This thread is meant to discuss 9/11. However, the tie-ins to I/P are so stark, the interaction of 9/11 and I/P should also be under discussion. Please WATCH this if you do not realize it was controlled demolition (hence a false-flag)
Primer video for those who do not realize it was controlled demolition- - anonymouscomments
That 1st film covers a lot of territory. Very informative. - mark e
Anon, I called it a controlled manmade demolition before the buildings hit the ground the first time I watched the towers go down. I didn’t buy it one iota. When I say knowing the how, it isn’t the how entre-nous, here. It’s the how for the general population, so many of whom believe the official story. Perfectly intelligent well-meaning people believe the official story--my eyes roll into the back of my head--when there are commercial stoves that burn as hot as NIST said the WTC fires were, fercrissake. But I agree with Blankfort. Saying Israel was involved, or the US govt, is not helpful. Sets up too many mental barriers, and invokes cries of ‘prove it! prove it!’. So first things first. Kinda’ like what the architects and pilots are doing. - MRW
anonymousecomments -- if I don't comment much on this issue now, it's because I have commented on it a great deal in the past and researched it in depth. Clearly the official story is nonsensical in dozens or hundreds of ways. We desperately need a new thorough and honest investigation into 9/11 and the 9/11 anthrax attacks. But it seems impossible to make any headway in achieving this objective -- the forces obstructing an inquiry into what really happened are enormously powerful and won't budge an inch. But here is possibly the good thing: all the discussion on the Internet about the history and methods of false flag ops has perhaps made some arrogant miscreants more cautious about attempting to inflict another 9/11 or worse on the American public. - Sean McBride
I’ve watched so many demolitions of buildings over the years, and it wasn’t until the last three years that something turned inside me about 9/11. In every instance of the regular controlled demolition the dust cloud was created from the blasted buildings hitting the ground or the explosions starting up the core from the bottom up, like WTC7. But WTC7 didn’t disintegrate like 1 & 2. It buckled at the top then went straight down on its footprint, just like a controlled demolition. WTCs 1 & 2 instead vaporized from the top down, so what provided the energy to pulverize 43,600 windows
• 600,000 sq ft of glass
• 200,000 tons of structural steel
• 5 million sq ft of gypsum
• 6 acres of marble
• 425,000 cubic yds of concrete (according to the buildings’ engineers, per ABC News) in five seconds of the nine-second (overall) drop? I keep counting nine seconds out on my fingers: it’s a sobering act. And when I tell people who are pooh-poohing me to physically do it too, and realize that everything I listed gets blown to smithereens in five, it stops them for a second. - MRW
totally agree sean, i noted that as the one SURE benefit of the 9/11 "truth movement" (and sorry for spamming that thread, but i think we had many OT tangents there anyways, at comment 300+). MRW, i agree with you as well... regarding the twin towers, i think they laid the explosives on *thick*, as they were doing an atypical demolition both UP and DOWN from the point of impact (point of impact was likely fixed, but exact floor of impact could also be accounted for after the plane impact, and they could alter the demo sequence). in my opinion WTC1 and WTC2 were LOADED with semi-explosive nanothermite, when looking at the 9/11 dust constituents, and the video OF the demolitions. note the tell-tale white smoke, which was TRAILING all the large debris ejected away from the building. some of that debris even seemed to explode mid-air, or even change direction or accelerate faster than gravity would allow. the whole building was really just blown to bits. they even had bone fragments on rooftops far away from the towers, found months after 9/11. and this for the rocket trails on debris or for the speed of large projectiles - anonymouscomments
i do want to pose a question, to compare our chances for success on 9/11 truth, versus a sane I/P policy. likely, many of the same forces that want to prevent a just US policy on I/P, are also suppressing 9/11 truth. so the question to me is, which topic could we truly achieve "success" on? [let me stress i think we should always push on BOTH... and at least in the "public" realm, keep the topics entirely DISTINCT... kinda like how MW did, by getting rid of any 9/11 talk] - anonymouscomments
SANE I/P POLICY- the barriers to this are a massive infrastructure, and it is almost like moving a mountain. the vested interests who wield power in the US media and political establishment are *entrenched* and pervasive. also, the issue of I/P, for the average person and even a student of the conflict, is a DEBATE. we are but an educated and justice minded voice, in a sea of voices. we should keep pushing as we do, but given the record of the last few decades, we will always be confined to small successes, while the majority of biased forces will hold their ground (or even gain ground). - anonymouscomments
9/11 TRUTH HITTING THE "TIPPING POINT"- this is also hard to achieve. i do not think it will be achieved, but even growing 9/11 skepticism has its benefits. also, 9/11 is a singular event, and though the MSM gatekeeper is suppressing it, your average american, especially one who is scientifically and/or politically literate, really can reach NO OTHER CONCLUSION, after reviewing the best evidence, with an open mind. also, 9/11 truth is not confined to the USA, and if ANOTHER sovereign ("western") country reaches the tipping point they might in turn force change in the US, and cause americans to hit the tipping point. i have lived in germany, and the german mind is generally very analytical, and their education system is top notch. plus they went through the nazi thing, so know about false-flags and the power of "evil".... - anonymouscomments