’s staring at you right in the face.
_________________________
When a door is partially open, it is ajar. So, when a jar is partially open why isn't it adoor?

Top
#705271 - 03/29/08 05:08 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11
Fraggle Offline
Full Member

Registered: 02/26/07
Posts: 384
Loc: Nottingham, U.K.
Why would they detonate an explosive at the base of the tower before the `plane hit? Why would they expose themselves so? Why would they even use explosives instead of just crashing the `planes into the towers? Are you seriously suggesting that every individual involved in the clean-up was involved? What about the British news broadcast? Do you think that after all this s00per^5ekrit planning they would be so stupid as to accidentally tell some journalists that the building had collapsed just before they blew it up?
_________________________
Will

Top
#705272 - 03/29/08 09:22 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11
luapparc Offline
Full Member

Registered: 03/02/08
Posts: 22
Loc: Massachusetts
 Quote:
Fraggle wrote:
What above the British news broadcast? Do you think that after all this s00per^5ekrit planning they would be so stupid as to accidentally tell some journalists that the building had collapsed just before they blew it up?
I assume you wanted to say “What about…” not “What above…”. Well, did you see the video that I provided showing the British news commentator announcing the collapse of the building with the building clearly visible in the background?

To me that broadcast demonstrates that someone knew that the building was going to collapse before it actually did. If someone knew that, and because the building was under no physical stress at the time to cause such an event, it would have to mean that someone was going to intentionally take it down using controlled demolition, just like they take down all such buildings when they need to. Can you give me a believable explanation that would convince me otherwise? Please do so if you can. And I guess it also means that yes, they were stupid enough to tell someone about it before they actually blew it up. Indeed, that is typical of such false flag military operations.
_________________________
When a door is partially open, it is ajar. So, when a jar is partially open why isn't it adoor?

Top
#705273 - 03/29/08 10:18 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11
Fraggle Offline
Full Member

Registered: 02/26/07
Posts: 384
Loc: Nottingham, U.K.
It just seems like a ridiculous idea to me.
_________________________
Will

Top
#705274 - 03/30/08 09:42 AM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11
luapparc Offline
Full Member

Registered: 03/02/08
Posts: 22
Loc: Massachusetts
 Quote:
Fraggle wrote:
It just seems like a ridiculous idea to me.
What do you find ridiculous, looking at the video that proves that the British media found out about the Building 7 (Solomon Building) collapse before the event actually occurred, or blowing up the building in the first place?

I don’t think it’s ridiculous to look at the video. I think everyone in this world has a responsibility to themselves and to their country to be aware of and to interpret world events. For example, in your country there is the famous “Downing Street memos”. You must have some thoughts about that?

Concerning blowing up the building, yes, it is a ridiculous thing to do. But history shows that governments consistently do ridiculous things. Tony Blaire in your country supported Bush’s invasion of Iraq. That was clearly a ridiculous thing to do. Although that is easier to say that now in hindsight, it was clear to many before the invasion. I heard that in England there was massive demonstration against the war before the actual invasion. Is that true? If so, what do you think about that? Also, considering the Downing Street memos, it was also dishonest for Tony Blair to support Bush’s invasion.

Perhaps what you think is ridiculous is the whole idea that the World Trade Center disaster is a false flag operation, false flag being a terrorist military operation performed by a government towards its own country and blaming it on some outside country or group in order to justify some action, like perhaps the invasion of another country, or to gain more authority over its own population? Well, I would agree with you that it is ridiculous, but it routinely happens in many countries and particularly here in the USA. The assassination of President Kennedy, the Bay of Tonkin (leading to the Vietnam war), and the World Trade disaster are most prominent. There are others as well. Sometimes they actually accomplish their intent for some people, as in the assassination of President Kennedy for the FBI, the CIA, Vice-President Johnson (I will never acknowledge him as a president), and of course thousands of people throughout the military industrial complex. Sometimes false flag operations lead to disastrous wars, as in the Bay of Tonkin. Since the Iraq war is still in progress I suppose you could argue about whether the World Trade disaster as a false flag operation was a success or a failure, but personally I consider it to be a massive failure, perhaps the worst in our nation’s history. Of course neoconservatives, the Bush administration, the oil companies, and companies like Halliburton and Blackwater think differently than I do. They think I’m ridiculous. But they are all part of the power structure, and I am not. So their opinion prevails. And so the world turns.

By the way, you have not given me a reasonable explanation for the British media finding out ahead of time about the collapse of Building 7, or for the numerous examples of explosions occurring at the base of the buildings at the World Trade Center. Of course, you don’t really have to. Although I admit your replies have encouraged me to write more, I’m not writing these long postings because of you, really. You see, I am in the very later stages of my life. I am now completely bed ridden and I require the services of visiting nurses to keep me alive. That is soon to end. This series of postings has helped me pass some idle time as well as form my last final personal thoughts and judgments about the world and the miniscule part that I have played in it during my lifetime. You should know though that these thoughts are far more encompassing than the very few aspects of only the one world event that we have been discussing here.

Since you were not impressed with my previous links, here is one from the CBC, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.

CBC Documentary

This may not convince you yourself of anything, but at least it should make you aware that there are a great many people, some prominant intellectuals, who believe that the World Trade Center disaster was a false flag operation orchestrated by the United States government.
_________________________
When a door is partially open, it is ajar. So, when a jar is partially open why isn't it adoor?

Top
#705275 - 03/31/08 08:51 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11
Fraggle Offline
Full Member

Registered: 02/26/07
Posts: 384
Loc: Nottingham, U.K.
I think the conspiracy theorists should focus on trying to prove that the government knew there would be a large scale act of terrorism and did nothing, a plausible hypothesis in my opinion but there just isn`t the evidence to suggest direct involvement. It`s all just seeing-patterns-in-the-clouds and bullshine.

The windows weren`t blown out just before the `planes hit, they were blown out AS the `planes hit which is not in the least bit surprising. In a collision with such enormous energy involved anything could happen.
Why would they crash the `planes when they`d already placed explosives? Why not save time and effort by just setting them off one lunchtime?

All the British news report `evidence` suggests to me is that a reporter mixed up in the most staggering event imaginable made some mistake or jumped the gun and misreported the event. Is that really surprising? Perhaps the firefighters were warning people that the building was in a state of imminent collapse and that information was mis-interpreted by the time it reached the anchor.

Why did Al-Qaeda take responsibility if they didn`t do it?

I don`t think it`s ridiculous because I believe that governments are incapable of this sort of thing, I just think it`s ridiculous to claim that these three buildings were rigged for demolition, in secret, without anyone knowing anything about it. There`s nothing to suggest it was anything but what it appeared to be: an act of terrorism perpetrated by some uncivilised middle-eastern people.

Since my last post I have read through page after page of conspiracy websites and such until my brain went runny and I was disappointed. I did enjoy the South Park 911-truth episode though \:D
_________________________
Will

Top
#705276 - 05/07/08 05:29 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11
Stilamazed Offline
Full Member

Registered: 12/12/07
Posts: 92
Loc: New Jersey
luapparc,

You're free to believe whatever you wish. But, you're theory about what actually took down those buildings... I have to ask, where were you when it happened? I was about two blocks away, and anyone who tries to tell me that jets did not slam into those buildings... is less than retarded. Like i said, believe what you will, but don't blame me for seeing the TRUTH with my own eyes. I must admit, i do not have the type of FIRST HAND knowledge that can only be obtained by watching a movie, but maybe someday i'll be as ENLIGHTENED as you. As for michael moore, anyone with a sixty inch waist is a glutton, and therefore should not tell ANYONE what to think, or how to behave.

Top
#705277 - 05/08/08 12:11 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11
luapparc Offline
Full Member

Registered: 03/02/08
Posts: 22
Loc: Massachusetts
 Quote:
Stilamazed wrote:
anyone who tries to tell me that jets did not slam into those buildings... is less than retarded.[/b]
I agree with your opinion, although not your choice of words (I tend to refrain from calling people retarded). I never said that planes did not crash into the buildings, and there is plenty of photographic proof that that did occur. I have never heard it suggested by anyone that planes did not crash into the buildings. Although, you never know. For example, years ago my father thought that the US landing on the moon was faked as a strategy in the cold war. Perhaps there are some individuals who feel that no planes struck the building, but I am not one of them.
 Quote:
Stilamazed wrote:
I was about two blocks away[/b]
You have no idea how much I envy you. Not because you were witness to a great tragedy and the resulting pain that you may feel, but because had I been there I might have seen something that might help suppress this aching feeling in my heart that my government played a role in orchestrating the tragedy, and is getting away with it. But who knows, if I had been there I might have seen something that may have made my heart ach even more.

I envy you in the same way that I envy those who happened to be at Dealey Plaza in Dallas Texas on November 22, 1963. Hopefully I might have seen something to help suppress this aching feeling in my heart that my government just murdered its own president in broad daylight, and has gotten away with it. But who knows, if I had been in Dealey Plaze I might have seen something that may have made my heart ach even more.

The many, many questions I have about 9/11 are simple, and I am not alone in asking them. Below list only a few:

Is the collapse of the towers due to the plane crashes, or were the plane crashes orchestrated in order to disguise how they were really brought down? There is much photographic evidence to suggest that the crashes did not cause the buildings to structurally fail. There is much photographic evidence to suggest that the resulting fires were not hot and could not have weakened the building. There is much photographic evidence to suggest that the speed of collapse of the buildings was too fast to be explained by the “official” pancake theory.

Why were there explosions at the base of the buildings, one even occurring several seconds before the plane hit the building?

Why were the windows in the lobby blown out? Could a plane crashing into the building at about the 85th floor blow windows out in the lobby and not on any other floors in between?

Why didn’t the mayor use his special command center built in building 7?

Why did Building 7 collapse? The official enquiry did not even investigate it.

Why is there photographic proof that the British announced on their television network that Building 7 collapsed more than twenty minutes before the event actually occurred?

Why was all the building material, and hence the evidence, carted away under high security? So it could not be analyzed for thermite? Indeed, some photographs of the towers show the possibility of thermite being used.

Why was there no aircraft debris at the site of the Pentagon crash?

Why do the only published photos of the Pentagon crash show no aircraft?

Why did the Bush administration resist an investigation.

Why were families who were compensated required to promise to never take legal action against the government in this matter?

Going back to the Kennedy assassination, I was not there. However, it was evident to any observant citizen that the vehicle had been fired on from the front and the government went out of its way to conceal that fact. Similarly in the 9/11 disaster, any observant citizen can see from the public record that the government is hiding a great deal.

As a witness to the event, what are your feelings about the event and what are your reactions to my questions? Surely not all my questions are, to use your words, “retarded”?

But since you were a witness to the event, I would like to ask you one question. Why is it that most witnesses do not approve of people asking legitimate question about it? Is it because it is too painful to think about?

Like most citizens of any country, I do not like to harbor thoughts that my government does such evil things as destroy it own buildings and in the process murder its own citizens for the sake of getting congressional approval to wage war around the world for corporate greed and oil. However, I see no way to feel otherwise.

To me the most likely scenario is that the so called terrorists were taking part of a much more extensive military operation conducted by the US government to destroy the World Trade Center. The terrorists may have been patsies in the same way that Oswald was a patsy in President Kennedy’s assassination. I would love to think otherwise, but I cannot.
 Quote:
Stilamazed wrote:
Like i said, believe what you will, but don't blame me for seeing the TRUTH with my own eyes. I must admit, i do not have the type of FIRST HAND knowledge that can only be obtained by watching a movie, but maybe someday i'll be as ENLIGHTENED as you.[/b]
I never claimed to be ENLIGHTENED in this subject. Indeed, I cannot seem to find any legitimate answers to any of my questions. Indeed, why does the fact that I ask questions cause you to sarcastically accuse me of considering myself more enlightened than you? I certainly don’t feel that way.

And if you know the TRUTH, as you say, can you please help me and answer some of my questions?

I must admit, whenever I speak to people like yourself they seem to think that because they were witnesses to the event that I should, perhaps out of respect, not ask any questions at all.

There is an old saying, “You don’t have to be a plumber to know that there is something wrong with your kitchen sink” Similarly, I do not have to know what really happened to know that the story I have been fed by my government is very flawed.
 Quote:
Stilamazed wrote:
As for michael moore, anyone with a sixty inch waist is a glutton, and therefore should not tell ANYONE what to think, or how to behave.[/b]
You may have a lot of dislike for Michael Moore, but in order to refute anything that he presents in his documentary films you would have to analyze deeper than the fact that he is overweight. Did you know that 60% of Americans are overweight? Do you think that 60% of Americans are gluttons? No, on second thought, don’t answer that.
_________________________
When a door is partially open, it is ajar. So, when a jar is partially open why isn't it adoor?

Top
#705278 - 06/22/08 02:04 AM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11
'fredo Offline
Full Member

Registered: 08/03/07
Posts: 45
Loc: San Bernardino, California
Lol really if the government did it, I don't think we'd know. They'd have eliminated the guy who came up with the theory 6.3 seconds after he posted it.
_________________________
I know the music ups and down.

Top
#705279 - 10/13/08 08:07 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11
Horwinkle Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 09/22/08
Posts: 1011
Michael Moore is more than a little bit looney.

His "facts" are dubious at best, spurious usually, and generally used out of context.
In his films, you only get "his" mutated views.

His works are reviewed far and wide. Have a look. His works just don't stand up to scrutiny.

Top
#705280 - 11/13/08 04:42 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11
ManyHandedMusician Offline
Full Member

Registered: 10/13/08
Posts: 71
Loc: North-central Minnesota
I can kinda agree with the facts. My godmother thinks that the 9/11 thing is a bit of a conspiracy. She says, "Did you notice how the first building fell? it fell straight down like when construction crews destroy buildings, like whoomp. But I think it should've toppled sideways at a diagonal from the way the plane hit it." I can see that, but I dunno...*she's kinda wierd occassionally..* But the whole movie talked about how Bush had business ties with the Bin Ladens, I believe it.
_________________________
Currently working on:
-Die Moldau
-some jazz stuff

Top
#705281 - 11/13/08 04:45 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11
ManyHandedMusician Offline
Full Member

Registered: 10/13/08
Posts: 71
Loc: North-central Minnesota
But yes, I believed the movie very much, none of it would surprise me. I think the government is corrupted for the most part. It really sickens me.

I am on the same boat as luapparc
_________________________
Currently working on:
-Die Moldau
-some jazz stuff

Top
#705282 - 11/29/08 02:16 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11
rocket88 Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 09/04/06
Posts: 3172
Michael Moore does not make "documentaries"...he makes "Crockumentaries", as does Oliver Stone.
_________________________
Music teacher and piano player.

Top
#1166700 - 03/22/09 05:59 AM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: rocket88]
David Jenson Online   content
2000 Post Club Member

Registered: 10/22/06
Posts: 2178
Loc: Maine
'Interesting discussion ... sort of. Osama Bin Laden and Sheik Kalleid Mohammad debunked the "truther" conspiracy theories, but yet they go on and on ad nauseium.
_________________________
David L. Jenson
Tuning - Repairs - Refurbishing
Jenson's Piano Service
-----

Top
#1183900 - 04/20/09 03:37 AM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: David Jenson]
agent8698 Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 06/18/07
Posts: 6
Loc: Tacoma, WA
I don't believe the WTC buildings were brought down by explosives. I say this because I read the following 12-page document, written by demolition experts:

"A Critical Analysis of the Collapse of WTC Towers 1, 2 and 7 from an Explosives and Conventional Demolition Industry Viewpoint"

http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC%20STUDY%208-06%20w%20clarif%20as%20of%209-8-06%20.pdf

Top
#1244491 - 08/06/09 06:24 AM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: agent8698]
angelas Offline
Full Member

Registered: 08/01/09
Posts: 114
Loc: New Zealand (South Pacific, Do...
I can't honestly believe that so many Americans would subscribe to the notion that their own government orcehstrated 9/11. Come on. Fundamentalist Islam is your problem...not the government. Every American I meet in NZ is an apologist for their "being American". I've never seen a nation of people so ashamed of their own existence. I'm glad one of my rellies (relatives) wasn't killed during 9/11. I'd be baying for blood. Micheal Moore is an idiot. He's a lefty, pseudo intellectual, idealistic twit. I wouldn't trust him off the end of my boot.

Evil pervails only when good men do nothing.


Edited by angelas (08/06/09 07:22 AM)
_________________________
Behind every successful woman is some twit who's lost the remote....

Top
#1310672 - 11/22/09 09:42 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: angelas]
PartyPianist Offline
Full Member

Registered: 10/05/09
Posts: 281
Interesting thread. My take (based on discussion with actual CIA members).

1 Michael Moore is as "politically correct" as everyone else on the "payroll"

2 Oklahoma WTC bombing was a fix. McVeigh was set up and though was "culpable", he did not bring the building down. The expert report stated that he would have done no more than "blown out a few windows. Experts claimed it was a professional demolition job and explosives were placed at the struts.

3 Who was behind the WTC bombing? It seems that though McVeigh was protesting "medical injuries" of gulf veterans (veterans who became sick or died as a result of "medications" for their service in Iraq), he had formed some associations with Islamic extremists. It is clear that Clinton was briefed.

4 Some of those behind Oklahoma were involved with 911.

5 It is likely that 911 was enabled by cooperation of Mossad, US government and its security service. But, with one important point - the attack was carried out by Islamic extremists.

6 Were Clinton and Bush aware? Dates - probably not. It was going to happen - without a shadow of a doubt.

7 What about Bin Laden? He is not wanted for the 911 attack, but "if" he was caught it sure would make the agenda. I don't have any evidence, but I believe he is already dead and possibly died before 911.

8 How did the wheels fall off? As with all crooks, the outcomes were miscalculated. There was no reason for any Islamic to use the date 9/11. It has absolute significance to anyone in the US and therefore was the idea of US backers. The marketing plan backfired when 300 fire-fighters were killed with the building collapse.

9 Iraq was all part of the plan in a attempt to violently stamp out "anti west" Islamic fundamentalism (post Iranian Ayatollah), but not the lid is off a disastrous situation, where something very nasty may well happen. This nasty thing will make 911 like a mild scratch. I pray it does not happen.

10 Rather than looking inward as a result of 911, American has sought solace in the blame game, ignoring the huge injustice that should be directly attributed to its own callous administrations.

11. There are many good people in America. God needs them to be given a forum to take things away from the current path. Obama predictably has done nothing to stop the progression.
_________________________
You play it & I'll hum it, but currently rehearsing:

Bach WTC book 2 no 15 G major, no 20 A minor, no 22 Bb Minor
Mozart A minor Sonata K310
Mendelssohn Op 35 preludes and fuges
Busoni Carmen Fantasy
Rachmaninov Bb prelude OP 23 no 2
Lyapunov Humoreske Op 34
and others

Top
#1334193 - 12/26/09 04:17 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: PartyPianist]
MacMacMac Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 09/24/09
Posts: 3866
Loc: North Carolina
Originally Posted By: PartyPianist
I don't have any evidence, but I believe he [Bin Laden] is already dead and possibly died before 911.
Yeah, that's the whole story of conspiracy theorists.

"I don't have any evidence, but ..."

It's always the same.

Top
#1372136 - 02/12/10 09:23 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: MacMacMac]
lisztonian Offline
Full Member

Registered: 09/29/07
Posts: 266
I can think of *at least* 10 documentaries proving government involvement of 9/11. I can link them if you like. Some scientists that have spoken out are Dr Stephen Jones David Ray Griffin as well as the architects of the twin towers. Five of the commission's members also testified saying 9/11 was a fraud. I could go on and on. The media loves to smear "9/11 truthers" but the reality is, the facts and truth are on our side.
_________________________
http://www.infowars.com

Top
#1387289 - 03/03/10 01:26 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: lisztonian]
appleman Offline
Full Member

Registered: 03/30/09
Posts: 188
Originally Posted By: lisztonian
I can think of *at least* 10 documentaries proving government involvement of 9/11.
Wow. Is any of them actual have any real facts?

I can think of one documentary that proves that Jesus was created by elites who really believed in astrology.

Another one that proves Jews run the entire world.

Are these also true?
_________________________
Dr. Appleman, former NASA engineer, Empire of Earth and B.S. of Ninjutsu at MIT.

Top
#1393390 - 03/11/10 02:29 AM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: appleman]
lisztonian Offline
Full Member

Registered: 09/29/07
Posts: 266
Originally Posted By: appleman
Originally Posted By: lisztonian
I can think of *at least* 10 documentaries proving government involvement of 9/11.
Wow. Is any of them actual have any real facts

Yes.

-The senior counsel to the 9/11 Commission – John Farmer – says that the government agreed not to tell the truth about 9/11 (6 of the 9 commission members also spoke out) Also published a book about it.

-Jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt though steel, let alone pulverize steel and bring all three towers down at near free-fall speed into their own footprint (building 7 wasn't even hit by a plane)

-Over 1000 architects and engineers signed a petition for a new investigation based upon physical evidence and analysis completely inconsistent with the official story

-Molten metal under both towers weeks after the collapses. This is not scientifically possible with only jet fuel. See Stephen E. Jones' work - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezIU6ZxYU3A

These are just a few. If you do your research you will realize that there is no possible way the governments account of 9/11 is factual.
_________________________
http://www.infowars.com

Top
#1396187 - 03/15/10 10:11 AM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: lisztonian]
appleman Offline
Full Member

Registered: 03/30/09
Posts: 188
Wow. Wow. Wow. So much fallacious thinking, so little time.
Quote:

-The senior counsel to the 9/11 Commission – John Farmer – says that the government agreed not to tell the truth about 9/11 (6 of the 9 commission members also spoke out) Also published a book about it.
Yeah. John Farmer published a book that basically told how the Bush administration tried to cover up it's inadequacies. Oh wow. Politicians trying to save their butts! It's a first for politics.

John Farmer called the 9/11 commission "accurate and true" in his book. While the advertisements claim otherwise, the book spends most of it's time defending the 9/11 commission.
Quote:
-Jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt though steel, let alone pulverize steel and bring all three towers down at near free-fall speed into their own footprint (building 7 wasn't even hit by a plane)
Wow. I don't know where to begin.

Building 7's debris field was not well contained within the footprint. It fell asymmetrical and was leaning enough to damage the adjacent Verizon and Manhattan Community College buildings when it fell.

Molten metal?
Originally Posted By: "Retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn"
I have never seen melted steel in a building fire, but I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."


This was very well demonstrated with the tanker crash on April 29, 2007 in Oakland, California. The 8,600 gallons of gasoline on fire weakened a bridge and the entire I-Beam steel structure collapsed in a matter of minutes. And it not only collapsed, the weakened I-Beams were crushed like clay.

Real world proof that not only is it not required for metal to be molten for a structure to collapse, but also that the weakened metal can be deformed very easily.
Quote:
-Over 1000 architects and engineers signed a petition for a new investigation based upon physical evidence and analysis completely inconsistent with the official story
Over 1000 piano teachers think that Bach invented ET tuning that we used today.

I think the group sums itself up with this one.

Originally Posted By: " Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth"
"the 3 high-rise buildings of the World Trade Center which 'collapsed' on 9/11 (the Twin Towers plus WTC Building #7) presented us with a body of evidence (i.e.controlled demolition) that was clearly outside the scope of our training and experience."

Quote:

-Molten metal under both towers weeks after the collapses. This is not scientifically possible with only jet fuel. See Stephen E. Jones' work - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezIU6ZxYU3A

Let's see.

Professor Jones finds trace chemicals that have already been discovered by other WTC dust surveys. Unlike the other, sane people, instead of concluding that these things are expected in a collapse of a skyscraper at levels expected for such a collapse, he instead believes these are the result of thermite.

Right.

I gotcha.

Steven Jones is a prof of physics, not of chemistry. Most of his expertise is on the atomic level, not the level you'd need for a WTC collapse.

Another expert speaking outside his expertises making wild claims. I guess that sums up the entire movement in one sentence.
Quote:
These are just a few. If you do your research you will realize that there is no possible way the governments account of 9/11 is factual.
The only thing I see is that conspiracy theorists turn a blind eye to anything that doesn't fit nicely into their conspiracy, so relying on them will only make a person disinformed.
_________________________
Dr. Appleman, former NASA engineer, Empire of Earth and B.S. of Ninjutsu at MIT.

Top
#1396932 - 03/16/10 12:43 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: appleman]
lisztonian Offline
Full Member

Registered: 09/29/07
Posts: 266
John Farmer - "at some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened." - http://www.infowars.com/911-commission-counsel-government-agreed-to-lie-about-911/

Also the quote from the architects and engineers was from 2007... It goes on to say "There is however a growing body of very solid evidence regarding these "collapses" that has emerged in the last couple of years
gaining ground even in the mainstream media. This new evidence casts grave doubt upon the theories of the 9/11 building collapse
"experts" as well as the official reports by the 9/11 Commission, FEMA, and NIST." Comparing Architects and Engineers that have studied the WTC collapse with piano teachers is fallacious.

Nano-thermite - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nGS9uNd1Go (4:40)

Underwriter laboratories did their own tests on steel beams and found that the towers had to have explosives to fall the way they did.

Do you realize multiple buildings throughout history have burned hotter and longer than the WTC but have not collapsed? Besides, WTC 3, 4, 5, and 6 withstood far more damage than 7, yet the bottom halfs of them were still standing. Building 7 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEuJimaumW4

Comparing a bridge to a building is illogical. The pancake theory of how the building collapsed has already been debunked.

Molten metal under the towers 6 weeks after collapse? Impossible with jet fuel and small office fires.

Do you realize governments throughout history have staged terror attacks to get agendas across? Gulf of Tonkin, Hitler and his Reichstag, Oklahoma city bombing (came out the FBI made the bomb and trained the driver), Operation Northwoods are just a few. The US government most definitely has the capability.
_________________________
http://www.infowars.com

Top
#1397630 - 03/17/10 09:58 AM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: lisztonian]
appleman Offline
Full Member

Registered: 03/30/09
Posts: 188
Originally Posted By: lisztonian
John Farmer - "at some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened." - http://www.infowars.com/911-commission-counsel-government-agreed-to-lie-about-911/

Originally Posted By: "TFA"
Make no mistake, Farmer is not saying that 9/11 was an inside job,
Again, Farmer defends the 9/11 report.
Quote:
Also the quote from the architects and engineers was from 2007... It goes on to say "There is however a growing body of very solid evidence regarding these "collapses" that has emerged in the last couple of years
gaining ground even in the mainstream media. This new evidence casts grave doubt upon the theories of the 9/11 building collapse
"experts" as well as the official reports by the 9/11 Commission, FEMA, and NIST."
That makes me laugh even more.

The full statement is that they are untrained and non-experts, but they are still willing to go on to conclude that the evidence is sound. That still is not a vote of confidence.
Quote:
Comparing Architects and Engineers that have studied the WTC collapse with piano teachers is fallacious.
AE911 not only includes people who are architects and engineers, but those people who are students and workers for architects and engineers.

Out of the 1000, there are only 284 are actual working architects or engineers.

So yes, I think it's quite fair to hold a piano teacher as accountable to the history of piano as I do architects, engineers and their secretaries to chemistry. In fact, I hold piano teachers MORE accountable to the history of the piano than I do to architects and the people who work for them to chemistry.

Quote:
Wow, another Steven E Jones link. Well, It's not him, but it's his co-author.

I think I already covered why I think it's total bupkis.

Quote:
Underwriter laboratories did their own tests on steel beams and found that the towers had to have explosives to fall the way they did.
Underwriter laboratories did do tests on the steel beams, but did NOT conclude explosives were the the only way they could fall.

That conclusion was reached by Kevin Ryan, who was employed outside of UL.

Quote:
Do you realize multiple buildings throughout history have burned hotter and longer than the WTC but have not collapsed? Besides, WTC 3, 4, 5, and 6 withstood far more damage than 7, yet the bottom halfs of them were still standing. Building 7 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEuJimaumW4
Again, another conspiracy that ignores important evidence that disproves their conspiracy.

Rather than going through each building listed, maybe I should just state the obvious.

There has been NO fire in any skyscraper that has been allowed to burn uncontrollably like 9/11. Period. Every one except the WTC had a functioning fire suppression system and real firefighters working directly on the fire.

Comparing a controlled fire with an uncontrolled fire, without taking in account that the fire was controlled, will only lead to faulty conclusions.

Quote:
Comparing a bridge to a building is illogical.
Comparing the results of a fuel fire on two steel structures is totally illogical!

It might be a challenge for you, but I find comparing two structures which share similar properties under similar conditions very useful.

Before you call me on it. Since the various skyscraper fires were not under similar conditions as the WTC, this is not a contradiction to what I've said before.
Quote:
The pancake theory of how the building collapsed has already been debunked.
It is not the NIST official explanation.

I would like to point out the majority of the architects who originally studied the collapse came with the pancake conclusion. By dismissing the pancake claim, you are doing what you accused me of, dismissing architects which studied the collapse.
Quote:
Molten metal under the towers 6 weeks after collapse? Impossible with jet fuel and small office fires.
Not impossible with a fire that burned uncontrollably for 19 days over 17 acres. The fires weren't put out for 2 months, and could possibly have pockets that were high enough to melt some metals.

Originally Posted By: "Popular Mechanics"
"The debris pile sat cooking for weeks, with the materials at the bottom of the pile getting increasingly hot because the fires were confined and lost minimal heat to the atmosphere. As a result the fires could have easily reached temps sufficient to melt steel, not to mention most other metals found in the buildings."


Let me also mention that most of the molten steal reports were not examined by experts, and it's easy for non-experts to confuse oxidized weaken steal with molten steel.

The 11 people rescued from the rubble of the WTC is proof enough that there was not a significant flow of molten metal. When people get hit with molten metal, they don't give a thumbs up like Arnold in Terminator 2, they pretty much get burned to death.

Especially if you consider the amount of molten metal Steve Jones claims to have been falling on them.
Quote:
Do you realize governments throughout history have staged terror attacks to get agendas across? Gulf of Tonkin, Hitler and his Reichstag,
Do you realize that governments also get attacked legitimately a lot more often they they stage one.
Quote:
Oklahoma city bombing (came out the FBI made the bomb and trained the driver), Operation Northwoods are just a few. The US government most definitely has the capability.
One crazy conspiracy theory at a time, dude.

Next we'll be talking about chem trails poisoning us and how Jesus visited the Mayas. Oh wait, Steve E Jones is an expert on those things too!

It's kind of weird how these conspiracy theorists tend to be linked to many different unrelated theories. It's almost like there are just some people that are predisposed to them.
_________________________
Dr. Appleman, former NASA engineer, Empire of Earth and B.S. of Ninjutsu at MIT.

Top
#1400088 - 03/20/10 03:58 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: appleman]
MacMacMac Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 09/24/09
Posts: 3866
Loc: North Carolina
appleman, The Internet only makes this worse. In the past, many people believed everything they saw on television. Now they get 100x more from the net, little of it checked for accuracy. (It need only be checked for allure.)

If people believe that magic creams can eliminate wrinkles, that a little pill will improve "mental energy" or take off 30 pounds, that a "magic putty" can fix leaking pipes, then they're primed to believe any huckster. The net is rife with them. (Stupid people are everywhere. Avoid them.)

Top
#1400801 - 03/21/10 05:47 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: MacMacMac]
Sparky McBiff Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 03/09/10
Posts: 1112
Loc: Toronto, Ontario
I think the firefighters themselves are the experts when it comes to whether structural steel buildings collapse at free-fall speeds simply because of fire.
They know that it is a load of Bravo Sierra.

http://firefightersfor911truth.org/
_________________________
Hailun 198







Top
#1401293 - 03/22/10 12:49 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: Sparky McBiff]
appleman Offline
Full Member

Registered: 03/30/09
Posts: 188
Originally Posted By: Sparky McBiff
I think the firefighters themselves are the experts when it comes to whether structural steel buildings collapse at free-fall speeds simply because of fire.
They know that it is a load of Bravo Sierra.

http://firefightersfor911truth.org/
I've been exposed the a lot of these websites recently, but you've gotta respect this one. When other sites try to hid illogical thinking, this one goes all out crazy right from the start.

The claim that everyone is either incompetent or part of a secret society whose oaths are preventing them from finding the truth is probably my favorite part.

I've tried to go through their PDF, but it's huge and filled with so many blatant falsehoods and half-truths it's hard to even go though the entire thing.

A lot of it hinges on Steve Jones again. AGAIN. Does that man get around a lot or what?

Dr. Jeff King. King is only has a BS in EE and Biology, only went to MIT for math for 2 years, and is a family doctor by profession. Yet the firefighters identify him as "Dr. Jeff King MIT Structural Engineer". From now on, I am Dr. Appleman, former NASA engineer and empire of Earth.

Again, most of the argument on this website revolves around Mr. King, Mr. Jones and misquotes of various firefighters on the scene, as well as the old standby, "It happened before, so it's happening now".
_________________________
Dr. Appleman, former NASA engineer, Empire of Earth and B.S. of Ninjutsu at MIT.

Top
#1403931 - 03/25/10 11:25 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: appleman]
lisztonian Offline
Full Member

Registered: 09/29/07
Posts: 266
I have yet to see and hard evidence disproving my claims. Laughing at me and saying things like "It might be hard for you to do this" are ad hominem attacks and distract from any civilized discussion.

Farmer’s contention is that the government agreed to create a phony official version of events to cover-up the real story behind 9/11. - http://joerobertson.com/newstome/security/john-farmers-book-the-ground-truth-the-story-behind-america%E2%80%99s-defense-on-911

Quote:
That makes me laugh even more. The full statement is that they are untrained and non-experts, but they are still willing to go on to conclude that the evidence is sound. That still is not a vote of confidence. AE911 not only includes people who are architects and engineers, but those people who are students and workers for architects and engineers. Out of the 1000, there are only 284 are actual working architects or engineers.


So? Being a student or worker disqualifies you from being educated and examining evidence under the supervision of professionals? You said they are non-experts and then go on to say they are architects and engineers?

Quote:
Wow, another Steven E Jones link. Well, It's not him, but it's his co-author.
So? Your statement isn't even an argument or refutation of any kind.

Quote:
I think I already covered why I think it's total bupkis.
No, you didn't disprove Jones' claims of thermite, or anybody's claim of thermite or nano-thermite yet. Name calling again doesn't help your case.

Quote:
Underwriter laboratories did do tests on the steel beams, but did NOT conclude explosives were the the only way they could fall.

That conclusion was reached by Kevin Ryan, who was employed outside of UL.


He was FIRED after he made that conclusion.

Quote:
Again, another conspiracy that ignores important evidence that disproves their conspiracy.


Like what? Jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to cause the kind of structural collapse of the WTC and eject huge steel girders away from the building.

Quote:
I would like to point out the majority of the architects who originally studied the collapse came with the pancake conclusion. By dismissing the pancake claim, you are doing what you accused me of, dismissing architects which studied the collapse.
Scientists believed that before more evidence had come out. See - http://www.journalof911studies.com/volum...elyCollapse.pdf

Quote:
Not impossible with a fire that burned uncontrollably for 19 days over 17 acres. The fires weren't put out for 2 months, and could possibly have pockets that were high enough to melt some metals.
"Some metal" is a huge understatement. All quotes from eyewitnesses are consistent with literal molten metal or "rivers of flowing metal".

Originally Posted By: "Popular Mechanics"
"The debris pile sat cooking for weeks, with the materials at the bottom of the pile getting increasingly hot because the fires were confined and lost minimal heat to the atmosphere. As a result the fires could have easily reached temps sufficient to melt steel, not to mention most other metals found in the buildings."


Popular Mechanics uses straw man arguments in most of their articles. See also - http://www.rense.com/general62/ppop.htm Besides, there was molten metal on top as well.

Quote:
Let me also mention that most of the molten steal reports were not examined by experts, and it's easy for non-experts to confuse oxidized weaken steal with molten steel.
The melting temperature of steel is 1532 C, or 2790 F. Iron can only be melted in a specially designed blast furnace (where lots of extra oxygen is pumped into the furnace). Knowing this, please explain how the steel shown in the following videos can melt in open air fires.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cx33GuVsUtE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_jiCyMkrRM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Nr1eK0sAsY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qa7PN-8T2VY


Quote:
The 11 people rescued from the rubble of the WTC is proof enough that there was not a significant flow of molten metal. When people get hit with molten metal, they don't give a thumbs up like Arnold in Terminator 2, they pretty much get burned to death.
Nobody got rescued out of the molten metal.

Quote:
Do you realize that governments also get attacked legitimately a lot more often then they stage one.
At least you admit governments stage terror. Governments getting ligitimately attacked doesn't disprove the fact that governments stage terror attacks though.

Quote:
Next we'll be talking about chem trails poisoning us and how Jesus visited the Mayas. Oh wait, Steve E Jones is an expert on those things too!
Your mixing lies with truth, thats dangerous territory and a bad tactic, your destroying your credibility, but since you brought these up, I'll deal with them. Your somehow trying to make a correlation between Stephen Jones (a scientist) with myth. Chem trails do exist and it's not a "conspiracy". Even the history channel did a report on this and the United States, the Chinese and Russian governments have all admitted that they are manipulating the weather.

Quote:
It's kind of weird how these conspiracy theorists tend to be linked to many different unrelated theories. It's almost like there are just some people that are predisposed to them.
It's not unrelated. I'm am proving to you that governments have the capability to stage false flag events (and they do) which is related to the discussion of 9/11 being an inside job. It's happened before (gulf of tonkin, operation northwoods, are a few in the United States). It has happened thoughout history.


Your using the word conspiracy as a kind of "throw around" word. A conspiracy is defined as - an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot, or a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose.

Under this definition, yes there are many government conspiracies.


Suggested video/reading -

http://www.911truth.org/

http://911truth.org/article.php?story=20041221155307646

http://911scholars.org/

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/

http://stj911.org/

http://lawyersfor911truth.blogspot.com/
_________________________
http://www.infowars.com

Top
#1403934 - 03/25/10 11:30 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: MacMacMac]
lisztonian Offline
Full Member

Registered: 09/29/07
Posts: 266
Originally Posted By: MacMacMac
appleman, The Internet only makes this worse. In the past, many people believed everything they saw on television. Now they get 100x more from the net, little of it checked for accuracy. (It need only be checked for allure.)


Of course no one should believe everything they see on the internet, I don't know how that would apply to me though. Nobody should believe anything they hear on the media without doing their own research.

Quote:
If people believe that magic creams can eliminate wrinkles, that a little pill will improve "mental energy" or take off 30 pounds, that a "magic putty" can fix leaking pipes, then they're primed to believe any huckster.
The same goes for those who get all their news from the corporate-controlled media and have been programmed what to believe.
_________________________
http://www.infowars.com

Top
#1419933 - 04/19/10 10:40 AM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: lisztonian]
appleman Offline
Full Member

Registered: 03/30/09
Posts: 188
Quote:
“Farmer builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version not only is almost entirely untrue but serves to create a false impression of order and security.”
Farmer's story is that the government cannot protect you from terrorist attacks and it's lying to you that it can. It has little to nothing to do with 9/11 being a planned attack by the government.
Originally Posted By: lisztonian
Quote:
That makes me laugh even more. The full statement is that they are untrained and non-experts, but they are still willing to go on to conclude that the evidence is sound. That still is not a vote of confidence. AE911 not only includes people who are architects and engineers, but those people who are students and workers for architects and engineers. Out of the 1000, there are only 284 are actual working architects or engineers.
So? Being a student or worker disqualifies you from being educated and examining evidence under the supervision of professionals? You said they are non-experts and then go on to say they are architects and engineers?
You can be an expert at one thing without being an expert at everything. The few that are experts are experts of architecture, not demolitions or chemistry.

The ones that are not even professional architects, just people who work for them or students, should not be listed as an Architect against 9/11. That's an appeal to authority they do not deserve.

When you say that 1000 architects believe 9/11 was false, it should be 1000 real architects. If you wanted it to be 1000 smart people for 9/11 truth, I wouldn't have raised the objection.
Quote:
Quote:
Wow, another Steven E Jones link. Well, It's not him, but it's his co-author.
So? Your statement isn't even an argument or refutation of any kind.
Well, to prove your point about Steven E Jones, you link his co-author. That's basically supporting Steven E Jones by citing Steven E Jones. You're not allowed to do that!
Quote:
Quote:
I think I already covered why I think it's total bupkis.
No, you didn't disprove Jones' claims of thermite, or anybody's claim of thermite or nano-thermite yet. Name calling again doesn't help your case.
Yes I did. I said everything in his samples are what you expect from a huge building falling down.

He jumps to the conclusion of thermite without examining what else it could have been.

He doesn't for example, take a real bit of thermite and burn it himself and examine the output. He doesn't take a sample of dust outside in a normal city outside of a welding shop like the one he tested from and see if there is any contamination. He doesn't explain why certain important pieces of thermite are not present in his sample.
Quote:
Quote:
Underwriter laboratories did do tests on the steel beams, but did NOT conclude explosives were the the only way they could fall.

That conclusion was reached by Kevin Ryan, who was employed outside of UL.
He was FIRED after he made that conclusion.
That still doesn't change the fact that he was not employed directly by UL.

Quote:
Like what? Jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to cause the kind of structural collapse of the WTC and eject huge steel girders away from the building.
Incorrect, as the truck fire I've posted about earlier in this thread, car fuel is enough to cause a structural collapse of a steel structure.

Quote:
Quote:
Not impossible with a fire that burned uncontrollably for 19 days over 17 acres. The fires weren't put out for 2 months, and could possibly have pockets that were high enough to melt some metals.
"Some metal" is a huge understatement. All quotes from eyewitnesses are consistent with literal molten metal or "rivers of flowing metal".
Do you have a source for this?

This is one of the most videoed and photoed event in history, have anything beyond the aluminum shot in the last one.

Quote:
Originally Posted By: "Popular Mechanics"
"The debris pile sat cooking for weeks, with the materials at the bottom of the pile getting increasingly hot because the fires were confined and lost minimal heat to the atmosphere. As a result the fires could have easily reached temps sufficient to melt steel, not to mention most other metals found in the buildings."


Popular Mechanics uses straw man arguments in most of their articles. See also - http://www.rense.com/general62/ppop.htm Besides, there was molten metal on top as well.
You accuse me of Ad hominum attacks and link to a page that starts by claiming Pop Mechanics is a CIA Front. O_O

The page you link to just sources Steve E Jones and Jeff King, and does no research on it's own.
Quote:

Quote:
Let me also mention that most of the molten steal reports were not examined by experts, and it's easy for non-experts to confuse oxidized weaken steal with molten steel.
The melting temperature of steel is 1532 C, or 2790 F. Iron can only be melted in a specially designed blast furnace (where lots of extra oxygen is pumped into the furnace). Knowing this, please explain how the steel shown in the following videos can melt in open air fires.
The first video is after it's been dug up and can easily be explained by the popular mechanic's explanation.

Second video has been removed

Third video shows molten aluminum coming from the plane, which is consistent with other air plane crashes.

The fourth video compares buildings that are not the same as the WTC, making the comparison interesting, but useless.

Quote:
Quote:
The 11 people rescued from the rubble of the WTC is proof enough that there was not a significant flow of molten metal. When people get hit with molten metal, they don't give a thumbs up like Arnold in Terminator 2, they pretty much get burned to death.
Nobody got rescued out of the molten metal.
There are rivers of molten metal and yet, 11 people can survive these "rivers". With all the metal in the WTC, it doesn't make sense that these people narrowly avoid all of them.

Quote:
Quote:
Next we'll be talking about chem trails poisoning us and how Jesus visited the Mayas. Oh wait, Steve E Jones is an expert on those things too!
Your mixing lies with truth, thats dangerous territory and a bad tactic, your destroying your credibility, but since you brought these up, I'll deal with them. Your somehow trying to make a correlation between Stephen Jones (a scientist) with myth.
It is completely true that Steven E Jones believes in those things and has gone as far as put his name on them.

I am not making a correlation with a scientist and a myth. I am making a statement about a myth a scientist believes. I am saying that a scientist that has a history of jumping to strange conclusions should be taken with a grain of salt.
Quote:
Chem trails do exist and it's not a "conspiracy". Even the history channel did a report on this and the United States, the Chinese and Russian governments have all admitted that they are manipulating the weather.
The chem trail theory is that planes are venting poison. It has no fact in reality and is easily explained by natural phenomenon.

Further reading:
http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4037

Movie:
http://herebedragonsmovie.com/
_________________________
Dr. Appleman, former NASA engineer, Empire of Earth and B.S. of Ninjutsu at MIT.

Top
#1537779 - 10/18/10 05:24 AM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: Horwinkle]
Rimmer Offline
Full Member

Registered: 10/15/10
Posts: 483
Loc: United Kingdom
Originally Posted By: Horwinkle
Michael Moore is more than a little bit looney.

His "facts" are dubious at best, spurious usually, and generally used out of context.
In his films, you only get "his" mutated views.

His works are reviewed far and wide. Have a look. His works just don't stand up to scrutiny.


As a Brit, the only thing I don't like about Michael Moore is his ability to be a little bit 'Hollywood' about his performances. Other than that, he should be considered an asset to patriotism. He constantly says he loves his country and hates the fact that the American people don't seem to stick up for themselves in given situations. That's admirable.. It's quite easy to dupe the population if you have the media on your side.

I personally think that anyone that thinks the 9/11 incident was a simply case of buildings falling down due to planes crashing in to them is more capable of being duped by the media and an unpatriotic American government (certainly at that time) than they are able to listen to the facts from experts in their fields.

Planes crash in to the twin towers and they fall down against all technical explanation. Bin Laden takes responsibility. America invades Iraq. Nuff said..

Top
#1764287 - 10/04/11 12:11 AM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: Takeshi_Jay]
Artur Gajewski Offline
Full Member

Registered: 12/07/10
Posts: 306
Loc: Helsinki, Finland
Google up operation northwoods and tell me if you see some resemblance to 9/11?
_________________________
- Artur Gajewski

Author of Piano Lessons Package for Synthesia & Child's Piano Play

Top
#1853878 - 02/29/12 06:48 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: luapparc]
Prof Pizzacotta Offline
Full Member

Registered: 02/15/12
Posts: 25
Quote:
I don't think it takes a demolition expert to see that the buildings, especially building 7, are falling as a result of controlled demolition.


There is absolutely ZERO evidence of any controlled demolition. There aren't any actual demolition experts who've signed on to such ludicrous theories.

Think about it: isn't it very interesting that both towers began to fail right at the areas they were hit by the planes. This is an awfully strange coincidence if a controlled demo was used, especially since they were difference parts of the two buildings. So, if it was planned, the untrained pilots were good enough to guide the planes into a very small area. heck, the second plane damn near missed the building entirely. As far as building 7 goes, if it was controlled, they had very lousy timing or were incompetent. It made no sense to drop the building 8 hours after the other towers fell, injuring no one.

Top
#1894174 - 05/09/12 01:23 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: Prof Pizzacotta]
pckhdlr305 Offline
Full Member

Registered: 10/12/11
Posts: 53
Wow never knew this section of the forums was here. I'm glad some people have a level head on their shoulders and can discern the flaws in the official story. Look with your eyes not with your ears. Like most already said it was considered unpatriotic to say that the official story was suspicious directly after the incident and anyone who questioned it was un-American. Funny how before noon on the day of we somehow knew who the culprits were...give me a break!

It wouldn't matter if you flew 100 planes into those buildings, they wouldn't disintegrate because of it. To the guy above me, are you aware that Larry Silverstein updated his insurance to cover for terrorist attacks just months before the attack? He also miraculously didn't go into work that day. Even if somehow those planes could have cause the collapse of those buildings they wouldn't accelerate at the speed of gravity. Cars wouldn't spontaneously combust either. It's very sad to see peoples who don't use their minds.

For anyone who wants the most in depth explanation of what happened on 9/11 I highly suggest Dr. Judy Woodses book, Where Did the Towers go?
You can listen to an overview of her theory here;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ms1uUZX_g2I

She really hit the nail on the head with this and I hope at least one person on this site listens to that interview and buys her book.

Top
#1898852 - 05/17/12 08:18 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: Takeshi_Jay]
MacMacMac Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 09/24/09
Posts: 3866
Loc: North Carolina
You're an expert at the consequences of flying 100 planes into a building?

You find it suspicious that someone purchases insurance? How many people purchase insurance on any given day?

You find it miraculous that someone doesn't go to work that day? My coworker's friend didn't go that day either. Perhaps she was in on the conspiracy?

In your case, I find it sad to see people who DO use their minds. Learn how to think, please.

Top
#1901609 - 05/23/12 01:27 AM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: MacMacMac]
pckhdlr305 Offline
Full Member

Registered: 10/12/11
Posts: 53
wink

Top
#1903390 - 05/26/12 09:38 AM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: pckhdlr305]
appleman Offline
Full Member

Registered: 03/30/09
Posts: 188
Originally Posted By: pckhdlr305
Wow never knew this section of the forums was here. I'm glad some people have a level head on their shoulders and can discern the flaws in the official story.
People like you are the people that makes it so we cannot discuss this story with a level head.

Quote:
o the guy above me, are you aware that Larry Silverstein updated his insurance to cover for terrorist attacks just months before the attack?
Incorrect.

The WTC was insured against terrorist attacks for many, many years. It's public record that Larry Silverstein collected an insurance claim for the 1993 bombing attack of the WTC.
Quote:
He also miraculously didn't go into work that day.
The man had a doctors appointment.

Yes, it is an interesting coincidence that a 69 year old man had a doctors appointment on the very day of the attack. But must I also point out he's 69, and so frequent doctors appointments are just part of being near your life expectancy.
Quote:
Even if somehow those planes could have cause the collapse of those buildings they wouldn't accelerate at the speed of gravity.
Models have shown that this would be the case, since there would be little to no resistance as the weight of the floors collapsed on top of each other.

Quote:
Dr. Judy Woodses book,
Star Wars Energy Weapons took down the Death Star WTC. Alright.
_________________________
Dr. Appleman, former NASA engineer, Empire of Earth and B.S. of Ninjutsu at MIT.

Top
#1903524 - 05/26/12 03:21 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: appleman]
pckhdlr305 Offline
Full Member

Registered: 10/12/11
Posts: 53
If the tower fell because the floors were collapsing on top of each other there would have to be a moment of resistance every time a floor fell on top of another one. Even if the resistance was only .25 seconds, assuming they started collapsing from the 80th floor, that would still take 20 seconds to reach the ground. Those buildings were gone in half that time. Try and clap your hands 80 something times in around 10-11 seconds.

About Larry getting insurance in 1993 I will have to look into that because I'm almost positive that The Port Authority of new york owned the buildings and until about 6 months before the attacks they then leased it out to Larry. Even if I'm wrong about that did you do know that the FBI was caught working in conjunction with an Egyptian terrorist to bomb the WTC in 1993?

Proof about that here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFLHzWJN7-8

Back to the WTCs.

An open air fire isn't going to do any significant damage to those buildings steel beams either. Here is a list of sky scraper fires and none of them underwent a total structural collapse. Maybe partial in areas but they all remained standing and all burned much longer than the WTCs. The one in Madrid burned for 18 hours.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyscraper_fire#Notable_fires

I mean look at this fire compared to the WTCs.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3di41_madrid-skyscraper-windsor-tower-on_news
Especially number 7. The fires in the towers do not compare on any level to that building.

There are too many ambiguities surrounding the official story. You would be crazy not to question it. And if you wan't to mock me before evening listening to that interview or reading her book that's fine but she provides irrefutable evidence that something else was at play that day. I really think you and everyone else read it. Even if you don't want to believe her as to what caused the collapse you can't deny the evidence she provides.

Those buildings were built on a water dyke to keep the Hudson river from flooding the basement/subway lines and supposedly 1 million tons of material 'collapsing'(collapsing in quotes because they didn't collapse, they disintegrated) to the ground didn't harm the dyke in any way. Yet when construction crews started to move their equipment in to clean up they had to park them on the outside of the dyke structure because the weight of the equipment began to damage it. Something doesn't add up there.

Cars were spontaneously combusting. Firefighters oxygen tanks were too. That isn't the result of a fire or from a building 'collapsing'.

All that was left of those buildings was dust and paper. Every single piece of paper inside that building was blown into the streets of new york that day. They found a filing cabinet with all of it's paper contents still inside of it!

Picture here, http://www.the-office.com/filingcabinet.jpg
There isn't any known explanation as to how that could happen. Look at that cabinet and then the un burned paper inside. Could a office fire do that?

I mean there is so much more to get into with this that I will have to stop here for now. I would like to have a civil discussion with people about this because it's very important people start to realize what our government is trying to do to us. They don't want us to have freedom. They never did and never will. 9/11 was a false flag attack to begin an ultimate stripping of our liberties. Governments have always done that. From Nero burning Rome to the Reichstag fire all the way to the gulf of Tonkin incident which was admitted to be a lie. A lie to send our troops to be killed in a war.

And something to back up what Dr. Judy Wood says:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzm2wfiXdW4

That steel column just turns to dust right there. That's not a breaking or tipping or falling over. That is a disintegration.


Edited by pckhdlr305 (05/26/12 03:26 PM)

Top
#1904308 - 05/28/12 09:03 AM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: pckhdlr305]
appleman Offline
Full Member

Registered: 03/30/09
Posts: 188
Originally Posted By: pckhdlr305
If the tower fell because the floors were collapsing on top of each other there would have to be a moment of resistance every time a floor fell on top of another one.
Not necessarily.

If we drop a heavy book from 10 feet, it will fall at the speed of gravity.
If we drop a heavy book from 10 feet, it put several layers of thin, wet tissue paper across it's path, the book will still fall at the speed of gravity. The wet tissues will offer absolutely no measurable resistance and the book will rip right through them.

The floors of the WTC are not load bearing, the walls were. The force of the fall was going through the non-load bearing part of the building.

Quote:
An open air fire isn't going to do any significant damage to those buildings steel beams either. Here is a list of sky scraper fires and none of them underwent a total structural collapse. Maybe partial in areas but they all remained standing and all burned much longer than the WTCs. The one in Madrid burned for 18 hours.
All the other buildings were not built like the WTC and had working fire suppression, unlike the WTC. They also lack airplane sized holes in their support structures.

Likewise, open air fires do get hot enough to significantly weaken steel beams.

A good example is this one, clicky
Quote:
There are too many ambiguities surrounding the official story.
This I do agree with.

Quote:
she provides irrefutable evidence that something else was at play that day.
She's peddling "woo". Star wars energy weapons exist in the same way ghosts exist on ghost hunting shows. We have no clue what ghosts can and cannot do, so therefore anything can be proof of a "ghost".

There's no such thing as a Star Wars Energy Weapon, so anything can be "proof" of it's existence.
_________________________
Dr. Appleman, former NASA engineer, Empire of Earth and B.S. of Ninjutsu at MIT.

Top
#1904407 - 05/28/12 12:47 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: Takeshi_Jay]
pckhdlr305 Offline
Full Member

Registered: 10/12/11
Posts: 53
While I accept your idea of the book falling through wet tissue it's irrelevant because NIST even says that isn't the way the buildings disappeared. They changed their theory as to how the buildings collapsed. You can read that here:

http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/


But I think you ignored some of my more important points. Did you watch the video of the steel column and girders literally just turning to dust? And are you aware cars were spontaneously combusting on that day. Firefighters oxygen tanks were exploding as well. Or my point about the water dyke that kept the Hudson river out of the subway/basement lines not being damaged by 1 million tons supposedly crashing to the ground from a quarter mile in the sky. What about that cabinet with it's paper contents still intact inside? Or all the paper contents of the towers just thrown into the streets of New York that day. If this was a normal fire paper wouldn't survive. Or what about the lack of debris at ground zero? Even the day of the event there are not enough debris left to account for 2 500,000lb buildings. That's not taking into account WTC 7 either. Heck how about all the people who have mysteriously died that worked in one of the buildings and contradicted the official story http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvay28lZiHU


And Dr. Judy Wood provides real world, tangible evidence. You did not even listen to any of the interview or read anything about what she has to say or you wouldn't have said that. Some of the tangible evidences are the questions I raise to you in the above paragraph but it goes much deeper than that. Her book is 500 pages; I can't get into all of it here.

And I understand what you meant by saying Star Wars weapons don't exist but they do. I mean the army has already weponized a heat ray. And do you know who John Hutchison is? Video of what he can do here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeUgDJc6AWE


Again there is a lot to get into with this but no matter which part of the event you choose to talk about that day there are always more ambiguities than truth. Why wouldn't the pentagon just release all of it's security tapes to prove a plane actually hit it? Why would they release one that shoots at 1fps and doesn't even show the side of impact. And why would FBI(or whoever the government officials were) confiscate security tapes from gas stations and stores neighboring the pentagon?

Take 2 hours and listen to what Dr. Wood has to say. Even if you don't want to believe it was some sort of secret government technology you can't deny the facts she provides.


Edited by pckhdlr305 (05/28/12 05:16 PM)

Top
#1915148 - 06/18/12 07:14 AM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: pckhdlr305]
appleman Offline
Full Member

Registered: 03/30/09
Posts: 188
Originally Posted By: pckhdlr305
While I accept your idea of the book falling through wet tissue it's irrelevant because NIST even says that isn't the way the buildings disappeared. They changed their theory as to how the buildings collapsed. You can read that here:
NiST only studied until the building collapse was inevitable.

Their dismissal of the pancake theory is only to point out that the pancaking of floors was the RESULT of the failure, not the cause of the failure.
Quote:
Did you watch the video of the steel column and girders literally just turning to dust?
It doesn't look like it's turing to dust. It looks like the bottom of the structure weakened and fell. The "dust" is the result of the debris sitting on and around that steal structure.
Quote:
And are you aware cars were spontaneously combusting on that day. Firefighters oxygen tanks were exploding as well.
There is no evidence of this, except coming from Dr. Judy herself.

Quote:
Or my point about the water dyke that kept the Hudson river out of the subway/basement lines not being damaged by 1 million tons supposedly crashing to the ground from a quarter mile in the sky.
Most of the support structure of the dyke was destroyed.

However, the debris were enough to keep the walls from falling over.

While removing the debris, several leaks sprong, but since this is expected, most of them didn't make anything more than the local news.
Quote:
What about that cabinet with it's paper contents still intact inside? Or all the paper contents of the towers just thrown into the streets of New York that day. If this was a normal fire paper wouldn't survive.
There was a huge fire on some of the floors, but many of the floors were not affected by the fire.

This is obvious from the videos.
Quote:
Or what about the lack of debris at ground zero?
O_o I'm not sure what 9/11 you're talking about, but there was a heck of a lot of debris.
Quote:
all the people who have mysteriously died that worked in one of the buildings and contradicted the official story http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvay28lZiHU
While they're interesting, that's all they are.

In fact, the proof of this video existing only proves that no one is trying to cover it up. Why would the government go after them, but not be able to censor youtube?
Quote:
And I understand what you meant by saying Star Wars weapons don't exist but they do.
Look. If we have the technology to destroy a huge building like the WTC like magic, and we're not using it in Iraq or Afghanistan after so many years of war.

I'm going to be pissed.

Seriously.

Pissed.
Quote:
I mean the army has already weponized a heat ray. And do you know who John Hutchison is? Video of what he can do here:
At first, I thought he was using electromagnetic forces to bend things, which is pretty cool, but then I realized they're just moving around. The "bending" is simple perspective, similar to how "psychics" bend spoons.

It's really cool what he's doing, but almost all his words make absolutely no sense at all. He's using interesting science-y words, but fails to use them in any sort of proper context.

Quote:
Why wouldn't the pentagon just release all of it's security tapes to prove a plane actually hit it? Why would they release one that shoots at 1fps and doesn't even show the side of impact. And why would FBI(or whoever the government officials were) confiscate security tapes from gas stations and stores neighboring the pentagon?
These are the same reason.

They don't have large amounts of taped security cameras in the pentagon. When you deal with top secret information, you don't exactly want that sort of thing. Likewise, when you need a tape of the pentagon, you're going to have to go to places like gas stations and hotels, since they're the only ones that have them.
_________________________
Dr. Appleman, former NASA engineer, Empire of Earth and B.S. of Ninjutsu at MIT.

Top
#1931637 - 07/24/12 03:03 AM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: appleman]
Artur Gajewski Offline
Full Member

Registered: 12/07/10
Posts: 306
Loc: Helsinki, Finland
Interesting things to read: http://www.drjudywood.com/wtc
_________________________
- Artur Gajewski

Author of Piano Lessons Package for Synthesia & Child's Piano Play

Top
#1932744 - 07/26/12 02:23 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: Artur Gajewski]
pckhdlr305 Offline
Full Member

Registered: 10/12/11
Posts: 53
Originally Posted By: Artur Gajewski
Interesting things to read: http://www.drjudywood.com/wtc


Extremely interesting. The official explanation given to us by our government doesn't explain anything that happened on that day.

Top
#2005603 - 12/28/12 02:25 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: luapparc]
Scribbler Offline
Full Member

Registered: 12/15/12
Posts: 32
I am in total agreement with you. The last time I brought up this subject in an "off topic" area of a forum was on a credit info sight forum. I was terminated. I only asked those who might question the "official" story to investigate other viewpoints and to check out Architects and Engineers for 911 truth.

To really understand the motivation behind this attack on innocents (mostly working class cleaning staff and cooks, low paid office workers)that was planned/executed by the US National Security State Apparatus, including the help of Bourgeois mass media, is to read Vladimir Lenin's writings on Imperialism i.e. "Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism"

9/11 was perpetrated at the behest of Monopoly Corporations and Finance Capital or the Financial Oligarchy of the US, Europe (mainly France and England)and the cooperation of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain and Zionist Israel in order for the wealthy corporate and financial interests in the US (mainly in the US) to penetrate the markets, resources, labor, minerals and drugs of other countries that are trying to develop their industries for their own people. It's called State Monopoly Capitalism, when the ruling interests who dominate every aspect of society, including our "democratic" and "republican" a.k.a. "imperialists" parties and the major media and courts along with the military, will stoop to the most unspeakable crimes to realize their aims. Whether it's Bush or Clinton, Reagan or Obama, it doesn't matter. They all represent elite monopoly capitalist interests and will stop at nothing to expand surplus value in a decaying economic system called Capitalism.

Socialism and Communism are historically necessary. It is the only way to progress, peace, production and labor. In socialism (and then communism) production is subordinated to the needs of people, not surplus profit for a small fraction of the 1%. It resolves the contradictions of capitalism caused by Overproduction and Anarchy of Production which is the cause unemployment and crisis.

The dogmatic ideology Anti-Communinism and all of it's lies was created and is sustained by the Imperialist US ruling classes. It disseminates views that are completely alien to the interests most of the working masses.

Unfortunately, Obama is more of a war criminal than Bush. Just listen to what Hina Shamsi from the American Civil Liberties Union National Security Project has to say here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yPcxdEAwVA

I expect that this post will be deleted and I will get a warning not to post such statements but that's ok. Most people who love music and piano love life and the truth as well.


Edited by Scribbler (12/28/12 03:06 PM)

Top
#2005634 - 12/28/12 03:13 PM Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 [Re: Fraggle]
Scribbler Offline
Full Member

Registered: 12/15/12
Posts: 32
Security and "news anchors" are part of the Bourgeois machinery. Many of them were just doing their compartmentalized jobs and didn't really comprehend at the time what was happening. I am certain that all of these fluffy "good morning america" announcers and props now know that they were fooled as well. I still wonder how Peter Jennings died. However, it's important to remember that many "news anchors" are the children, wives and siblings of people who are firmly entrenched in teh National Security State Apparatus (military, Intelligence, courts). Most who are speaking up, especially first hand witnesses like the hotel staff who were viewing the missile attack on the Pentagon (it wasn't a plane)were murdered by the US State operatives. Many more had their lives taken because they were brave enough to speak up, from a dutch demolition expert to a wife of a Twin Tower victim. Dead. "apparent suicides"

even the mayor of Shankesville PA said "there is NO plane" I have met people from right outside of Shankesville. Residents' communication lines were interrupted for 3 days one told me when she was trying to contact her friend.


Edited by Scribbler (12/28/12 03:18 PM)

Top
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >

What's Hot!!

Trade Regrets:
Barry "Bear" Arnaut

(ad) Yamaha CP Music Rest Promo
Yamaha CP Music Rest Promo
Ad (Seiler/Knabe)
Knabe Pianos
(ad) HAILUN Pianos
Hailun Pianos - Click for More
(125ad) Dampp Chaser
Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver
(ad) Lindeblad Piano
Lindeblad Piano Restoration
(ad) Piano Music Sale - Dover Publications
Piano Music Sale
Sheet Music Plus (125)
Sheet Music Plus Featured Sale
New Topics - Multiple Forums
The less I practice, the better I get :-)
by Mark_C
11/25/14 04:49 PM
Reasons behind notes as letters rather than numbers?
by TowardsTheEdge
11/25/14 04:31 PM
collard & collard
by Bob Newbie
11/25/14 03:39 PM
What's your definition of music?
by juliantoha624
11/25/14 03:21 PM
Korg SP250 internal speakers
by Kai C
11/25/14 03:12 PM
Forum Stats
77041 Members
42 Forums
159348 Topics
2340729 Posts

Max Online: 15252 @ 03/21/10 11:39 PM
Gift Ideas for Music Lovers!
Find the Perfect Gift for the Music Lovers on your List!
Visit our online store today.

Visit our online store for gifts for music lovers

 
Help keep the forums up and running with a donation, any amount is appreciated!
Or by becoming a Subscribing member! Thank-you.
Donate   Subscribe
 
Our Piano Related Classified Ads
|
Dealers | Tuners | Lessons | Movers | Restorations | Pianos For Sale | Sell Your Piano |

Advertise on Piano World
| Subscribe | Piano World | PianoSupplies.com | Advertise on Piano World | Donate | Link to Us | Classifieds |
| |Contact | Privacy | Legal | About Us | Site Map | Free Newsletter | Press Room |


copyright 1997 - 2014 Piano World ® all rights reserved
No part of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission