here the little video i was talking about in the other topics in this forum
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oisOoZuoFuY
see the movie 911eyewitness the see the whole explanation
military helicopter were hiding in the smoke and use secret implosion weapon !!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mxFRigYD3s BBC Reported Collapse of WTC Building 7 Early-- TWICE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlvlNiTuqAI&feature=related President knew of WTC crash before leaving hotel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WA5VsSF6FZA&feature=related BBC reporter losing it (unedited) + BBC defense
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7SwOT29gbc&feature=related BBC Reported
Building 7 Collapse 20 Minutes Before It Fell
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0Qu6eyyr4c&feature=related Never before seen Video of WTC 9/11 attack
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw&feature=related 9/11: Total Proof That Bombs Were Planted In The Buildings!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeAwSAEXHkI&feature=related WTC - Video Not Shown In Europe Or USA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcHHl_m8ocg Slowed Down WTC UFO very interesting japanese version but #1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xv1MIDF2XM4
hi Pese and all.
RE: the UFO video....ummmmm... im not sure on the facts here but, didnt the US Gov pipe up and say they made that video for some crap reason ?....im not SURE if they did or not but i seem to remember reading something about it over the last 8 years or so, but IF they did here is my question.
.....the Gov will never admit to any ufo of any kind ever...why would they then pipe up and make a video ?...
...this might be a bit far fetched for some of you,but i cant help think that the Gov and all that black ops crap that go with it have had them for years....which opens up a whole new can of worms, so ill stop here.
(of course im expecting Madsen to chime in now with a pic of some one flying a kite, and pass it off as the ufo in the vid)
Hello all
someone ask me if there is other videos showing military helicopter over the WTC, yes there is, in the movie 911eyewitness they show one other video with helicopter (view from the street), not helicopters for tv reporter, and i have myself find 3 more videos showing military helicopter in the smoke over the WTC
i want to repeat here the main proof of conspiracy, it is all about the total time of the collapsing related with the newton law, in fact the 2 WTC towers were falling more rapidly than the Newton Law gravity formula
it means that an heavy big metal ball falling from the same distance will get down slower than the WTC towers !!!
this fact in on hundreds of videos showing the collapsing
my point is : it is impossible to fall down so rapidly, than there must be an explanation for that, and the better explanation i have found is that military helicopters were hiding in the smoke waiting the right time to shoot an implosion secret military weapon
How about when not any helicopters over WTC 911 ??? Nobody worry about ... not any goes to look closely what is happend ... nobody try to specify damages ... nobody even try to help ...
Is it what you like to see? All people must to be slack jaws like you? Sitting at home, picking nose and rave about Newton Law gravity formulas ...
and at the same time mess with "Gravity powered devices" !!! The same peoples who are speaking that WTC 911 falling more rapidly than the Newton Law gravity formula --- they
blithesome ignore all Newton Laws when crowing about "prosperous Gravity powered devices" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
My opinion is that WTC 911 collapsed by all known rules and laws. Huge Mass of upmost floors did ram nethers - caused incredible serial impacts, horrendous vibrations, unbelievable energy ...
The only thing myself I do wonder - why was so not enough helicopters around and over.
Cheers,
khabe
Oh wow more ppl thinking this was done by the government...
you can't even tell whats that in the pic, its too small and is probably debris.
Now dont get me wrong, i was all about the loose change documentaries and thinking bush blew up the towers... but after seeing sooooooooo many debunking documentaries even by popular mechanics (who have known what they've been talking about for YEARS and whatnot. it would be ob surd
to believe bush was behing 9/11.
Here's my proof with all the facts. Watch the first one called "screw loose change" if that dont make u feel like u were wrong then ur living in a fantasy world that doesn't exist.
"SCREW LOOSE CHANGE"
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3214024953129565561
"9/11 CONSPIRACY THEORIES"
http://clamshare.com/v/187,penn-&-teller-9/11-conspiracy-theories.html
"
Oh and find the popular mechanics documentary on debunking the theories too
This topic is all about the movie 911eyewitness, in the movie the picture is much better, they zoom at the flashes coming from the helicopter and we can see far much better, it look like two parrallele light beams, and we can see it more clearly
they have found the total collapsing time of the towers
it is possible that the thermit, were used just before the helicopter using implosion weapon
http://www.911eyewitness.com/
i saw this movie some years ago, my internet connection is too slow to see again
here there is many short cut of the movie
http://www.911eyewitness.com/videos01.html
and try this one
http://www.911eyewitness.com/samples/chopper45.php
some years ago there was only one movie 1.5 hours, now it is split, and much more videos has been add
QuoteShortly after NYC Fire Fighters reached the south tower impact zone and reported the fire was under control, Chopper #4 approached through the smoke, hidden from the live televised broadcast, to perform some sort of emergency rescue from the roof of the tower. Was this a direct result of the firemenÂÃ,¹s previous radio communications?
i wish to have more time to find the exact movie of mine on youtube, heu it must be there somewhere
i have a slow connection, haaaaa poor guy i am, i can not look at all the link you guys have post in this topic, and now my computer tell me that i can not even look those little video cause my computer need a sort af quick time program
the movie i got on my youtube is comnig from a German website, not working anymore
ANYWAY, the collapsing of the 2 WTC towers was too fast, even if it is at the same speed of free falling in thin air, we can see that in hundreds of videos
Quote from: guyver2k on September 17, 2008, 02:23:12 AM
Oh and find the popular mechanics documentary on debunking the theories too
lol if you think popular mechanics are the people to believe i feel sorry for you.......you might be supprised who is behind them.
.. if i were you i wouldnt believe any one,but id keep looking and reading and watching real footage untill i felt in my gut what the real story might be. glad im not you tho, i was where you are and it took years of reading and watching to work it out, the world is a stage,enjoy the pop corn while ya can.
Seems this is internet-contractable mental illness , some kind of web propagation paranoia.
Total surmise >:(
yeah all those eye witness reports were unconfirmed. so why distribute that as evidence???
In fact thats exactly what they say in screw loose change.
I don't care who runs popular mechanics , all i know is what they specialize in
PLEASE WATCH SCREW LOOSE CHANGE. I POSTED THE LINK.
Its like at least 2 and a half hours of debunking.
it explains exactly why the goverment wasn't involved, ( proper) physics. proper interviews. It debunks everything.,
like i know all the arguements against what i'm saying cuz i thought bush blew everything up b4.
But that would be the most extreme way to invade iraq and something of that magnitude.
muslims blew up the towers, osama was behind it. bush took advantage of 9/11 to invade iraq AFTER it happened.
You need the scientific facts and REAL witnesses and CONFIRMED reports u base ur conclusion on fact, not fiction made up by some college students.
Nah i feel sorry for the 9/11 victims that died just so you ppl can say it was their own goverment.
The U.S. has invaded and intervened in SOOOOOOOO many countries for the past 100 years.
They've made up bullshit like communism and dictatorships, as an excuse to overthrow democratically elected goverments in central and south america just to install murderous dictators that will sell them cheap bananas!
They've invaded iraq the first time over weapons that they sold saddam.
so why would it make sense to lose BILLIONS and BILLIONS of dollars to blow up the world trade center and kill thousands of their own ppl to invade a country in the desert that had nothing to do with it??? When they could've applied their usual propaganda tactics that have worked so cost effectively in the past. All bush did was take advantage of a tragedy. there was no plan to crash airplanes by bush.... Like jeez this is just common sense and looking up conspiracy movies and websites as ur years of evidence is a joke. like seriously... it's a joke right?
And btw... the buildings do fall in the proper time frame... u guys are just watching conspiracy movies with a bad clock on it lol...
my conclusion is that its not just REAL proof im using. But I'm also using common sense.
And i'd like to make a challenge here if anyones up for it.
watch Screw loose change. all the conspiracies u've all heard are on there and debunked. (btw its twice as long as loose change cuz they had to cover EVERYTHING).
oh an its independantly done.
if theres anyone who can argue the evidence on there, then bring it up. like to see you try.
that topic is about military helicopters and the 911 eyewitness video or website
so what the fuck are you saying with loose change, you are not in the right topic, you are changing the main topic, start your own topic on loose change yourself and then take your time to destroy it with your favorite counter loose change movie
and let this topic roll on the 911eyewitness and military helicopter
you are lost in this forum, fuck your loose change movie, and fuck you as well in your own thread
Quote from: khabe on September 17, 2008, 07:35:10 AM
Seems this is internet-contractable mental illness , some kind of web propagation paranoia.
Total surmise >:(
Hartiberlin had say this to khabe
QuoteKhabe, this is the last warning !
If you try to twist the facts you will get banned.
and Drannom will say this to khabe
QuoteHow about when not any helicopters over WTC 911 Nobody worry about ... not any goes to look closely what is happend ... nobody try to specify damages ... nobody even try to help ...
Is it what you like to see? All people must to be slack jaws like you? Sitting at home, picking nose and rave about Newton Law gravity formulas ...
and at the same time mess with "Gravity powered devices" !!! The same peoples who are speaking that WTC 911 falling more rapidly than the Newton Law gravity formula --- they
blithesome ignore all Newton Laws when crowing about "prosperous Gravity powered devices" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
My opinion is that WTC 911 collapsed by all known rules and laws. Huge Mass of upmost floors did ram nethers - caused incredible serial impacts, horrendous vibrations, unbelievable energy ...
The only thing myself I do wonder - why was so not enough helicopters around and over.
Cheers,
khabe
look at many hundreds videos of the collapsing and ask yourself how a tower can fall so rapidly, and then if you find it normal, it is because you believe the unbelievable, those towers were hit near the top and the fire is just not enough to do that
AND welcome to all the skeptics, we need a lot of skeptics then we will be able to open some blind eyes
most of the scientist understand the Newton Law, WTC were collapsing too rapidly, this evidence will remain forever, i am pretty sure that even a child could understand this
hey little child, you saw those towers, something was hitting them near the top, and then both of the towers fall down as if there were falling down in a big undeground hole
demolition with thermite, yes !, and at the same moment a secret implosion weapon going from the top to the bottom
all we need to know is what kind of weapon was it ?
Quote from: guyver2k on September 17, 2008, 02:19:14 AM
Here's my proof with all the facts. Watch the first one called "screw loose change" if that dont make u feel like u were wrong then ur living in a fantasy world that doesn't exist.
"SCREW LOOSE CHANGE"
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3214024953129565561
The Screw Loose change movie is really a screw,
but only by itsself,
as it wants to twists the facts:
They tell you, that WTC7 had no squibs, do you need glasses to see them ?
Have a look at Steve Jones videos where you can clearly see them.
Do you really think the building was brought down by fire or
collapse or "pulling" it with cables ???
Jeesh,how naive can you be ???
This was a perfect controlled demolition
falling in free fall speed into its own foodsteps.
The explosions could probably be heard in the near sourroundings,
but they were damped, cause they also had the charges deep inside the building
and not at the outside.
Also you can already see from the smoke and dust
that all 3 buildings were destroyed by explosive demolition.
That is the best evidence !
Also the video wants to tell you, that no demolition company says, that it was an
explosive demolition.
Well, didnÂÃ,´t you see the video where the NetherlandÂÃ,´s demolition expert
saw it and instanntly said it was an explosive demolition ?
He did not even know, that it was WTC7 , but he instantly verified,
that it was an explosive demolition !
This video is really redicoules. It "screws itsself...! But that is all..
Quote
"9/11 CONSPIRACY THEORIES"
http://clamshare.com/v/187,penn-&-teller-9/11-conspiracy-theories.html
Penn and Teller are 2 guys that even would sell their mothers,
if they would get money for them...
How often do I hear them say: "Asshole", "Throw and push him down the ladder"..., etc..
Not the right words for an ethical analysis..
enough said...
P.S:
You can probably get some of the pertuberators,
if you will find out, who was in the helicopter, that flew seconds
before the 1st WTC fell in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oisOoZuoFuY
They probably used radio frequency controlled ignition of the
explosive charges inside the elevator shafts
and this chopper is the only logical explanation that
could have radioed these ignition signal with absolute safety to these explosive charges.
So the guys who ignited the charges were probably in this chopper...
So one only has to find out, which chopper this was and who was in it.
This is the only logical explanation to me to ignite the charges
in the right order and to control the ignition safely.
I donÂÃ,´t think the ignition was controlled by cables or phone
lines as this would have caused too much uncertainity, as they
could not see in advance, what the crashed plane ( Cruise Missile, Black Hawk ?)
would cause for damage.
And they needed to ignite the charges in the right order
from the top to the bottom to make it look,
as if it collapsed..
So people, find out, who was in this chopper.
Then you will have some of them....
Quote from: hartiberlin on September 20, 2008, 10:16:53 PM
They tell you, that WTC7 had no squibs, do you need glasses to see them ?
Have a look at Steve Jones videos where you can clearly see them.
Do you really think the building was brought down by fire or
collapse or "pulling" it with cables ???
Ok, this is the third time I've seen this mistake, and I'm beginning to get suspicious ;D
The "official story" does not claim that WTC7 was "pulled with cables". Based on your posts in another thread, it appears you have misinterpreted some pictures on this page: http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm
Those pictures show WTC6 being "pulled" with cables. That happened months after September 11, and the identity of the building is made clear on the page. The website is not trying to mislead you into believing that cables were used to demolish WTC7 on September 11.
To the contrary, it is the "truthers", if I may use that expression, who claim WTC7 was "pulled", which they maintain means "demolished with explosives".
I'm not going to get involved with this thread other than to point this out (which I'm sure most of you will appreciate). :D
@Madsen,
so how in your view had WTC7 come down,
if not with explosives ?
How and who did "pull" it ?
Do you think they did the wiring in 5 to 7 hours
to explode it ?
So how did they "pull" it ?
NWO did the demolition of WTC7 cause it was the central control of all the operation, yes the bad guys were there to supervise all the operation, and push the signal radio waves to the thermite
so after, they have to destroy WTC7 in the way to destroy all proof in that building, they have planned to destroy it , and they had to do it, the problem is that there was no damage at all on the WTC7 building as they had planned
the radio demolition waves come from WTC7, from my point of view there was thermite and no explosive, just a kind of secret implosion military device falling from the top of the 2 WTC and breaking all floors going from the top to the bottom, that can explain the testimony of those who were hearing explosives sounds, in fact i think it was implosive implosions
those implosion devices may have let the outside structure intact
WE do know who were in those helicopters, thoses choppers were not immatriculate and take advantage of a big military test done the same day to proceed viciously!
the pilots of those choppers were working for the governement over the govenement, it is the NWO, and they have infiltrated military as well as NASA
in fact in WWar2 , the Nazis keep going with the war by infiltrate many governements, they found some of their kinds to help them, a coalition of bad guys
JFK was murdered 10 days after calling the peoples to rebel against any secret society !
the WTC terrorists were the same who killed JFK
Quote from: hartiberlin on September 21, 2008, 01:34:17 AM
@Madsen,
so how in your view had WTC7 come down,
if not with explosives ?
How and who did "pull" it ?
Do you think they did the wiring in 5 to 7 hours
to explode it ?
So how did they "pull" it ?
In my opinion, they didn't "pull" it. Please see the 9/11 truth topic thread for an excruciatingly long discussion of this. Sorry to derail this thread.
Quote from: Drannom on September 21, 2008, 06:54:21 AM
NWO did the demolition of WTC7 cause it was the central control of all the operation, yes the bad guys were there to supervise all the operation, and push the signal radio waves to the thermite
so after, they have to destroy WTC7 in the way to destroy all proof in that building, they have planned to destroy it , and they had to do it, the problem is that there was no damage at all on the WTC7 building as they had planned the radio demolition waves come from WTC7, from my point of view there was thermite and no explosive, just a kind of secret implosion military device falling from the top of the 2 WTC and breaking all floors going from the top to the bottom, that can explain the testimony of those who were hearing explosives sounds, in fact i think it was implosive implosions those implosion devices may have let the outside structure intact WE do know who were in those helicopters, thoses choppers were not immatriculate and take advantage of a big military test done the same day to proceed viciously! the pilots of those choppers were working for the governement over the govenement, it is the NWO, and they have infiltrated military as well as NASA in fact in WWar2 , the Nazis keep going with the war by infiltrate many governements, they found some of their kinds to help them, a coalition of bad guys JFK was murdered 10 days after calling the peoples to rebel against any secret society ! the WTC terrorists were the same who killed JFKÂÃ,´
:o
::)
brilliant!
cheers,
Quote from: madsen on September 21, 2008, 07:32:57 AM
In my opinion, they didn't "pull" it. Please see the 9/11 truth topic thread for an excruciatingly long discussion of this. Sorry to derail this thread.
Just state here in 3 sentences, how they have done it and who has done it ?
Quote from: hartiberlin on September 21, 2008, 10:39:38 AM
Just state here in 3 sentences, how they have done it and who has done it ?
I haven't seen any clear evidence showing that anyone "did" anything to bring the building down. My opinion is that it was heavily damaged by fire (which the firefighters were unable to fight sufficiently due to lack of water) and collapsed on its own.
Note that I don't rule out absolutely that some action was taken to deliberately demolish the building. However, none of the theories proposed so far make sense to me in light of the evidence.
Quote from: madsen on September 21, 2008, 11:05:51 AM
I haven't seen any clear evidence showing that anyone "did" anything to bring the building down. My opinion is that it was heavily damaged by fire (which the firefighters were unable to fight sufficiently due to lack of water) and collapsed on its own.
No,
not possible in our physical world.
Reasons:
1. It would not have fallen into its own footprint and would not have fallen this fast.
2. Pyroclusting clouds show exactly, that it was a controlled demolition.
3. Many demolition experts agree, that it was a controlled demolition.
4. A steel structure building never has collapsed before due to fire as the steel
conducts the heat away. Other bigger fires in other skycrapers did burn
for many more hours and these buildings did not collapse....
Quote
Note that I don't rule out absolutely that some action was taken to deliberately demolish the building. However, none of the theories proposed so far make sense to me in light of the evidence.
So as the collapse can be ruled out, so how and when and by whom was it
"deliberately demolished" as you state in this chaos at 911 only 5 to 7 hours after the events started ?
How did they "pull" it ?
Sorry, but you fail to give reasonable logical answers.
Quote from: hartiberlin on September 21, 2008, 11:21:45 AM
No,
not possible in our physical world.
Ironically, that sort of argument does not fly here when used to argue against the possibility "free energy" or "overunity" devices.
Quote
Reasons:
1. It would not have fallen into its own footprint and would not have fallen this fast.
It didn't literally fall into its own footprint. Look at the pictures on that debunking site and you will find the debris pile. Nevertheless, how would you expect it to fall? Do you expect it would tip completely over before disintegrating?
Quote
2. Pyroclusting clouds show exactly, that it was a controlled demolition.
What is a "pyroclusting cloud"?
Quote
3. Many demolition experts agree, that it was a controlled demolition.
Many? What percentage?
Quote
4. A steel structure building never has collapsed before due to fire as the steel
conducts the heat away. Other bigger fires in other skycrapers did burn
for many more hours and these buildings did not collapse....
How many times have 767's loaded with jet fuel crashed into skyscrapers? Obviously no airplanes hit WTC7, but the collapse of the two towers earlier affected the firefighters' ability to deal with the fire in WTC7 effectively. Note that in this video: http://www.youtube.com/v/Afb7eUHr64U the person speaking (presumably a firefighter) is concerned that the building could collapse, based on the damage and uncontrolled fire. (Listen at about the 1:30 mark) The collapse was not a huge surprise to this person, anyway.
Quote from: madsen on September 21, 2008, 01:44:03 PM
Ironically, that sort of argument does not fly here when used to argue against the possibility "free energy" or "overunity" devices.
We are speaking here just of the ffect of gravity nothing else
and it did not modify gravity !
So your argument does not count.
Quote
It didn't literally fall into its own footprint. Look at the pictures on that debunking site and you will find the debris pile.
This was a skyscraper of about 30 flooors or higher..
What do you expect ?
ALso with controlled demolition there would be debris a hundred meters around..
This is also no argument.
Quote
Nevertheless, how would you expect it to fall? Do you expect it would tip completely over before disintegrating?
Yes, as it was said and as you can see in yourquoted video,
the building was only burning at one side more or less..
If that would have caused a collapse ( which it did not)
it would have tipped over or at least one part would
have remained and it would have fallen completely different...!
Quote
What is a "pyroclusting cloud"?
You have not seen all the videos from Steven Jones, Eric Huffschmidt, etc,
otherwise you would know, that this means the heated dustcloud from
explosive detonation.
Many? What percentage?
Quote
How many times have 767's loaded with jet fuel crashed into skyscrapers? Obviously no airplanes hit WTC7, but the collapse of the two towers earlier affected the firefighters' ability to deal with the fire in WTC7 effectively. Note that in this video: http://www.youtube.com/v/Afb7eUHr64U the person speaking (presumably a firefighter) is concerned that the building could collapse, based on the damage and uncontrolled fire. (Listen at about the 1:30 mark) The collapse was not a huge surprise to this person, anyway.
I only understand, from the audio:
"There is a hole in the building..
scrammble.
..is coming down.."
Maybe he said windows or glas or stones are coming down-...
It looks pretty intact the building,only a few fires on some floors
but surely not so hot to melt the steel frame and weaken the whole
building.
The facts are:
1.Pyroclusting clouds and footprint tell us that it was a controlled demolition.
2. Demolition experts agree.
3. Fires never have brought down steel buildings burning much longer.
( See Loose change movie, where you can see a different Skyskraper burn
for 18 hours or so in many floors with hot yellow flames and it did not collapse)
4. Explosive squibs can be seen on the videos on WTC7.
5.Nobody never came forward with any other logical explanation
how WTC7 was "pulled".
I guess this is enough now.
Topic closed.