# World Trade Center probably could not have been destroyed by planes



## TheCrusader (Dec 31, 2015)

The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.

So 18/110 means approximately 16% of the total building's weight was affected.

Now ask yourselves, if you cut the support between 84% of something, and 16% of something, how does that change the relationship that 84% of something can still HOLD THE FUCKING WEIGHT of 16% of something?

The basic principles of engineering would require us to believe that since the building could already support the top floors severed by plane explosions, that the only event that could happen is the top of the buildings would have collapsed onto the remaining 84% and either jammed, or fallen off like the top of a tree breaking off.

When's the last time you saw a branch fall off a tree, and collapse the entire fucking tree?

I say "probably" because I'm trying to think creatively how 16% of something can gain enough "weight" to collapse something that is holding up itself and is 5.25x as massive as the thing falling on it.

Either the acceleration of the remaining 16% is enough to overcome the support allowed by the remaining 84% or it isn't.

Again if it isn't, then it'd just bounce off and fall to the side or fall around it like water balloon falling on a post.


----------



## TheOldSchool (Dec 31, 2015)

Ah yes, because buildings are just like trees.  Well done, your logic is bulletproof.


----------



## irosie91 (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.
> 
> So 18/110 means approximately 16% of the total building's weight was affected.
> 
> ...



you are thinking  CREATIVELY -----in accordance with the creativity of the koran----
it is OBVIOUS what happened ------DA JOOOOOS DID IT-------using Talmudic
magic.      The planes were not really there.     It was an animated recreation----
footage shopped


----------



## Dale Smith (Dec 31, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> Ah yes, because buildings are just like trees.  Well done, your logic is bulletproof.


 Explain building 7 or the fact that 83 cameras surrounding the Pentagon were confiscated and all that has been released in 4 frames that make it impossible to tell what it was that caused that small hole on the south side of the Pentagon that was being used to search for the 2.3 trillion dollars that Rumsfeld said on 9/10/01 was missing? People need to wake up because things are not what they seem at all.


----------



## TheOldSchool (Dec 31, 2015)

Dale Smith said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > Ah yes, because buildings are just like trees.  Well done, your logic is bulletproof.
> ...


The tree outside my window probably has about 83 branches!


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.
> 
> So 18/110 means approximately 16% of the total building's weight was affected.
> 
> ...



The stupid is strong in this one.


----------



## PredFan (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.
> 
> So 18/110 means approximately 16% of the total building's weight was affected.
> 
> ...



Well looky there! He's also a Truther! Why am I not surprised?


----------



## TheOldSchool (Dec 31, 2015)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> TheCrusader said:
> 
> 
> > The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.
> ...


Turzovska's thread gave me some hope for him.  But, alas...


----------



## TheCrusader (Dec 31, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> Ah yes, because buildings are just like trees.  Well done, your logic is bulletproof.


Please pull your head out of your ass on this one.

I'm not saying it's exactly like trees, what I am saying is that the weight supported by an UNDAMAGED 84% of a building, is likely to just BOUNCE off the rest of the structure.

Explain how it ends up PULVERIZING that entire structure in both cases the SAME way.


----------



## PredFan (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > Ah yes, because buildings are just like trees.  Well done, your logic is bulletproof.
> ...



Ok lunatic, explain what really happened.


----------



## PredFan (Dec 31, 2015)

It was an inside job I tell ya!


----------



## Dale Smith (Dec 31, 2015)

PredFan said:


> TheCrusader said:
> 
> 
> > The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.
> ...


 I would be labeled a "truther" and I am wearing it like a badge of honor.


----------



## Dale Smith (Dec 31, 2015)

PredFan said:


> TheCrusader said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...



Are you familiar with "Operation Northwoods'?


----------



## PredFan (Dec 31, 2015)

Dale Smith said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > TheCrusader said:
> ...



I wish you guys really wore badges proclaiming your Trutherness. That would make it easier to avoid getting too close to you.


----------



## TheCrusader (Dec 31, 2015)

PredFan said:


> View attachment 58373 It was an inside job I tell ya!


Holy shit my facebook's supposed to be private!

But seriously, how does 16% of the weight already supported, collapse the other 84%?


----------



## PredFan (Dec 31, 2015)

Dale Smith said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > TheCrusader said:
> ...



Are you unable to articulate your beliefs? Is your answer simply to link to an author or blogger? Are you unable to think for yourself?


----------



## TheOldSchool (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > Ah yes, because buildings are just like trees.  Well done, your logic is bulletproof.
> ...



If you zoom in really close, you can see that the planes were actually trees.


----------



## shadow355 (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.
> 
> So 18/110 means approximately 16% of the total building's weight was affected.
> 
> ...


 

 The conduction and convection of heat traveled along the ( steel )  supports - heating adjacent building materials, as well as weakening the steel - causing the collapse of the building.

 And you do not have to be an arson investigator ( I have certified arson investigation education ), or a structural engineer to know that.

 Heat travels by = Conduction - Convection and Radiation.

  Heat from superheated gases, as well as smoke from the fire ; met with some building components ; such as wood siding and other materials......causing them to meet their ignition temperature ( The lowest temperature needed for self sustained combustion - like holding a piece of paper over a lit lighter ) and burst into flames. Smoke carries heat, and the particles of what ever is burning. Yes, smoke can cause secondary fires.

  Superheated gases from fires.....can cause secondary fires.

 Smoke and Superheated gases......can be very - very dangerous.

  You have to "read the signs" inside a burning building.


            Shadow 355 ( Fire & EMS certified )


----------



## TheCrusader (Dec 31, 2015)

PredFan said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



I don't have to try to answer what really happend, to illustrate the absurdity of what we are told happened.

Again, take a 10 foot bar, super heat and melt the top 1 foot of it, hit the bar with a pile-driver, and tell me what you have left.

You'll have a 9foot bar still standing...not a pulverized footprint.


----------



## Dale Smith (Dec 31, 2015)

PredFan said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...


 Of course I am able to think for myself....which is why I do not believe a thing your "gubermint" tells us. I bet you believe that Oswald acted alone.....right?


----------



## PredFan (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > View attachment 58373 It was an inside job I tell ya!
> ...



I'm probably wasting my time here but you have a poor understanding of structural engineering. They floors pancaked. The floor just under the crash site couldn't hold the above 16%. It collapsed and added to the weight which collapsed the floor under it, which added to the weight and so on until eventually the collapsing weight was now 50% of the total weight, and it grew from there to eventually 99%.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



*and tell me what you have left.
*
A moron with a stupid hypothetical.


----------



## TheCrusader (Dec 31, 2015)

shadow355 said:


> TheCrusader said:
> 
> 
> > The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.
> ...



This is NOT how Buildings are constructed, I'm a FFII/Hazmat Tech/AEMT, and certified B Faller....you as a fell Fire/EMS should know better than to suggest that there are not Conductivity breaks in US Building Code.

Those breaks exist for all skyscrapers in NYC and have existed for over 100 years for all buildings over 7 floors.

All NYC buildings after 1910s are coded to collapse inward as well, if a floor collapses it has purposefully built "joints" to allow the floor to break at the wall so the walls are not undulyl stressed...the WTC are no different.

So the idea that the walls would be damaged as much as they were is also idiotic.


----------



## PredFan (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



Because the towers were solid steel. Right.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Dec 31, 2015)

PredFan said:


> View attachment 58373 It was an inside job I tell ya!




thats what this resident troll of USMB always does when he cant refute facts,he goes into his childish tin foil hat insults when he cant counter facts. He got pissed at me and threw tartrems and fits when i pointed out to him once facts he ignored that there were multiple shooters in the JFK assassination,he has had me on ignore ever since i took him to school on that.


----------



## TheCrusader (Dec 31, 2015)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> TheCrusader said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



I have more than stupid hypothetical, I have a high rise firefighting background and understanding of building collapses through training.  What do you have?

Guess what, most NYC Fire does not believe that WTC collapsed by fucking planes.


----------



## PredFan (Dec 31, 2015)

Dale Smith said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



Yes, in fact I do. Tell me, do you think the moon landings were faked?


----------



## Dale Smith (Dec 31, 2015)

shadow355 said:


> TheCrusader said:
> 
> 
> > The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.
> ...



Buildings 1, 2 and 7 fell in a free fall manner and 7 wasn't hit by a plane at all. I am not buying the official story whatsoever. Anyone that believes 17 arab hijackers armed with nothing but box cutters singlehandedly defeated NORAD, the NSA, CIA and the Pentagon is living in La-La Land.


----------



## PredFan (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > TheCrusader said:
> ...



After reading your OP, I'm calling bull shit. I don't have any kind of engineering degree and I can spot the enormous errors in your theory.


----------



## Dale Smith (Dec 31, 2015)

PredFan said:


> TheCrusader said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...


  If the floors had actually pancaked, it would have taken longer to collapse. WTC 1 collapsed in 9.2 seconds start to finish.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Dec 31, 2015)

Dale Smith said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > Ah yes, because buildings are just like trees.  Well done, your logic is bulletproof.
> ...



the official conspiracy theory apologists never can account for bld 7,they ignore pesky facts and then resort to their childish tin foil hat comments when they are cornered and backed up against the wall.

they cant get around it that bld 7 is the crux of the 9/11 coverup.everytime i post a video that exposes it that explosives brought bld 7 down,they ignore it and never watch it since they are so much in denial.


----------



## TheCrusader (Dec 31, 2015)

PredFan said:


> TheCrusader said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...


That makes absolutely no sense.  The floors themselves are held up by a structural support that is capable of holding their weight.

If a floor can't hold the weight of the floors above it, the structural core FUCKING COULD.

Again, if you drop a branch out of a tree (floors), does the whole fucking tree explode and collapse?

GOD DAMN IT, USE YOUR FUCKING HEAD.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Dec 31, 2015)

PredFan said:


> TheCrusader said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


so says the resident troll who runs off when he cant refute facts and puts people on ignore.


----------



## TheCrusader (Dec 31, 2015)

Dale Smith said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > TheCrusader said:
> ...


This doesnt even fucking matter.

The core of WTC is the tree, the floors are lightweight branches.

What happens to branches falling out of a tree as they hit other branches?

They BOUNCE OUT OF THE FUCKING TREE.

They don't tear down the goddamn core.

Stop using stupid logic to refute idiots, use basic obvious real world examples.


----------



## The Great Goose (Dec 31, 2015)

The neatness of it was just so unlikely. Compared with other bungling suicide attacks it's just not in the ball park.

it stinks.


----------



## PredFan (Dec 31, 2015)

Dale Smith said:


> shadow355 said:
> 
> 
> > TheCrusader said:
> ...



We know.

None of you Truthers ever listen or learn, or reason beyond what you want to hear.

It's more fun to just make fun of you.


----------



## Dale Smith (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > TheCrusader said:
> ...


 The inner core of  WTC 1 and 2 was rebar incased in concrete. At the very least the inner core should have been left standing.


----------



## TheOldSchool (Dec 31, 2015)

Dale Smith said:


> Anyone that believes 17 arab hijackers armed with nothing but box cutters singlehandedly defeated NORAD, the NSA, CIA and the Pentagon is living in La-La Land.





Spoiler: Possibly offensive


----------



## TheCrusader (Dec 31, 2015)

How the WTC collapse should have actually occured would have been EITHER the top fell off like the top of a tree breaking off.

Or the "pancaking floors" hitting the resistance of other floors supported by a *MASSIVE CORE CAPABLE OF HOLDING THEIR WEIGHT* should have collapsed out and down and slid out of the whole structure like cards falling off a tipping table.

A-shape collapse is most likely, with floors sliding off like shingles on a roof.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > TheCrusader said:
> ...



take it from me dude,this guy is USMB's resident troll.


PredFan said:


> View attachment 58374 View attachment 58374 View attachment 58374 View attachment 58374 View attachment 58374 View attachment 58374
> 
> 
> Dale Smith said:
> ...



so says the resident troll hypocrite who resorts to name calling whe he cant refute facts and puts people on ignore when they point out his lies.


----------



## shadow355 (Dec 31, 2015)

Dale Smith said:


> shadow355 said:
> 
> 
> > Buildings 1, 2 and 7 fell in a free fall manner and 7 wasn't hit by a plane at all. I am not buying the official story whatsoever. Anyone that believes 17 arab hijackers armed with nothing but box cutters singlehandedly defeated NORAD, the NSA, CIA and the Pentagon is living in La-La Land.
> ...


----------



## TheCrusader (Dec 31, 2015)

People just use your common sense, if you hit a brick wall with one brick you can't take down the whole brick wall...unless you used some very high velocity.

If the floors pancaked they would just have simply fallen out of the building once they hit the still standing still undamaged SUPER STRUCTURE below it.

Or the whole top would have just fallen off leaving the rest standing.


----------



## Dale Smith (Dec 31, 2015)

PredFan said:


> View attachment 58374
> 
> 
> Dale Smith said:
> ...




I believed the official story for 11 years but when I found out that the Patriot Act was written before 9/11/01 and the spy grid was put in place before 9/11? I decided maybe I should look into the events that day more carefully. If I can wake up, anyone can.


----------



## PredFan (Dec 31, 2015)

Dale Smith said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > TheCrusader said:
> ...



Wrong again. It is complete consistent with the tremendous weight pressing down. Also, there was an enormous amount of debris and dust obstructing the view of the collapse.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > TheCrusader said:
> ...


Crusader,you might as well be arguing with a one month old baby,you would have better luck thats for sure. this troll put me on ignore years ago when in a JFK discussion i posted pesky facts he could not refute that there were multiple shooters and there is no way oswald could have been the lone assassin. when I kept asking him to refute it he started calling me names and has had me on ignore ever since.

ignore this troll,dont waste your breath on him.all he does is go into insult mode and whine like the hypocrite  baby he is when you insult him back.he can dish it out but he cant take it.dont bother with him.move on to someone else

you have heard the old saying before-

advise i would follow with him.


----------



## TheCrusader (Dec 31, 2015)

PredFan said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



Tremendous weight?  Are you stupid?

18 floors is not tremendous compared to 92 floors.

92 floors can more than easily support an impact from the 18 floors above it that it is designed to HOLD UP.


----------



## TheCrusader (Dec 31, 2015)

9/11 inside job said:


> TheCrusader said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



Be that as it may, I sharpen my own nascent thought by arguing...so it helps me to clarify what I am starting to understand.


----------



## Dale Smith (Dec 31, 2015)

PredFan said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...


----------



## PredFan (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > TheCrusader said:
> ...


----------



## G.T. (Dec 31, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> TheCrusader said:
> 
> 
> > The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.
> ...


lol rosie is funny as hell


----------



## PredFan (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



Because the towers are just like a tree. Right.


----------



## Missourian (Dec 31, 2015)

Simple.

Imagine this.

Once those supports are gone,  they transfer the weight of all the weight above disproportionately to the supports that remain.

Those supports buckle the supports of the floor directly beneath them.

That transfers a disproportionate amount of weight to the remaining supports and the supports beneath them...which buckles them.

It's a chain reaction. 

Add the shear stress of the weight force shifting from vertical to near diagonal...a direction from which the supports were most vulnerable...only added to the collapse.


----------



## TheCrusader (Dec 31, 2015)

Predfan, do you realize that hitting* structurally sound 92 floors with the 18 floors above it that it is designed to support the weight of*, is like hitting a fence post with a water balloon?


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Dec 31, 2015)

Dale Smith said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > View attachment 58374
> ...


Damn dude you been brainwashed THAT long by the government that 19 muslims were behind the attacks?

you mean to say you been listening to the CIA controlled media for 11 freaking years? jesus christ dude,it only took me THREE years before i spotted the bullshit lies of the 9/11 coverup commission.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> Predfan, do you realize that hitting* structurally sound 92 floors with the 18 floors above it that it is designed to support the weight of*, is like hitting a fence post with a water balloon?


again why do you argue with this child dude?


----------



## Penelope (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.
> 
> So 18/110 means approximately 16% of the total building's weight was affected.
> 
> ...



Personally I think all 3 buildings were planned demolitions. Look at all players  involved. Perfect to say terrorist attack and go to war. The way the buildings came down was not by planes, I agree. The hospitals around the areas  didn't get the victims they thought, just responders.  Those buildings were old and full of asbestos, would of been a fortune   to fix.  Killed two birds in one stone, and lots of people got rich.


----------



## Indofred (Dec 31, 2015)

The momentum gained by falling would explain why the lower sections of the buildings were badly damaged.
My concern is why they fell from the top instead of the area of most damage and why was the fall vertical, not to the side of greatest damage?


----------



## Dale Smith (Dec 31, 2015)

9/11 inside job said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



Yeah, I was late to the reality check but I have been making up for lost time.


----------



## TheCrusader (Dec 31, 2015)

PredFan said:


> TheCrusader said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



Actually yes they are, they have a central core that is like a massive bole, and they have floors supported much like a tree's branches anchored into the core bole.

Of course an idiot like you would think my analogy is "simplistic" or "ignorant" when in fact it's how sky scrappers are designed.


----------



## PredFan (Dec 31, 2015)

Dale Smith said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > View attachment 58374
> ...





TheCrusader said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



I already explained that to you. It's only 18% for the floor directly under that. It grows with each collapsing floor.


----------



## TheCrusader (Dec 31, 2015)

Indofred said:


> The momentum gained by falling would explain why the lower sections of the buildings were badly damaged.
> My concern is why they fell from the top instead of the area of most damage and why was the fall vertical, not to the side of greatest damage?



What momentum?

Let's say 18 floors finally give way at the 92nd floor and falls to the 90th floor (let's say there's a 2 floor gap).

So it breaks and 18 floors of weight accelerates for 20 feet.

You don't think the fucking engineer over engineered it enough that 84% of the building could support 16% of the building crashing down on on top of it by just 20 feet?


----------



## TheCrusader (Dec 31, 2015)

PredFan said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



Why woudln't the floor break like a pitched roof and send all the floors on top falling off it like shingles from a roof?

Why do they magically keep "pancaking" despite physics, or the fact that *EVERY TALL BUILDING IN NEW YORK REQUIRES FLOORS TO COLLAPSE LIKE AN A-FRAME*.

Why wouldn't the whole top just tip off and fall off like the tip of a melted candle breaking off?


----------



## PredFan (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> Predfan, do you realize that hitting* structurally sound 92 floors with the 18 floors above it that it is designed to support the weight of*, is like hitting a fence post with a water balloon?



No of course I don't realize that. Because it's fucking idiotic!


----------



## Indofred (Dec 31, 2015)

I didn't say collapse, I said damaged.
Frankly, the whole story of 9/11 stinks.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Dec 31, 2015)

Dale Smith said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...


so you finally stopped listening to the CIA controlled media huh? i would recommend listening to drudge and american free press to get out of the brainwashing you have experienced all this time.AFP is a really great source for whats REALLY going on in the world.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Dec 31, 2015)

Indofred said:


> I didn't say collapse, I said damaged.
> Frankly, the whole story of 9/11 stinks.


uhh thats because its been exposed for being an inside job.lol


----------



## TheCrusader (Dec 31, 2015)

PredFan said:


> TheCrusader said:
> 
> 
> > Predfan, do you realize that hitting* structurally sound 92 floors with the 18 floors above it that it is designed to support the weight of*, is like hitting a fence post with a water balloon?
> ...



What's idiotic about that analogy?


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Dec 31, 2015)

Indofred said:


> The momentum gained by falling would explain why the lower sections of the buildings were badly damaged.
> My concern is why they fell from the top instead of the area of most damage and why was the fall vertical, not to the side of greatest damage?


trolls like predfan dont understand that the laws of physics were violated that day.guess he skipped through junior high school science classes.lol


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > TheCrusader said:
> ...


*
I have more than stupid hypothetical, I have a high rise firefighting background and understanding of building collapses through training.
*
Great. How much weight was the 84th floor designed to carry?
How much did it carry just before the collapse?


----------



## MisterBeale (Dec 31, 2015)




----------



## PredFan (Dec 31, 2015)

We all saw the towers fall. We know they fell and we saw how they fell. We saw the planes hit the towers, people in NYC saw that live and in person.

Now, if you cannot accept the official report then you have to come up with an alternative. If you can't then you are just another loony Truther deserving of scorn and ridicule.

The very fact that the official report is incomplete, and possibly based on loose interpretations of engineering laws is actually proof that there was no conspiracy. They didn't know it was coming and had to piece together their theory based on what the found AFTER THE FACT.

Had it been some kind of conspiracy, they would have had a story devised to cover their asses. They didn't and that's because two planes were high jacked by Islamic Terrorists, flown into the buildings and they collapsed as a result.

If you cannot give a credible alternative theory, then you have nothing and are just a conspiracy nut.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Dec 31, 2015)

9/11 inside job said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...



What's your theory for the motive for the "planned demo" of WTC 7?


----------



## TheCrusader (Dec 31, 2015)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> TheCrusader said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



The floors don't carry the weight, asshole, the core carries the weight, and the 84th floor core is designed to carry not just the load of the core above it but the load of the floors above it.

That core is called a core because it is supported by a foundation "tap root".  So the 84th floor core is supported entirely and stably by the entire structure and its weight below it.

Now you're telling me, that (in this case) 26 floors, drop 1 floor's distance onto the 84th floor, causing the core to do what exactly?

What will that core do?

If it breaks on the 84th floor, the whole TOP, slides off.

So not once, but 84 times, the N-1 floor's core has to break to allow the floor impacted to collapse onto the next floor?

That's 84 chances for the core of the floor impacted to break and cause the structure above it to be deflected.

SO HOW DO YOU BELIEVE THE PANCAKE THEORY?


----------



## MisterBeale (Dec 31, 2015)

PredFan said:


> We all saw the towers fall. We know they fell and we saw how they fell. We saw the planes hit the towers, people in NYC saw that live and in person.
> 
> Now, if you cannot accept the official report then you have to come up with an alternative. If you can't then you are just another loony Truther deserving of scorn and ridicule.
> 
> ...


----------



## TheCrusader (Dec 31, 2015)

In fact, play a tall game of Jenga, if you break the Jenga puzzle near the top, the rest of the puzzle remains standing, the whole damn puzzle doesn't come apart.


----------



## Penelope (Dec 31, 2015)

Anyone really know who  Jules and Gedeon Naudet are?? The Naudet brothers. I do not believe in many coincidences and to say the one was just there filming a gas leak and actually got a pic of the first plane hitting the building is beyond me.  Anyone hear of them and your opinion.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> Indofred said:
> 
> 
> > The momentum gained by falling would explain why the lower sections of the buildings were badly damaged.
> ...



*You don't think the fucking engineer over engineered it enough that 84% of the building could support 16% of the building crashing down on on top of it by just 20 feet?
*
No. Obviously.


----------



## chikenwing (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > Ah yes, because buildings are just like trees.  Well done, your logic is bulletproof.
> ...


Explaining would be pointless,its was done years ago.


----------



## MisterBeale (Dec 31, 2015)




----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > TheCrusader said:
> ...



*The floors don't carry the weight, asshole, the core carries the weight, and the 84th floor core is designed to carry not just the load of the core above it but the load of the floors above it.
*
All by itself?
With the damage of the impact?
And the expansion caused by the fires?
*
So the 84th floor core is supported entirely and stably by the entire structure and its weight below it.
*
How does the stress travel to the core?

*If it breaks on the 84th floor, the whole TOP, slides off.*

Slides off? Because it was built tilted? That's funny.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Dec 31, 2015)

Penelope said:


> Anyone really know who  Jules and Gedeon Naudet are?? The Naudet brothers. I do not believe in many coincidences and to say the one was just there filming a gas leak and actually got a pic of the first plane hitting the building is beyond me.  Anyone hear of them and your opinion.



They were sent there to get fake footage of the non-plane that hit the tower?


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Dec 31, 2015)

Penelope said:


> Anyone really know who  Jules and Gedeon Naudet are?? The Naudet brothers. I do not believe in many coincidences and to say the one was just there filming a gas leak and actually got a pic of the first plane hitting the building is beyond me.  Anyone hear of them and your opinion.



thats why I dont think there ever were any planes.For several years i thought yes there were planes,but they and the fires did not cause the collapse.Now I dont think there ever were any planes.the reason i came to that conclusion is because when you watch that video,new yorkers are just walking about like any other day when allegedly there is an airliner crashing into the tower.
If there was a plane flying in that low,everyone would be looking up saying in that video-why is that plane flying so low,oh my god its going to hit the towers.you hear NONE of that in the video,they dont look up and start screaming and reacting till the explosions happen.

plus more importantly  its impossible for an aluminum jet to pass through in and out  steel girders like swiss cheese like they do in one of the videos.

its on par with the JFK assassination where abraham zapruder,he wasnt just the innocent bystander the media portrayed him to be and just happened to be the one person to film it all.it was all by design,the elite WANTED america to see his head blown off and same here,only they needed them there to film that so everyone would be sold that an airliner hit the towers.

Plus the ONLY people I have seen come out and say over the years -I live in new york,i was there,i saw it all,there were planes are trolls like predfan who toot the governments version of events.

I have never seen an honest truther come out and say there were planes over the years.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Dec 31, 2015)

9/11 inside job said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > Anyone really know who  Jules and Gedeon Naudet are?? The Naudet brothers. I do not believe in many coincidences and to say the one was just there filming a gas leak and actually got a pic of the first plane hitting the building is beyond me.  Anyone hear of them and your opinion.
> ...



*new yorkers are just walking about like any other day when allegedly there is an airliner crashing into the tower.
*
What should they have done in the seconds before the plane hit?

*they needed them there to film that so everyone would be sold that an airliner hit the towers.
*
And that explains the airliner that everyone else saw hitting the second tower?

*plus its impossible for an aluminum jet to pass three steel girders like swiss cheese like they do in one of the videos.
*
It should have bounced off the glass windows?


----------



## MisterBeale (Dec 31, 2015)




----------



## MisterBeale (Dec 31, 2015)




----------



## MisterBeale (Dec 31, 2015)




----------



## MisterBeale (Dec 31, 2015)




----------



## MisterBeale (Dec 31, 2015)




----------



## PredFan (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> In fact, play a tall game of Jenga, if you break the Jenga puzzle near the top, the rest of the puzzle remains standing, the whole damn puzzle doesn't come apart.



Yeah because the towers are completely solid, like Jenga blocks. Right.


----------



## MisterBeale (Dec 31, 2015)




----------



## PredFan (Dec 31, 2015)

Penelope said:


> Anyone really know who  Jules and Gedeon Naudet are?? The Naudet brothers. I do not believe in many coincidences and to say the one was just there filming a gas leak and actually got a pic of the first plane hitting the building is beyond me.  Anyone hear of them and your opinion.



There are a lot of people in NYC, I'd be surprised if no one got a picture of it.


----------



## hjmick (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > Ah yes, because buildings are just like trees.  Well done, your logic is bulletproof.
> ...




The only people around here with their heads up their as, as far as I can tell, are you and Dale.


Fucking losers.


----------



## MisterBeale (Dec 31, 2015)

Penelope said:


> Anyone really know who  Jules and Gedeon Naudet are?? The Naudet brothers. I do not believe in many coincidences and to say the one was just there filming a gas leak and actually got a pic of the first plane hitting the building is beyond me.  Anyone hear of them and your opinion.


You know, I read an independant analysis of their project, and I was reserving judgement on the whole thing.

I wondered whether they were part of the intelligence establishment paradigm.

I found this article some years ago, it made me think a little bit.

*JULES NAUDET'S 9/11 FILM WAS STAGED*
JULES NAUDET'S 9/11 FILM WAS STAGED

We must be careful though, a lot of what can be found on the internet is disinfo. misinfo, and just plain cointel.

However, recently, this came out, pretty much confirming that much of what was speculated about in the previous article was probably true.  How else would these knuckle heads be pushing the establishment paradigm?  Obviously they are part of the intelligence community.  We would probably have those answers via FOIA if building WTC 7 hadn't been demolished.

*How the makers of 'The Spymasters' got former CIA directors to open up*
How the makers of 'The Spymasters' got former CIA directors to open up


----------



## irosie91 (Dec 31, 2015)

Indofred said:


> The momentum gained by falling would explain why the lower sections of the buildings were badly damaged.
> My concern is why they fell from the top instead of the area of most damage and why was the fall vertical, not to the side of greatest damage?



Freddie actually imagines that he said something UNIQUE ----"the momentum gained by falling......."--------LOL   watta genius.     So true----lots of momentum is gained by
falling--------the  LD/50 of a  human free fall is   4 stories----which is something like
45-50 feet------based on Freddie's magical  MOMENTUM OF FALLING  (he learned
a word from his high school physics text)       I am also impressed with Penelope's
"I THINK IT WAS LIKE THIS.~~~~I THINK IT WAS LIKE THAT~~~allah told me....


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Dec 31, 2015)

hjmick said:


> TheCrusader said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...


ah the truth hurts that you have your head up your ass.poor baby. Dale admitted he had his head up his ass for 11 years.unlike you,he got his head out his ass.you still have yours in it.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Dec 31, 2015)

MisterBeale said:


>



The official conspiracy theory apologists refuse to get their head out of their asses and look at this pic.lol


----------



## psikeyhackr (Dec 31, 2015)

TheCrusader said:


> The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.
> 
> So 18/110 means approximately 16% of the total building's weight was affected.



The problem with this is the distribution of mass of the building.  The percentage is correct for height but not mass.

Some box columns at the bottom of the building were made of plate steel FIVE INCHES THICK and the columns were 40+ inches wide.  Steel at the top was about 3/4th inches thick and 12 inches wide.  Skyscraper must be bottom heavy but I cannot find the Center of Gravity on a single building over 300 meters tall.

The data on the CN Tower in Toronto is interesting though.

It is more than 500 meters tall and the CoG is 61 meters above the ground.  But because it gets thinner toward the top it would have less of a wind problem than the WTC.

The 9/11 Affair is entirely unscientific because so many "experts" are not demanding and distributing critical information.

Neil de Grasse Tyson lived less than a mile from the Twin Towers and was at home on 9/11.  But he has not said anything about the physics of the building's destruction though he talks about flaws in the movies, Gravity, Titanic, Interstellar and The Martian.  Like science only matters when it is fiction.

psik


----------



## MisterBeale (Dec 31, 2015)

psikeyhackr said:


> TheCrusader said:
> 
> 
> > The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.
> ...



"The 9/11 Affair is entirely unscientific because so many "experts" are not demanding and distributing critical information."

That's because to do so would be a threat to public safety.  The establishment has stated so explicitly.

IOW, if you do so, you are a terrorist.


----------



## PredFan (Dec 31, 2015)

psikeyhackr said:


> TheCrusader said:
> 
> 
> > The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.
> ...



Tyson is a government stooge paid to make the uneducated believe what the government wants them to.


----------



## psikeyhackr (Dec 31, 2015)

MisterBeale said:


> "The 9/11 Affair is entirely unscientific because so many "experts" are not demanding and distributing critical information."
> 
> That's because to do so would be a threat to public safety.  The establishment has stated so explicitly.
> 
> IOW, if you do so, you are a terrorist.



That is such an idiotic excuse it is ridiculous.  How is the distribution of mass in buildings that no longer exist a threat to public safety?

psik


----------



## HenryBHough (Dec 31, 2015)

The more I think about the more I have come to agree.

The World Trade Center was not destroyed by planes!

Nay, it was destroyed by the Muslim bastards _flying _the fucking planes!!!!


----------



## PredFan (Dec 31, 2015)

And finally...


----------



## Indofred (Dec 31, 2015)

9/11 inside job said:


> Indofred said:
> 
> 
> > I didn't say collapse, I said damaged.
> ...



There is so much smoke being thrown up, it's very hard to separate fact from lies, nut jobs with really daft theories, and what actually happened.
It's very clear some are deliberately pushing extremely silly theories, perhaps because they're stupid, or perhaps because they're working for interested parties, so want crazy ideas on the market to make all who are unconvinced about the official story look crazy.

Some things are solid facts - here's two.






As we see in the picture, the majority of the damage to both towers is to one side, one being quite a way off centre, the other being almost all on one side.
Whilst I fully understand the spread of aviation fuel and other combustible material would have spread the heat out fairly evenly over the floor, the most damaged side of the building would have been weakest and hottest, so most prone to collapse first, leading to the top of at least one building falling to one side, and likely the other.
The vertical fall just doesn't ring true.

The other thing, and the killer for me is the pentagon.
They can't produce a single photo of an aircraft, even with all the security cameras that were available on that day.
Agents removed footage from every building in the area, but not a one showed an aircraft. Then add the total lack of any damage (pre collapse) that was big enough for an airliner hit, and the official story stinks.
Had an aircraft really hit that building, there would be a thousand pictures, but there isn't a single one.

That's easily enough to question the official version of the story.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Dec 31, 2015)

Indofred said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Indofred said:
> ...


*
Whilst I fully understand the spread of aviation fuel and other combustible material would have spread the heat out fairly evenly over the floor, the most damaged side of the building would have been weakest and hottest, so most prone to collapse first, leading to the top of at least one building falling to one side, and likely the other.*





Like this?


----------



## Indofred (Dec 31, 2015)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Like this?



No.
That tower fell to the side first, but the rest of the building collapsed evenly, allowing a vertical fall.
As was shown in the video, one side of the tower was far weaker, so it should have fallen to one side, leaving much of that tower intact.
The other tower top went vertical, producing reasonably equal stress on the structure below it, but that tower's fall started to one side, so there was no reason for the rest to fall in the manner it did.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 2, 2016)

PredFan said:


> And finally...View attachment 58401


thats what our resident troll stoops to when he gets frustrated and cannot refute facts.lol


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 2, 2016)

Indofred said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Indofred said:
> ...


thats why the explanation that a plane hit the pentagon is as much of a joke of an explanation as the fires causing the collapse the fact they cant produce ONE SINGLE PHOTO of the airliner coming into the pentagon despite all the hundreds of cameras there which is why we have all these infiltraters of the government trolling this thread in their desperation.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 2, 2016)

Indofred said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Like this?
> ...


the other thing these agents cant get around that the fires did not cause the collapse is there has never been a case in mankind history of a building collapsing in its own footprint at  free fall speed due to fires ,they come down gradually over a period of time. anytime you challenge them to produce footage of a building collapsing like that,they never can.

there was this one shill like todd here once who in his desperate attempts to try to avoid defeat that he was losing the debate with me,he posted a pic of a building collapsing but the problem with his ramblings was he only showed the upper scaffolding collapsingthe structure itself remained standing.all he did back then was prove it for me that i am correct,that the entire structure of a building doesnt collapse.He could not handle the defeat though of course even though he showed everyone it was an obvious miserable fail.

these trolls are clueless to the fact that buildings like the twin towers are designed so that the office fires at the top of the building while they might collapse over a period of time,its impossible foe the whole tower to collapse into its own footprint because as you go lower,the steel columns are thicker and bigger than the steel at the top of the towers.

thats why the epic that misterbeale showed of the  madrid building in spain that burned for two DAYS and never collapsed despite all the intense heat that was far more extreme than the small office fires on 9/11,thats why THEY did not collapse is because of that pesky little fact.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 2, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> Indofred said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 2, 2016)

There were 83 camera confiscated from surrounding businesses alone by the FBI which was the same M.O concerning the OKC bombing and of course no footage of what was on those cameras were ever released...why is that?
that dale is why the infiltraters here can only sling shit in defeat like the monkey trolls they are.
btw Dale,I notice you live in Dallas Texas.As you have seen me talk about on this thread quite a few times,I have done a lot of research into the JFK assassination as well.even far more than in 9/11.

Because of the fact that our corrupt school system has lied to us all these years about JFK and the government still to this day endorces the warren commission,tell me if you had the same thoughts in your head that day i had when 9/11 happened.

Because of the JFK assassination and their lies they have spun since then and over the decades i thought to myself back then on 9/11 i said to myself-I dont believe a fucking word of this what they are saying,that Bin Laden was behind these attacks.I think our government is behind this whole thing just to get us into another fake and phony war same as they did with vietnam "as you know,that was one of the main reasons the CIA killed JFK was he was going to pull us out of vietnam.they knew johnson would reverse kennedys policy on it as he did."

while I never had any facts or proof about it at the time which is why i accepted the possibility back then that the media might be correct,deep down because of the JFK assassination and being lied to about that event,I had a gut feeling back then because of that,9/11 was a lie.It just wasnt till three years later when I started talking to a friend of mine who started telling me the facts of the case,that I  woke up about it and knew my initial hunch was correct. How about you,at the time 9/11 happened,did YOU have your doubts about it like I did?

also tell me if you ever run into these kind of people.Its not uncommon for me to run into these kind of people.I have run into quite a few of them over the years,they will acknowledge the CIA killed JFK but anytime you try to get them to look at the facts of 9/11,they refuse to and ignore the evidence and ignore the facts.

see they can handle it that the CIA killed JFK and they were lied to about that but they cant accept it that they were also behind 9/11 as well because 9/11 being an inside job hits too close to home for them and is much harder to deal with since it is so much more recent and they dont want to face reality that our government murdered 3000 of its own citizens.one of the mods here at this site is one of them.so do YOU ever come across people like that as well by chance?

I find that just INCREDIBLE how they can accept it that the CIA killed JFK yet they refuse to look at the facts that they were behind 9/11 as well dont you?

they can accept it that the CIA is an evil organization acknowledging the fact they killed JFK,yet despite that,they cant accept it that they were behind 9/11 as well even though it was for the same reason,to get us into another fake and phony war.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 2, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> Indofred said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



*they cant produce ONE SINGLE PHOTO of the airliner coming into the pentagon
*
How fast was it traveling before impact?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 2, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> Indofred said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



It's true. Never before in history had a building with the WTC's design been hit by a passenger jet filled with fuel
which then caused a collapse. Not until 9/11/2001.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 2, 2016)

TheCrusader said:


> The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.
> 
> So 18/110 means approximately 16% of the total building's weight was affected.
> 
> Now ask yourselves, if you cut the support between 84% of something, and 16% of something, how does that change the relationship that 84% of something can still HOLD THE FUCKING WEIGHT of 16% of something?


You're missing three factors.

First, the load energy of the building was transmitted *around* floors via perfectly aligned vertical columns to bedrock. When the floors above impacted each floor below the load energy wasn't transmitted around that floor below. The floors were impacted directly. The floor would collapse virtually instantaneously. And did.

Second, the acceleration of gravity. As the floors above weren't gently placed onto the floors below during the collapse. They were accelerated by gravity and impacting the floors below. If you want a demonstration of the difference, gently balance a cinder block on your head. Now, drop that same cinder block onto your head from about12 feet, the average distance between floors on the WTC.

Though I warn you, you'll probably only do this experiment once. As the impact energy is far, far greater when accelerated by gravity.

Third, the dynamic amplification factor. Basically, the way a material responds when force is applied to it quickly compared to slowly.. Virtually all materials have less resistance to forces applied quickly than to the same forces applied slowly. The sudden impact of 16% of the building's mass would be dramatically amplified via the DAF. In the case of the WTC, by about double for that initial collapse.

Once the collapse began there was no structure within the building capable of 'catching' the falling floors and stopping them. The collapse would have continued, one floor at a time, all the way to the ground.

Which, in fact, it did.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 2, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Indofred said:
> ...



And why would they have a picture of the airliner coming into the pentagon? Who has security cameras pointed up to the sky?


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 2, 2016)

Skylar said:


> TheCrusader said:
> 
> 
> > The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.
> ...




The inner core of WTC 1 and 2 was concrete and encased rebar and there was no resistance as every floor collapses essentially at the same time and in free fall manner. Building 7 collapsed the same way. There is even video showing charges going off when Building 7 collapsed. There is nothing that can convince me that there were not explosives planted because I have seen enough implosions since I woke that proves this was indeed planned and for a litany of reasons.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 2, 2016)

Skylar said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



Because according to the hole that was made, the plane was flying mere feet off of the ground for at least a hundred yards when that in of it's self would be impossible to do with an amateur pilot that failed even the basics of flying a Cessna plane.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 2, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



*the plane was flying mere feet off of the ground for at least a hundred yards
*
At what speed?


----------



## Skylar (Jan 2, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> > TheCrusader said:
> ...



No they didn't. The debris falling outside the WTC 1 and 2 from the impact hit the ground at essentially free fall speeds. As one would expect of falling debris. The towers themselves came down at significantly lower than free fall speeds.



> Building 7 collapsed the same way. There is even video showing charges going off when Building 7 collapsed.



No it didn't. The penthouse imploded roughly 10 seconds before the rest of WTC 7 came down. Demonstrating that the internal structure of the WTC 7 was already collapsing before the facade came down.

And explosive charges are ridiculously loud. The collapse of WTC 7 initiated in virtual silence. A physical impossibility with explosive demolition. Especially one where you could see the charge going off.

In fact there was no charge or apparatus of explosives ever found in any of the collapsed buildings. Not one charge, not one inch of blasting wire, not one detonator, blasting cap, timer, transceiver, anything. Despite the need for tens of thousands of them. Not one girder cut in a manner consistent with explosive demolition was ever found. Despite 10s of thousands of such cuts had the building been explosively demolished.

Plus, WTC 7 was on fire. Explosives and fire don't play well together.Explosives would have exploded, blasting wire, timers or transceivers would have been reduced to bubbling pools of plastic.

Rendering the 'explosive demolition' theory among the poorest explanations for the collapse. 


> There is nothing that can convince me that there were not explosives planted because I have seen enough implosions since I woke that proves this was indeed planned and for a litany of reasons.



Then your mind is closed and the presentation of evidence is irrelevant. As nothing can convince you.

I, however, remain open to evidence. The evidence simply doesn't match your narrative.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 2, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



How much skill does it take to crash a plane?


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 2, 2016)

the paid shills are out in full force as always i see.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 2, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> the paid shills are out in full force as always i see.



As I remember, 'paid shills' are anyone who doesn't ape your story.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 2, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



dude these infiitraters are here to just tie up your time-


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 2, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> There were 83 camera confiscated from surrounding businesses alone by the FBI which was the same M.O concerning the OKC bombing and of course no footage of what was on those cameras were ever released...why is that?
> that dale is why the infiltraters here can only sling shit in defeat like the monkey trolls they are.
> btw Dale,I notice you live in Dallas Texas.As you have seen me talk about on this thread quite a few times,I have done a lot of research into the JFK assassination as well.even far more than in 9/11.
> 
> ...




btw dale you never answered the question i posed here.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 2, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Skylar said:
> ...



'Infiltrators' now, is it? The old conspiracy maxim 'anyone who doesn't ape the conspiracy becomes part of it' must be in full effect.


----------



## westwall (Jan 2, 2016)

Indofred said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Like this?
> ...










Oh?  You mean the part that had been physically compromised collapsed at an angle and then gravity pulled it down into the section that hadn't been compromised by the fire so collapsed straight down like a stack of cards...which is how the building was designed?


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 2, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > There were 83 camera confiscated from surrounding businesses alone by the FBI which was the same M.O concerning the OKC bombing and of course no footage of what was on those cameras were ever released...why is that?
> ...



Sorry, I have been doing my weekly cleaning and listening to documentaries while doing so and wanted to write you a detailed post. Debunking the cynics takes just a few sentences. I knew back in 2003 that OKC was not what we were told and I kept looking for a cover-up that it had a Middle Eastern connection but in the last three years I have found that it was a black-ops done by rogue elements of the FBI and CIA.. The FBI was also behind the first WTC bombing in 1993 and had tried to set up an Egyptian muslim as the fall guy but he beat them at their own game by wearing a wire. Snowden's revelations that the Patriot Act was written before 9/11/01 and the apparatus for this survellience grid was also set-up in advance of 9/11 caused me take a hard look at the events of that day...plus my 17 year old son at the time that insisted that it was an inside job and he dared me to watch "Loose Change" and if he said if I could watch it and have no doubts, he would leave me alone. I eagerly took the challenge but I got about 45 minutes into it when my blood went cold and that was the start of over 12,000 plus hours into the way things really work.

I knew that Oswald never acted alone but I never really delved into it until three years ago. I believe the best documentary ever done on JFK, the banking oligarchs and the events leading up to 9/11/01 is "JFK To 9/11...Everything Is A Rich Man's Trick".  It covers a lot of the things that I had learned in my research for the truth but compiled it in a way that anyone could understand. If I was a teacher, I would make this documentary a "must watch". JFK had managed to piss off every power structure like the CIA, the oil companies, the military industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about, the FBI head J Edgar Hoover as well as the banking oligarchs and anti Fidel Castro Cubans and every single one played their part in the public murder of JFK. People would be stunned to know that Watergate and the JFK assassination are intimately connected. Nixon's "plumbers" were involved in the JFK assassination as was George Herbert Walker Bush and LBJ. Operation Paperclip brought in thousands of Nazis that were allowed to be apart of the OSS that later became the CIA and as it turns out, America had their share of Nazis and Nazis sympathizers. Nazism could never have gained a foothold in Germany without industrialists and the banking oligarchs financing it. The coup de e'tat that took place when JFK was killed has only entrenched itself to the point of 52 years later, I have serious doubts that nothing less than a mass awakening will change our fate.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 2, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



You ended any purpose in discussion when you informed us that 'nothing is going to convince you'. Which precludes your assimilation of evidence. You're done. Your mind is closed.

My posts are for those who have interest in the evidence. The physical impossibility of silent explosive demolition, for example. Or how the towers came down exactly opposite of controlled demolition.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 2, 2016)

Skylar said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Skylar said:
> ...





I mean, you can see the charges going off before it collapses.....I mean seriously, how do you explain that?


----------



## Skylar (Jan 2, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...




There are several other views of the same side of the building*. Why would none of them show any these 'charges' while this one video would? Or record any of the audio?*

A 'new' video posted in 2013.....contradicted by every other video to come before it.  A video with no explanation save it was on an 'old cell phone video'. Showing a level of resolution far higher than cell phones in 2001.

Explain it to me. There are a lot of inconsistencies here.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 2, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



they never will watch this video,they never watch any videos that shread to pieces the governments version.

two minutes ago before my last post.one of the paid shills farted in here.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 2, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...


the bush dupes like to fool themselves into thinking it is the pressure of the floors or what not,what demolition EXPERTS as well as architects and engineers or the witnesses  say  means nothing only what the CIA media tells them.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 2, 2016)

Skylar said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



Dude, I was just like you for 11 years...I demonized, marginalized and berated anyone that tried to tell me that the official story was bullshit. You are going to have to have your own epiphany like I did. I have researched this to ad naseum and the reasons as to why it happened and why it had to happen for the global elites. The Black Eagle Trust that bought ten year securities in 1991 when the USSR ruble collapsed and how some of these globalists piggy backed off of the currency swaps of Leo Wanta, that was commissioned by Ronald Reagan to bring about the collapse of the USSR. The ongoing investigation of the insider trading ad Securities fraud that was being investigated by the SEC that would have put some very powerful movers and shakers on trial that was nixed because just so happens that the plane that hit WTC 1 hit the floors where the  SEC had stored the evidence and were meeting on how to proceed. Then there was the fact that WTCs had been a losing money proposition from the start and to add to the misery, the inner core was coated with asbestos and had been given waiver after waiver to correct this problem which would have cost over a billion dollars. What better way to rid yourself of this problem by engineering a terrorist attack and collapse them and then collect the insurance money. Like any event...all you have to do is follow the money and how stands to gain. This event ignited the military industrial complex because now we are in a war that will basically never end.


----------



## Indofred (Jan 2, 2016)

westwall said:


> Oh?  You mean the part that had been physically compromised collapsed at an angle and then gravity pulled it down into the section that hadn't been compromised by the fire so collapsed straight down like a stack of cards...which is how the building was designed?



Not likely.
All the weight of the falling section is on one side of the building, so you'd expect that section to slide to one side, badly damaging the floors below on that side, then sliding off.
Even accounting for steel supports holding for a while, it wouldn't have gone down vertically, nor would it have taken the whole building with it.
If there was a total collapse, it would have leaned well over to one side as the weight from the top section would have dragged it over.


----------



## westwall (Jan 2, 2016)

Indofred said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Oh?  You mean the part that had been physically compromised collapsed at an angle and then gravity pulled it down into the section that hadn't been compromised by the fire so collapsed straight down like a stack of cards...which is how the building was designed?
> ...











Nope.  Physics will direct it to the center.  The construction of the WTC was such that the walls acted like a funnel and kept the cascade of floors centered within the tube.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 2, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



I'm a big believer in Occam's Razor. And the conspiracy explanation is just fantastically, even ludicrously complicated. While collapse due to fire and structural damage matches the evidence and is far, far simpler.


----------



## Indofred (Jan 2, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> not,what demolition EXPERTS as well as architects and engineers or the witnesses say means nothing only



Professional know their future is going to be a problem if they say things that don't fit the norm, especially when it comes to a major event such as this.

That means these experts in their field must have a valid or strong argument on their side.

1,000 top end professionals just don't do that


----------



## Skylar (Jan 2, 2016)

Indofred said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Oh?  You mean the part that had been physically compromised collapsed at an angle and then gravity pulled it down into the section that hadn't been compromised by the fire so collapsed straight down like a stack of cards...which is how the building was designed?
> ...



No you wouldn't. The building was mostly empty space. Your scenario would have the entirety of more than a dozen floors using one row of outer panels as a fulcrum.  There's no way that the side would be able to hold all that weight. It would collapse almost instantly. And did.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 2, 2016)

Imagine that.....


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 2, 2016)

Indofred said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Oh?  You mean the part that had been physically compromised collapsed at an angle and then gravity pulled it down into the section that hadn't been compromised by the fire so collapsed straight down like a stack of cards...which is how the building was designed?
> ...



*you'd expect that section to slide to one side, badly damaging the floors below on that side, then sliding off.*

Sliding off? Are you under the impression there are frictionless surfaces involved?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 2, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Imagine that.....



Imagine what? A completely different design and a completely different fire acting completely differently?


----------



## Indofred (Jan 2, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Sliding off? Are you under the impression there are frictionless surfaces involved?



Are you under the impression there's no mass?
Any surviving beams would buckle and break under that massive weight once the moment had passed.
Whilst the towers remained vertical, equilibrium means only vertical fall is possible, but such a large mass falling at an angle would create a moment, negating any possibility of that.

Try it on any structure you like, logo if that's all you have around.
If you partially unlock the top 15% and force it to fall at an angle (Simulating the weight and gravitational forces on the tower), the rest will never fall vertically, if it falls at all.


----------



## ranfunck (Jan 2, 2016)

Sylar face it you are a loser and so is governments fairy tail.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 2, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Imagine that.....
> ...



Dude, if you buy the official story and you stick with it after all this time? What can I say....it doesn't pass my sniff test any longer and there wasn't a bigger denier than me for 11 years.  I have invested thousands upon thousands of hours delving into what is really going on and what the global elite have planned for us and how they see as "worthless eaters" and for 100 years they have been putting in place the means to phase us out after we no longer serve a useful purpose. What I have learned and connected the dots to is a future that means a 90 percent reduction in global population and they are very intent on reaching that goal. Trans-humanism along with the robotic age that will make humans less of a resource. You don't actually believe that the powers that be are going to allow lower forms to survive and squirt out other non-productive humans that will take up resources that the elites believe are theirs by divine right, do you? A  depopulation plan has been in effect since the late 40's but us pesky humans have been resilient even in spite of the vaccines and other sterilization programs....and trust me on this, they have been stepping up their efforts to bring this about. The Tavistock Institute, The Brookings Institute and other "gubermint" think tanks have used us as human lab rats trying to figure out ways to keep us from reproducing and keep us "dumbed down" as to what is happening to us...things are not what you think they are.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 2, 2016)

Maybe...Just maybe the contractor used inferior quality materials (steel, etc...).


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 2, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



*I have invested thousands upon thousands of hours delving into what is really going on*

And you found how many demo devices?

*You don't actually believe that the powers that be are going to allow lower forms to survive and squirt out other non-productive humans that will take up resources
*
The elites here keep letting in low skilled illegals.
*
think tanks have used us as human lab rats trying to figure out ways to keep us from reproducing and keep us "dumbed down"*

They dumbed you down. Congrats!


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 2, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



I know and understand more than you could possibly wrap your teeny tiny mind around and it doesn't bode well for those like you. Keep having faith in your beloved "gubermint" and trust that they have your best interest at heart. Honestly, there is a sorry part of me that is looking forward to the time when it all blows up in the face of idiots like you that have believed in a benevolent "gubermint"...because when the shit hits the fan (and it will) and idiots like you are going to be sitting on the curb of your humble abode waiting for "da gubermint" to come to your rescue...help that will never come. You don't mean  shit to the power elite that have been calling the shots for decades. Enjoy the "sheeple life"...you deserve nothing less.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 3, 2016)

Indofred said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Sliding off? Are you under the impression there are frictionless surfaces involved?
> ...



Ordinarily about 250 outer panels and 47 core columns hold each floor up. Each row of  62 outer panels that make up each side of the tower is designed to carry about  12% of the load of the floors above it.  In your scenario, only 62 outer panels would sustain the *entire* weight of 16 stories as they acted as a fulcrum. *100% of the weight of those 16 stories while being designed to carry only 12%. *

*That's nonsense. *Those 62 outer panels would collapse almost immediately after the initial collapse began.  Nor is there any structure within the building that can 'catch' 16 stories of collapsing steel and concrete accelerated by gravity. The floor below the initial collapse certainly couldn't do it. It would collapse as the floors above, accelerated by gravity, impacted it. 

_And the floor below that. And the floor below that. And the floor below that. _With the debris field getting larger (meaning more energy) and moving at greater speed (meaning more energy). If the first floor beneath the impact zone couldn't 'catch' the initial collapse, then there is no structure in the entire building that could. And none did. With each floor collapsing, one at a time, _all the way to the ground._

*Which is exactly what we saw. *


----------



## Skylar (Jan 3, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



Your story is ludicrously complicated.  Where somehow tens of thousands of explosives were set throughout the building with no one noticing. This despite the buildings being regularly maintained, inspected and cleaned. And yet...nothing. This despite bomb sniffing dogs sweeping the WTC plaza only ONE WEEK before 911, and nothing. That's absurdly unlikely. And it gets worse.

*As per your narrative, while the building was on fire,* the building was explosively demolished in a manner* exactly opposite of controlled demolition*. With not a single girder ever found cut in a manner consistent with explosive demolition, despite 10s of thousands of them in your scenario.

Not a single charge. Not a single inch of blasting wire. Not a singe kicker charge, transceiver, nothing. No apparatus of explosives ever found before, during or after the collapse.

Your narrative is stupidly complicated, ludicrously complex and pointlessly elaborate. And you're still not done with pointless layers of baseless elaboration. As you insist this is all some part of a vast plot of 'global elites' enacting their own stupidly complicated super secret plan. Which, for no particular reason, you happen to know.

*Or....the building fell due to fire and structural damage. Done.*

Occam's Razor cuts your narrative to ribbons.


----------



## ranfunck (Jan 3, 2016)

Sitting on the curb nah these idiots will be led into the fema camps like sheep to slaughter.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 3, 2016)

ranfunck said:


> Sitting on the curb nah these idiots will be led into the fema camps like sheep to slaughter.



Or, you have no idea what you're talking about. And are muttering to yourself on a curb.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 3, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



*Keep having faith in your beloved "gubermint"
*
Faith or lack of faith in gubermint has nothing to do with seeing a fully loaded jet crash into the WTC leading to its collapse.

*You don't mean  shit to the power elite that have been calling the shots for decades.*

Conspiracy nut jobs like you don't mean anything either, so you've got that going for you.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 3, 2016)

someone farted in here.^


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 3, 2016)

ranfunck said:


> Sylar face it you are a loser and so is governments fairy tail.


what else do you expect from all these government infiltraters?


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 3, 2016)

ranfunck said:


> Sitting on the curb nah these idiots will be led into the fema camps like sheep to slaughter.


yeah these government paid infiltraters are so stupid they think that by working for the government posting their lies,they are going to be protected from them but they will be in for a rude awakening when they turn on them as well and find out they have the same plan for them they have for us.they will then go into panic mode because they figured they were going to leave them along all this time for trolling these boards.


----------



## candycorn (Jan 3, 2016)

The titanic was an inside job too.  Take a piece of ice. Hit it with a metal hammer.  What breaks.  The ice?  Or the Hammer?  The Titanic was made of steel...it should have broken the ice the same way.....

Easy
Peasy
Japanesee


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 3, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



It's been many years since you began spewing your silliness here and still you assiduously avoid the obvious ... rational adults find semiliterate morons who post sophomoric comments like "videos that shread [sic] to pieces the governments [sic] version" or "two minutes ago before my last post.one of the paid shills farted in here" impossible to take seriously.

You are the destroyer of the long defunct 9/11 CT Movement.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 3, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> ranfunck said:
> 
> 
> > Sylar face it you are a loser and so is governments fairy tail.
> ...



Can I take it from your refusal to actually discuss the topic of the thread that your latest 'government infiltrators' batshit is your way of conceding the argument?


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 3, 2016)

candycorn said:


> The titanic was an inside job too.  Take a piece of ice. Hit it with a metal hammer.  What breaks.  The ice?  Or the Hammer?  The Titanic was made of steel...it should have broken the ice the same way.....
> 
> Easy
> Peasy
> Japanesee




. . . And to this day, the powerful men that did not want the Federal Reserve, the ones that could have prevented the booms and the busts, the ones that could have prevented the bubbles and the currency wars, the dollar devaluation and all the endless senseless wars in the name of the global banking cabal, went down on that ship.

Now, tax day is the same day that the ship went down.

Remember that next time you have to file your tax forms.





"Necessary to their plans, the Federal Reserve did have some opposition; those who saw what the future would become if banking was outside of the government’s hands, the rates set by a private company such as the Fed. All the wealthy and powerful men the Jesuits wanted to get rid of were invited to take the cruise. Three of the richest and most important of these were Benjamin Guggenheim, Isador Strauss, the head of Macy’s Department Stores, and John Jacob Astor, probably the wealthiest man in the world. Their total wealth, at that time, using dollar values of their day was more than 500 million dollars. Today that amount of money would be worth nearly eleven billion dollars. These three men were coaxed and encouraged to board the floating palace. They had to be destroyed because the Jesuits knew they would use their wealth and influence to oppose a Federal Reserve Bank as well as the various wars that were being planned.


It can also be mentioned that J.P. Morgan, the individual contracted to build the Titanic was scheduled to be on the maiden voyage, but canceled.


Supporters of the idea that the Titanic shipwreck was orchestrated carefully, a Jesuit tempore co-adjutor was picked to captain the ship, a man that would do anything for the order and God’s will; Captain Edward Smith. Quite possibly the most experienced captain of the time, Smith had navigated the waters of the Atlantic for 26 years, a master of the icy waters that the Titanic would be sailing. He was a Jesuit and worked for J.P. Morgan. As National Geographic stated in their 1986 documentary entitilted ‘The Secrets of the Titanic,’ “Anyone could be a Jesuit and their identity not be known.”"
Titanic Conspiracy and The Jesuits - RMS Titanic Article

The only time reality is stranger than fiction is when the minds of men are acting and reacting to make it so.
Insane Coincidences – The “Titanic” Disaster Story

5 Titanic Coincidences That Prove Reality is Stranger than Fiction

I find it unbelievable how malleable the minds of people are today.  The government schools have made them so willing to accept what ever paradigm the establishment media cartels will whore out to them.

I suppose that is easier than the horror of facing the truth.  That they have done this to us before is a good predictor that folks will love falling for the drama again.  I'm sure when they aren't paying attention, or are bored, or aren't willing to do the elites bidding, they will sell us more drama.  Just look at San Bernardino or Paris.


No one is saying the Titanic didn't sink or that it wasn't an Iceberg. 

Don't be so simple minded.  Get off your knees and stop accepting the narratives you are told w/o question.


----------



## candycorn (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > The titanic was an inside job too.  Take a piece of ice. Hit it with a metal hammer.  What breaks.  The ice?  Or the Hammer?  The Titanic was made of steel...it should have broken the ice the same way.....
> ...


 
I thought it was pretty obvious that what I wrote was in gest.  Sorry you were not developed enough to realize it. 

There was no conspiracy involved in the Titanic any more than there was one with the 9/11 attacks.  The looney birds that sponsor such a fantasy have the same IQ as pea soup and any investigation of the subject matter would return any sober observer to the same conclusion. 

Just a few pages back one of them was saying that there were no planes involved.  It doesn't get any more batshit crazy than that.


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 4, 2016)

candycorn said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Your case and your position is not made any stronger by your ad hominem.  Folks like you say, "nope, there are no conspiracies," but educated people know there are.  So stop being obtuse and grow up. 9 huge government conspiracies that actually happened




Now, as far as there not being any planes?  I don't really know about that.  I for one don't believe in that particular position, but I am not willing to condemn those who hold that position.  Experts have said otherwise. 

The following interview is of a fellow that is a known government disinfo agent.  He worked with the government, and was instructed to go get the Iranian hostages, not releasing them a moment before Reagan was sworn in.  

So can what he says be trusted?  I don't know.  I think he's pretty shady to say the least.  He talks of little green men, E.T.'s and the like (not that those aren't real), so you sort of take it for what it's worth.  OTH, he comes from an elite family that knows the inner workings of the SG, so there does seem to be a lot of info mixed in with disinfo. . . .


Who the hell are we to say there were planes?  I don't simply know.  Until they release to the public the black boxes, neither of us has any proof either way, do we?  So any discussion of planes vs. no planes seems academic to me.

Why does the government not release to the public the flight data recorders if there were planes?  What exactly are they hiding?  In every other crash, they always release that data or at least the destroyed recorders.  So what is the deal here?  The government claims those recorders were destroyed, but no wreckage?  Does it WANT to fuel such conspiracies?  

Seems like it to me.


The main reason I don't believe in the "no planes" theory is that the flight data recording devices WERE found, then the FBI took them, and told the folks that found them to shut up about finding them.

But why?

*9/11: Missing Black Boxes in World Trade Center Attacks Found by Firefighters, Analyzed by NTSB, Concealed by FBI*
9/11: Missing Black Boxes in World Trade Center Attacks Found by Firefighters, Analyzed by NTSB, Concealed by FBI
But the FBI states, and also reported to the 9-11 Commission, that none of the recording devices from the two planes that hit the World Trade Center were ever recovered.


There has always been some skepticism about this assertion, particularly as two N.Y. City firefighters, Mike Bellone and Nicholas De Masi, claimed in 2004 that they had found three of the four boxes, and that Federal agents took them and told the two men not to mention having found them. (The FBI denies the whole story.) Moreover, these devices are almost always located after crashes, even if not in useable condition (and the cleanup of the World Trade Center was meticulous, with even tiny bone fragments and bits of human tissue being discovered so that almost all the victims were ultimately identified). As Ted Lopatkiewicz, director of public affairs at the National Transportation Safety Agency which has the job of analyzing the boxes’ data, says, “It’s very unusual not to find a recorder after a crash, although it’s also very unusual to have jets flying into buildings.”


<snip>

What the apparent existence of the black boxes in government hands means is unclear.


If the information in those boxes is recoverable, or if, as is likely, it has been recovered already, it could give crucial evidence regarding the skill of the hijacker/pilots, perhaps of their strategy, of whether they were getting outside help in guiding them to their targets, of how fast they were flying and a host of other things.


Why would the main intelligence and law enforcement arm of the U.S. government want to hide from the public not just the available information about the two hijacked flights that provided the motivation and justification for the nation’s “War on Terror” and for its two wars against Afghanistan and Iraq, but even the fact that it has the devices which could contain that information? Conspiracy theories abound, with some claiming the planes were actually pilotless military aircraft, or that they had little or nothing to do with the building collapses. The easiest way to quash such rumors and such fevered thinking would be openness.


Instead we have the opposite: a dark secrecy that invites many questions regarding the potentially embarrassing or perhaps even sinister information that might be on those tapes.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...



*The following interview is of a fellow that is a known government disinfo agent
*
That's what he wants you to think.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...



9/11/01 happened for a litany of reasons and some of it has to do with some of the proceeds from the Black Eagle Trust (which was gold stolen from the Japanese that had buried it in the Philippines)  some of this was used to buy up gas and oil futures when the Ruble collapsed in September of 1991. The Carlyle group piggybacked off of the currency swaps by Leo Wanta, who was commissioned by Ronald Reagan to take down the USSR's currency back in 1988. These were ten year securities that were to expire in September of 2001...only problem was that in order to authenticate the owners of these securities would require the Securities and Exchange Commission to process it and that posed a real problem. It was solved when the Federal Reserve bankers shut down the SEC due to 9/11 for two weeks thus allowing all trades to go through with no scrutiny. 240 billion dollars were able to fall into the hands of those that had used the stolen gold that made up of some of the Black Eagle Trust of gold stolen from the Japanese that they themselves had stolen.....just one of many reasons for 9/11/01. Cantor Fitzgerald was one of the groups that was used to authenticate ownership of said securities and were targeted on 9/11/01. They resided on the 82nd floor of WTC 1. Oddly enough, Edward Lansdale, one of the principles in getting the gold for the Black Eagle Trust was intimately involved in Kennedy's murder....truth is much stranger than fiction sometimes.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 4, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Wow! What a complete load of crap.
I really loved this.
*
Leo Wanta, who was commissioned by Ronald Reagan to take down the USSR's currency back in 1988.*

The ruble in the USSR was not convertible, you stupid git.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 4, 2016)

Wow! What a complete load of crap.
I really loved this.
*
Leo Wanta, who was commissioned by Ronald Reagan to take down the USSR's currency back in 1988.*

The ruble in the USSR was not convertible, you stupid git.[/QUOTE]


Exactly and thus leading to the downfall of the Ruble. The USSR had over-valued it's currency and using currency swaps, Wanta was able to buy up Rubles from countries holding Russian debt for pennies on the dollar to accrue an ungodly amount of Rubles that he and his Asian partner cashed in like poker chips at a casino. It crashed the Russian economy and the vultures swooped in to take advantage of it. I may be missing some minute details because I research and try and learn as much as I can about a myriad of things but I pretty much have the gist of it. I am "dead on" about the Black Eagle Trust" and I have barely scratched the surface on that one.  I don't mind being lamely flamed by a troll that can't stand having his preconceived notions challenged...... because it's what I do day in and day out. I have no political agenda.....simply want people to wake up and think for themselves.


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 4, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Yes, I'd heard many of the nefarious other plots associated with 9/11.

We need to focus on the fact that the military/industrial complex needed a new enemy for the fiat currency/debt merry-go-round to keep the game going.

Up till that point, the Clinton administration had cut the defense spending to historical lows not seen since the end of WWII.  This was an untenable situation for the private banking cabal.

I was aware of the nefarious currency swaps involving Leo Wanta.  I've never really clearly understood that scandal, and it continued on past 9/11.  It was one of the main drivers in the world wide economic collapse that involved the derivative bundles.  The MSM has everyone believing that it was only toxic assets and bad mortgages, but it also had something to do with the Wanta scandal.  I'm not sure how, it is extremely complex and above my pay-grade.  I was following it for several years from a intelligence analyst at a site called Global Analysis.  It went down for several years.

Recently I found that someone paid to archive it.  I knew the whole economic crash was coming years before it did.  Christopher Edward Harle Story pointed out the problems with Fannie and Freddie and how they were connected to Wanta.
You'll see from some of this archived intel, the Wanta stuff goes right up to Story's assassination.  It's been hard finding solid stuff about the SG since he has been gone.
Index of /news/

There are lot of other anomalies.  Like the gold that was stolen from the WTC complex, how Enron was involved, the missing trillions of dollars from the defense budget, etc.


But this is really about keeping the government and the banking cabal in power.  It is about hiding their corruption.  Those towers hid not only the corruption you have written about, but much more as well.  The bodies that were buried in that rubble, were buried with a lot of government and corporate skeletons as well.

This nation has two choices.  We exhume all the skeletons that the destruction was meant to cover up, and right the ship, or the rest of the world will right it for us.



I can see the world elites are already giving us more and more insane politicians, setting the nation up for idiotic masses to vote in a megalomaniac that will make it easier for the global elites to justify an invasion.


The plebes are given a clown or a liar to vote for, and they are actually arguing over which is better.  Both the clown and the liar will go to the international bankers with hat in hand asking for money to start WWIII.   The rest of the world would love to come and take all the land and make us all slaves.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 4, 2016)

It is a real blessing to come across someone like you and some others here that know the things that I do and have taken the time to read and research. It is people like you that keeps me going even when I am being dogpiled on in other forums. I have a close knit group of truthers that are a part of my inner circle and we lean on each other and pass on information to each other. I look forward to learning what I can from you and I hope I am able to return the favor and that you might be able to take some of the things I have garnered and be of use to you as well. We are all in this together and it seems that the powers that be are doubling down on their efforts to bring about their totalitarian, feudalistic two class system of elites and serfs. I want you to know  that there are "white hats" working on our behalf and there are inner- agency wars going on that the media never speaks of and what will help them is people waking up...that is the thankless job that you and a few others have here.


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 4, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...



My guess is you have no idea that the Leo Wanta scandal is the largest scandal in US history.

Unfortunately, I think 240 billion dollars is a pretty large underestimate of the amounts we're talking about.  *Reliable* updates about the scandal largely disappear after Story was assassinated.  But the amounts we're talking about exceed four trillion, some put it at over 25 trillion.  Is it any wonder the world economy is a basket case?

As far as being a "stupid git?" 

Who's the "stupid git?"
Soviet ruble - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## candycorn (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...



The only questions about whether or not a plane hit the buildings and the Pentagon lay in the questionable sanity of those who harbor such indecision....  Mountains of video evidence, physical evidence, eye witness evidence, data evidence exists showing each plane's path to demise and is born out by wreckage on the ground.  

The only thing the government is hiding from you is their laughter.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



Only a limited set of products could be freely bought, thus the ruble had a role similar to trading stamps or food stamps. *The currency was not internationally exchangeable* and its export was illegal.

Thanks. I love it when you idiots post proof of my claim.
Stupid git.


----------



## candycorn (Jan 4, 2016)

Okay...if the planes didn't hit the buildings; what happened to them?  What happened to the Passengers?  How did the conspirators plant the airplane parts without being seen? How did the light poles get knocked over  near the Pentagon if it were not a plane hitting them?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 4, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Wow! What a complete load of crap.
> ...


*
The USSR had over-valued it's currency
*
For sure. But being non-convertible, it didn't matter.

*and using currency swaps,*

There were no currency swaps for rubles.

*Wanta was able to buy up Rubles from countries holding Russian debt*

You think Russia borrowed rubles from other countries? Shit, you're stupid.

*for pennies on the dollar to accrue an ungodly amount of Rubles that he and his Asian partner cashed in like poker chips at a casino.*

Ummmmm......cashed the imaginary rubles in how? For what?
*
I may be missing some minute details*

LOL!

*I research and try and learn as much as I can
*
Garbage in, garbage out.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 4, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...




No, foreign countries had acquired Rubles due to transactions with the USSR....the only one that is stupid is you because you haven't done any research about what happened almost 15 years ago....all you have are aspersions because that is all you have and tis a pity. I post about things that challenge people's preconceived notions because we have been living under an illusion. You, I and everyone here is an indentured debt slave to the international bankers that control our fiat currency that loses value by the day because it is a perpetual debt machine and the only way to keep up with the debt is to print more debt notes that debases the fiat currency that is already in existence. The fiat dollar has lost 99 percent of it's value since the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 and that central bank has never been fully audited in it's 102 years of being....don't you find that odd? The Crash of 1929 was orchestrated by the same banking oligarchs that claimed that a central bank would keep that from happening...they used the market crash to buy up unaffiliated banks and corporations that they coveted for pennies on the dollar. 7 Million Americans died from malnutrition and starvation due to the acts of the Warburgs, Morgans, Rockefellers, Kennedys, Schiffs, Rothschilds etc, etc.....and then pushed USA.INC into Chapter 11 bankruptcy and that is where the birth certificate comes into play...up until that time? There was no birth certificate but everyone born after 1933 became collateral on the debt and the birth certificate (printed on bond paper) made you an indentured debt slave and your income tax goes to pay interest on the credit extended to USA.INC due to a crisis that they themselves caused. I estimate that I have worked ten years of my life for free.......welcome to indentured servitude. (snicker)


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 4, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...


*
No, foreign countries had acquired Rubles due to transactions with the USSR*

Which foreign countries accepted non-convertible rubles from the USSR? Why would they?
*
I post about things that challenge people's preconceived notions*

Yes, you post things that challenge reality.

*that central bank has never been fully audited in it's 102 years of being
*
They're audited by Deloitte.
FRB: Annual Report 2013 - Federal Reserve System Audits
*
There was no birth certificate but everyone born after 1933 became collateral on the debt*

You're being seen by an entire team of doctors, aren't you?


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > There was no conspiracy involved in the Titanic any more than there was one with the 9/11 attacks...
> ...



Candy never claimed "nope, there are no conspiracies" nor have I ever heard anyone say such a silly thing (except CT loons trying to explain their lunacy).

What she is trying to tell you is that not everything is a conspiracy ... that like most normal people, gov't officials and employees are far too busy living their lives - you know ... mowing the lawn, chasing sex, watching football - to create and perpetrate the elaborate schemes of your vivid imagination.

That after your years of "research" you still are not sure whether or not there were planes involved on 9/11 says all that anyone needs to know about the loons that pervaded your now defunct 9/11 CT Movement.



Dale Smith said:


> It is a real blessing to come across someone like you and some others here that know the things that I do and have taken the time to read and research. It is people like you that keeps me going even when I am being dogpiled on in other forums. I have a close knit group of truthers that are a part of my inner circle and we lean on each other and pass on information to each other. I look forward to learning what I can from you and I hope I am able to return the favor and that you might be able to take some of the things I have garnered and be of use to you as well. We are all in this together and it seems that the powers that be are doubling down on their efforts to bring about their totalitarian, feudalistic two class system of elites and serfs. I want you to know  that there are "white hats" working on our behalf and there are inner- agency wars going on that the media never speaks of and what will help them is people waking up...that is the thankless job that you and a few others have here.



Indeed most CT loons are forced to seek out and "lean on" their "close knit group of truthers" because normal people ignore or ridicule the CT silliness.

Paranoia is treatable but you first must want to rejoin the rational.

I do find it amusing (but not surprising) that you think yourself some sort of superhero trying to save the world from evil.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 4, 2016)

"Which foreign countries accepted non-convertible rubles from the USSR? Why would they?"
Seriously, if you are that fucking stupid as to even ask that question? Then my conversation with you has been a total waste of time....you re just a time waster....seriously, how could someone as stupid as you are even be able to work a computer? You must be an idiot savant.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 4, 2016)

SAYIT said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


 Sayit sez???? "Listen to me you flammer of our gubermint...our gubermint loves us and has never lied to us due you here me due you? You due not love this republik for witches stands you traytor of this cunrtry....how dare you acurse our gubermint of laying to us...a curce upon you!!!!"

Seriously, punkinpuss....you are nothing but a bug on the windshield of life .....should we not be able to turn the tide and those that are left end up serving the collective? I will spare you a thought as you scratch your sloped skull when your little world is turned up on it's axis and you are sitting on the curb wonderin' "Where's da gubermint?" Don't fret, little man...there are millions of "I believe in Santa Claus" dumbfucks like you....you will have plenty of company to commiserate with....


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 4, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> "Which foreign countries accepted non-convertible rubles from the USSR? Why would they?"
> Seriously, if you are that fucking stupid as to even ask that question? Then my conversation with you has been a total waste of time....you re just a time waster....seriously, how could someone as stupid as you are even be able to work a computer? You must be an idiot savant.


*
Seriously, if you are that fucking stupid as to even ask that question?
*
I've noticed when I point out your idiocy, that you can't answer my questions.
Would you accept non-convertible currency from North Korea? Why/why not?

*Then my conversation with you has been a total waste of time....
*
Well, obviously, because you're a fucking loon. As well as an idiot.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 4, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > "Which foreign countries accepted non-convertible rubles from the USSR? Why would they?"
> ...





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > "Which foreign countries accepted non-convertible rubles from the USSR? Why would they?"
> ...




The only thing that you pointed out was your own stupidity....congrats and nicely done. Any idiot that would compare the manufacturing ability of the USSR, their trading abilities with that of North Korea obviously has no grasp on anything. I lean more to the right of the political spectrum than I do the left...but if you classify yourself as a "rightwinger"? You  are the reason that people declare themselves as "independent"....I sure as fuck wouldn't want to identify myself as being in the same camp as you.......not ever. ....sheeesh.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 4, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



Manufacturing? We're talking about currency, moron.

I agree, don't identify yourself as in my camp, fuckin' loon.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...



So......the current truther conspiracy is that there were no planes at all?

Holy shit. That takes 'batshit' to a whole new level.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...


you do know they wont watch the video or read the links right?lol


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 4, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...




disinfo agent sayit along with candyass is one of USMB's biggest paid trolls of them all-i put these two  stupid fucks on ignore years ago-


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 4, 2016)

someone farted in here.^


----------



## Skylar (Jan 4, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > SAYIT said:
> ...



Laughing.......and right on cue, the Truthers insist that anyone who even *questions* their conspiracies must be part of an even more lubriciously complicated and factually baseless conspiracy.

Sigh.......you can't fix stupid.


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 4, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> It is a real blessing to come across someone like you and some others here that know the things that I do and have taken the time to read and research. It is people like you that keeps me going even when I am being dogpiled on in other forums. I have a close knit group of truthers that are a part of my inner circle and we lean on each other and pass on information to each other. I look forward to learning what I can from you and I hope I am able to return the favor and that you might be able to take some of the things I have garnered and be of use to you as well. We are all in this together and it seems that the powers that be are doubling down on their efforts to bring about their totalitarian, feudalistic two class system of elites and serfs. I want you to know  that there are "white hats" working on our behalf and there are inner- agency wars going on that the media never speaks of and what will help them is people waking up...that is the thankless job that you and a few others have here.



I'm not real keen on the "us against them" paradigm.

I've heard the term, "white hats," before, and I'm not sure I like it.

Isn't it the elites that like to think in an "us against them" paradigm as well?  Don't you think they actually believe they are doing the best thing for the planet?

Wasn't it Spock that said, "Then needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few?"  

Or do you believe they are purposely setting about on a course of purposeful evil?



I've read that grandiose conspiracy stuff, and I am not sure I buy it.

I've specialized in political science at university.  What we have here are nothing more than interest groups.  Albeit, "clandestine interest groups."  This is a classic example of folks that take Plato's Republic seriously.  

And yet, they are NOT philosopher kings.

I have also lived and worked among the lower class.  I've had friends that came from the slums, the hood and the trailer parks.  Some have been extraordinarily gifted, others are exactly as written about in the Republic, in need of guidance by the educated classes.


So, in the final analysis, are these elite controllers doing these things for the good of the world's population or exclusively for their own gain?  It is something we need to consider before we uniformly think in terms of an us vs. them paradigm.

I highly recommend the documentary by the great grandson of the founder of the Johnson and Johnson company "The One Percent."  If nothing else, you find out the truth about Warren Buffett, and how he's not really such a nice guy.




You know, I search, do lots of research, and that is one of the few terms that never brings up anything meaningful.  "Clandestine Interest Groups."  It's sort of like trying to find out the name of China's intelligence agency, isn't it?

I did stumble across at least one of them. . . I don't think these folks want any press. . . 

does anyone know if this website is real or fake : http://www.guilderberg.com/?

You need at least four million net worth to log into this forum.  
Guilderberg | A Gathering of Distinguished Individuals - Dørene Er Åpnet

There is a FB page that is open to the public, it's pretty pedestrian.


Once into that site, I am sure there are other sites that don't even show up in google.


My son was invited to join a program at the local college for accelerated students at age eleven.  Now mind you, FB has a policy that one needs to be thirteen to have an account on FB.

After he joined, they told him they had a private group on FB that didn't even show up in Google searches or FB searches that was only open to their students.  

I'm like, WTF?  He shouldn't even be on that site, none of them should be.

But that is the nature of clandestine interest groups.  Does this mean the college or these kids have a "nefarious agenda?"  No, it just means they don't want the public involved in what they do in any way.

If they can do it, then be sure, there are lots of other groups doing the same thing.  I am also sure that the majority of them are doing it because they feel that the masses will just obstruct their functioning, and they feel they are doing what they are doing for the public good.


You will never be dog piled if you view those who are dog piling you as your friends, your family and your country men.

Everyone at USMB believes as they do for a reason.  We all have interests, we need to recognize them.  Why, in the final analysis, does the truth threaten these interests?  Then you will understand why folks "dogpile."

Sometimes an uncomfortable lie is better than the sinister truth.

Having a close knit group of friends can lead to tunnel vision, guard yourself always, be open to the possibility that those who you believe are your enemies, may in fact, just be your misguided saviors.

I sometimes wonder if the tales of John Titor might have been true.  What if 9/11 were all his fault?  What if it hadn't been for him, we would have been in civil war and invaded by now?  Who can say?  Would that have been better?  

At least our government would have been honest.  But look at that world he was living in. . . .


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 4, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



I'll agree with you, this is true for the common lay people.

However, this is NOT TRUE FOR GOVERNMENTS.

How do you think the Soviets bought commodities on the world market?  Seriously.


Why do you think wiki listed a conversion table?


----------



## Skylar (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...



The issues you're bringing up are irrelevant. As no conversion is necessary to sell commodities. If Russia sold, say, a million barrels of oil in exchange for 50 million dollars, they have 50 million in hard currency that they could buy goods with for import. And pay for them in dollars.

Thus the exchange is:
*
Export commodities for dollars.

Dollars for import commodities.*

The ruble never need play any role at all. As the ruble wasn't a freely convertible currency in the Soviet Era, the sale of commodities on the world market in dollars was essentially the only way that the Soviet Union could get hard currency. Rubles were intra-Union. They played little to no role outside it.

Making the 'crush the Ruble' narrative a silly one. It would be like trying to 'crush' the exchange rate of Chucky Cheese tickets for stuffed animals. It just makes no sense.


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 4, 2016)

Skylar said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Yeah, I'd have to say so. 

But I really couldn't tell you, and frankly, I don't care.

One would have to be supremely obtuse to believe that planes took down those buildings, so what does it matter?

One would also have to be supremely obtuse to believe that every technology that the US government or the shadow government has available to it's use is going to be available or known about in the popular press.  One would think that there is no such thing as top secret technologies, is that it? 

So just because the MSM never before Sept. 11, 2001 covered drone controlled airplanes, or holographic imaging, well, then it is completely out of the realm of possibility, it that it?  smh  Whether I believe the no planes hypothesis in not the point, it is just a simple fact, expert pilots will tell you that such a maneuver is statistically a near impossible stunt to pull off.  And twice within the time frame it was done?

Nor does any of this explain the lack of wreckage.  Etc.  I'm not saying I believe this hypothesis, I'm just saying, I've heard it, and there are some unexplained questions.  If one can't intelligently discuss something with out inflammatory remarks and acting like a five year old, some hasn't done the research.


I will never understand why discussions of this manner have to be adversarial.  Why can't folks discuss this in an adult manner with out the ad hominem and derogatory name calling?  Is it because folks world views and interests rely on their POV's not being challenged?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...


*
How do you think the Soviets bought commodities on the world market?
*
They used dollars or marks or francs or pounds.
*
Why do you think wiki listed a conversion table?
*
Because that's what the Commies said the rubles were worth. Even though they weren't convertible.


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 4, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Go here;

Alexa Top 500 Global Sites

I post for the public, and a post for those interested in the truth. 

I care not about those whose world view is clutching to a fiat currency and the boom/bust let's make war on the planet paradigm.

When I left the last forum I was at in 2012, I used Alexa and other analytics to decide to come here.  Mostly because at the time, this site was doing well.  I haven't analyzed it's performance since then.  I don't care.  I've grown attached.

I like everyone, whether they agree with me, or disagree with me.

Can you HONESTLY say you don't miss SFC OLLIE?


I do.  Nice old chap.  And honest.  I hope where ever he went to, he is still alive and kicking.

I have nothing personally against any of those who disagree with my POV.  As a matter of fact, their POV is much like many of my family members.  Do I harbor ill will toward my own family and friends?  Of course not.  And I full well know my own family are not, "paid government shills."   

We can't be expected to be treated seriously and with respect unless we treat those with whom we interact with by the same standards.

You read their links and watch their videos, right?

If they ever post any. . . . .

But they don't.  Mostly because there is nothing to that side of the elite ruse but ad hominem and snow job at this point.

And to the few we suspect of being paid disinfo agents, well, it's easy enough to just ignore that, isn't it?


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 4, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > SAYIT said:
> ...




I'll agree with you on SAYIT, as his position on issues changes with the wind.  His posting and postions will conform to what ever new administration comes into office next year.

Candy OTH. . . 

Though CandyACORN I believe is a grass roots paid partisan poster who really just watches too much TV.  She is just innocent and idealistic.  One day someone might reach her, I'm not sure she is in any way connected to the intel establishment.  One has to love her idealism for what it is, she posts out of a genuine love for humanity, she really does.  I understand her POV and the interests that motivate her.


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 4, 2016)

Skylar said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



I don't think it's "stupid."  It's exasperation.

. . . . and it is well known that some forums have certain members, or alternate handles that run interferrence for trolls, cranks, and nutters.  It is just how the business works.

Likewise, it is common knowledge among folks that study government (I can give you a link if you wanted to bother reading it,) that the intel community pays folks to go into social media to influence the way people think and communicate.

Not only does the government do this, but partisan groups do this as well.  Naturally, the people most paranoid of posters with an agenda. . . . or should I say, most aware of folks with an agenda, or those that study this issue.


That said, I think that is a smaller percentage of the posters.  Likewise, if one suspects a poster of being such a troll, why would one bother getting one's panties in a bunch over it?


----------



## Skylar (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...



You should. As it means your sources are wildly irrational, bordering on delusional. Which makes their conclusions questionable at best. 

I mean, really?* No planes? *

How much of the brain does someone have to turn off for that to make sense? 



> One would have to be supremely obtuse to believe that planes took down those buildings, so what does it matter?



That's more of an insult than an argument. Fire and structural damage match the evidence and are far, far simpler than the ludicriously complicated, fantastically elaborate truther conspiracy.

The same conspiracy that gave us the lovely 'no plane' theory. 



> One would also have to be supremely obtuse to believe that every technology that the US government or the shadow government has available to it's use is going to be available or known about in the popular press.  One would think that there is no such thing as top secret technologies, is that it?



That's just a gap argument. Where any of the myriad of truck sized holes in the Truther account are filled with mythical 'secret technology'. That just happens to do whatever it is you need it to do, somehow. Unless it doesn't. With nothing backing its capabilities, use or even existence.

You might as well cite shoe making elves. They have as much factual backing as your gap argument 'technology'.


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 4, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Your argument doesn't hold any water, sorry.

Why would the commies say their rubles were worth "X" amount if they never traded them?


----------



## Skylar (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



Its a baseless conspiracy to back a baseless conspiracy. And its turtles all the way down.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...



The illusion of equivalency with *actual* convertible currencies. It fooled you, didn't it?


----------



## Lewis31407 (Jan 4, 2016)

TheCrusader said:


> The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.
> 
> So 18/110 means approximately 16% of the total building's weight was affected.
> 
> ...





One question, settle up all this mess...we're the planes Israeli?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...


*
Your argument doesn't hold any water, sorry.
*
What argument? Rubles were not convertible in the USSR.
That's a fact.

*Why would the commies say their rubles were worth "X" amount if they never traded them?*

If they were tradable, why would the Commies have to tell you what they were worth, you could just post a market chart. Like you could with dollars vs YEN, GBP, DM, SFC, FFC, any tradable currency.

They did it so they could brag about how large their GDP was, in other words, so they could lie.


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 4, 2016)

Skylar said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > Skylar said:
> ...



You know, you are a very thoughtful person, and what you have posted makes sense.  Well, most of it anyhow.

Where I disagree, is this statement;



> That's more of an insult than an argument. Fire and structural damage match the evidence and are far, far simpler than the ludicriously complicated, fantastically elaborate truther conspiracy.



The fire and structural damage in no way have ever matched what happened.  NIST has hidden the data used in their models, any time anyone has tried to reproduce this, it just doesn't fly.  So why should we expect that those planes did?  I can't prove they weren't drones.  The government can't come up with the wreckage, and you can't prove it wasn't holograms.  I won't say there weren't planes, but the establishment conspiracy theory has as much FACTUAL evidence backing it up as the alternate hypotheses.  I think that is what really bothers you, isn't it?

They have been hundreds of threads, across countless forums, it never gets put to bed.

Your whole post has as much to it's POV as the alternate paradigm.  Where you go astray is with your hyperbole and ad hominem.  Do you think that makes your case any more compelling?  It really doesn't. 


I like your posts in most of the rest of the forum, try to remain an adult here.



*Context of 'Mid-August 2001: 9/11 Hijacker Hanjour Rents Plane in Maryland; He Is Still Not Skilled Enough to Fly Solo'*
Context of 'Mid-August 2001: 9/11 Hijacker Hanjour Rents Plane in Maryland; He Is Still Not Skilled Enough to Fly Solo'

*Mid-August 2001: 9/11 Hijacker Hanjour Rents Plane in Maryland; He Is Still Not Skilled Enough to Fly Solo*


 




Hani Hanjour. _[Source: FBI]_9/11 hijacker Hani Hanjour goes to the Freeway Airport in Bowie, Maryland, about 20 miles west of Washington. He wants to rent a single engine Cessna airplane. However, when two instructors take him on three test runs, they find he has trouble controlling and landing the plane. One instructor has to help him land. Due to his poor skills, therefore, he is not allowed to rent one of their planes without more lessons. Further, while Hanjour appears to have logged over 600 hours of flying experience and possesses a valid pilot’s license (though it has in fact expired), he refuses to provide contact information: He gives no phone number and only gives his address as being a hotel in Laurel. In spite of Hanjour’s lack of flying skills, chief instructor Marcel Bernard later claims, “There’s no doubt in my mind that once [Flight 77] got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it.” [Capital News, 9/19/2001; Gazette (Greenbelt), 9/21/2001; Newsday, 9/23/2001; Washington Post, 10/15/2001] However, on 9/11, in piloting Flight 77 into the Pentagon, Hanjour would have needed to do much more than simply point the plane at a target. Because Flight 77 at first seemed to overshoot its target, the Washington Post will note that “the unidentified pilot executed a pivot so tight that it reminded observers of a fighter jet maneuver. The plane circled 270 degrees to the right to approach the Pentagon from the west, whereupon Flight 77 fell below radar level.… Aviation sources said the plane was flown with extraordinary skill, making it highly likely that a trained pilot was at the helm.” [Washington Post, 9/12/2001] One Washington air traffic controller will later comment, “The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane.” [ABC News, 10/24/2001] One law enforcement official who will study Flight 77’s descent after 9/11 will call it the work of “a great talent… virtually a textbook turn and landing.” [Washington Post, 9/10/2002] Remarkably, the 9/11 Commission will overlook the numerous accounts of Hanjour’s terrible piloting skills (see April 15, 1999 and January-February 2001) and state that 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed assigned the Pentagon target specifically to Hanjour because he was “the operation’s most experienced pilot.” [9/11 Commission, 7/24/2004, pp. 530]


----------



## ranfunck (Jan 4, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...


Hay bud you are wasting your time with these trolls they are here for one reason and one reason only and that is to disrupt. And you payed mother fuckers know who you are.


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 4, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Like I stated earlier when discussing this topic with another poster, this has to do with the Wanta scandal.

A little research reveals those "exchange rates" listed in wiki are not, "Soviet lies," but are actually import/export ratios.

The Soviet Union tried to be mostly self-reliant.  As we can see from those ratios, it became less and less so as their government became larger, more cumbersome and corrupt.  Sort of like ours is becoming, eh?

Foreign Economic Reports


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...




I remember gomer pyle ollie..


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 4, 2016)

ranfunck said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



thats what i been trying to tell. him- you know they are paid infiltraters when they defend EVERY government lie there is on the face of the earth like candyass,sayit,and todd parrot do.

those trolls even say oswald was the lone assassin.

thank god for the ignore button,they are just here to take up your time,i am glad YOU  wisely dont feed these trolls.

the ones that are just in denial,they can at LEAST admit the CIA killed JFK,but when you talk to them about 9/11,they wont look at the facts since it hits too close to home for them and its hard for them to accept the government murdered 3000 of its own citizens.

those kind of Bush dupes are the only ones i bother with.these paid trolls like todd parrot,sayit,skylar and candyass like i said,defend EVERY government event so those shills nobody should pay any mind to.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...


why do you think shill candyass is a SHE?

Women dont discuss the NFL,trust me IT is dude.IT is really the most proper term for that user name in reality.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...


*
A little research reveals those "exchange rates" listed in wiki are not, "Soviet lies," but are actually import/export ratios.
*
The manner in which the Soviet Union transacted trade varied from one trade partner to another. Soviet trade with the Western industrialized countries, except Finland, and most Third World countries was conducted with hard currency, that is, currency that was freely convertible.* Because the ruble was not freely convertible*, the Soviet Union could only acquire hard currency by selling Soviet goods or gold on the world market for hard currency. Therefore, the volume of imports from countries using convertible currency depended on the amount of goods the Soviet Union exported for hard currency.

Foreign trade of the Soviet Union - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 4, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



*Lesbian Wing of the Illuminati Seizes Control of the NFL*
Lesbian Wing of the Illuminati Seizes Control of the NFL

I've posted to you before about how the NFL is a profit sharing mind control cabal.  Why do you even give a shit about the NFL?

Perhaps IT has gender identity disorder. . . . lol


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 4, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Yes, I read that.  But then I read the source of that.  I'm not impressed.


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 4, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


----------



## Muhammed (Jan 4, 2016)

TheCrusader said:


> The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.
> 
> So 18/110 means approximately 16% of the total building's weight was affected.
> 
> ...


When is the last time you destroyed concrete and steel?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...



It's a widely know fact. How impressive a source do you need?

*this has to do with the Wanta scandal.
*
Sounds scary. Do you have an impressive source?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...



When you're talking with conspiracy nuts, there are no straight lines.


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 4, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


I believe you might be too young to understand his "interests."

Trying to imagine what it would be like, to be that senior in the establishment. . . It's too far out.  I don't think he ever meant any harm.

He was a way cool person outside of the discussions in the conspiracy forums.  The nation sorely needs more folks with that sort of moral fiber.

Is he a tool for the establishment. . . perhaps.  But then, whose father, grandfather, etc. isn't it?

I refuse to let _divide et imperium_ be used on our nation.  That is all there is to it.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...



June 30, 2006 3:00 am
*Russia prepares for convertible rouble*

By Neil Buckley in Moscow

Memories of Russia's default on $40bn of domestic debt eight years ago, when people queued outside banks to withdraw roubles that were plummeting in value, have barely faded from the national psyche.

Yet, remarkably, with coffers swollen by oil selling at $70 a barrel, Russia will tomorrow lift all currency controls on the rouble and make it fully convertible. Everyone will be able to move roubles freely out of and into the country, foreign and offshore investors will be able to open rouble bank accounts, and restrictions on rouble fixed-income investments will disappear.

Russia prepares for convertible rouble - FT.com

Financial Times work?


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 4, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



*sigh*  More ad hominem.

Is that the best you can do?


All I am trying to say, which I have maintained from the beginning of this digression, is that, in all likelihood, you are more correct than I.  I have stated simply, that I don't understand the intricacies of the Wanta scandal.

What I do know, is that the person that covered it was an adviser to Margaret Thatcher and a friend to Ronald Reagan.  He was in close personal contact with Lee Emil Wanta himself.

I don't generally put a lot of stock in hearsay or hypothesis.  Who to trust, and what the facts are; are big things in my world.  I like SOLID EVIDENCE.  How do we know that Edward Harle is trust worthy?  Well, in 2006 he was warning of catastrophic corruption and imminent collapse if the settlements weren't released.  What ever that means.  lol  All I know, is collapse happened, didn't it?



Like this piece, it's one of my favorites.  It's directly from one of the co-founders of Wikileaks.  They go directly to the public, not the press first.  It is something TANGIBLE that I can read.  Directly from NIST; it's something that shows there is a cover-up by the bureaucracy.  In my book, where there is smoke, there is fire.  How does releasing data used to model a collapse "jeopardize public safety?"  Precisely, it doesn't.  Not unless you want to avoid protests in the street and a popular revolt against CFR managed corporate press, industry, and banking interests.

If intelligent and inquisitive folks WANT to see the evidence, here is the smoking gun.

http://cryptome.org/wtc-nist-wtc7-no.pdf


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 4, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



The source goes back to the government.  If you know anything about the scandal, then you would know that this source is absolutely worthless.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...


*
I have stated simply, that I don't understand the intricacies of the Wanta scandal.
*
Never heard of it.

*Well, in 2006 he was warning of catastrophic corruption and imminent collapse if the settlements weren't released.  What ever that means.  lol  All I know, is collapse happened, didn't it?*

What settlements?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...



What source?


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 4, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



lol.  I like you Todd, you're an intelligent fellow.  You keep me honest, now it's my turn to do the same for you.

That wiki article you quoted was almost entirely based on one source.  For all intents and purposes it was plagiarized from government propaganda.  Didn't you read the "NOTES?"  (There were very, VERY few from that second source.)


*Notes*
Text used in this cited section originally came from: Soviet Union Country Study from the Library of Congress Country Studies project.
The piratization of Russia: Russian reform goes awry. Marshall I. Goldman.

Soviet Union : a country study /
Sure, it's "a widely known fact," that Soviet currency couldn't be traded.  But that is not how intelligence operatives worked.  Apparently they had Wanta inserted in Somalia as an Ambassador to Canada and a Socialist nation in Europe.   lol.  I forget which one now.

Then he set up some clandestine contacts with some folks in the Netherlands, used taxpayer funds from the treasury, and acquired the Soviet Currency.  Who knows the nitty gritty, down and dirty how they do things? I don't.   It was done via an executive order though.  But just because I don't know how intelligence operatives under Reagan got things done, doesn't mean I'm going to say, "oh, well, they couldn't have possibly traded arms for hostages, because, well, that was illegal."   Of course they could have done these currency swaps, we have seen the results.

You say it's impossible.  The hard proof of others say it happened.  And here we are talking about it, aren't we?

*Wanta Group Verfies Head of U.S Treasury Detained In Germany Over Failure To Release $4.5 trillion in Wanta Funds*
The Arctic Beacon

Why can't we trust the establishment and wiki when it comes to this topic?
*WHITE HOUSE ORDERS CONTACT WITH STORY TO CEASE*
*U.S. OFFICIALS ASK FOR A ‘TRUCE’, THEN LIE THAT WANTA HAS BEEN PAID*
*Saturday 8 December 2007 13:56*
News - WHITE HOUSE ORDERS CONTACT WITH STORY TO CEASE
Wicked Pedia Update dated 2nd December 2007:

WIKIPEDIA IS PART OF AN NSA DISCREDITING OPERATION
As previously reported, the Editor’s attention was drawn, in the second half of November 2007, to a pack of old lies, diversionary claptrap and disinformation posted on Wikipedia under ‘Leo Wanta’. 

Although this posting appeared FOR THE FIRST TIME on 12th November 2007, it consisted almost entirely of ancient lies, including disinformation dredged out of ‘Thieves’ World’, a hatchet job published in 1994 by Simon and Schuster by the late Claire Sterling, a CIA operative. 

Mrs Sterling died suddenly after being summoned for her second meeting with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, under Clinton.

ANCIENT DISCREDITED LIES POSTED IN NOVEMBER 2007
The fact that the OLD Wikipedia lies appeared for the first time as late as 12th November 2007, and consisted almost totally of old, discredited lies, omitting the Master Lie that the CIA retailed after the Ambassador had been taken down, namely that he was DEAD, indicated quite clearly to the Editor and his advisers that this latest evil display of regurgitated disinformation represented a deliberate operation by the US intelligence community’s disinformation and lie machine, to begin, all over again, the process of discrediting Ambassador Leo Wanta – so that they can relieve him of his funds by some false pretext or other after a ‘gag order’ has been signed.




Let's look at some of the principals that stood to gain by covering this up, shall we?


*THE WANTAGATE LISTING OF INSTITUTION DIRECTORS *
*INTERIM REPORT PENDING FURTHER WANTA INTELLIGENCE*
*Monday 11 June 2007 01:35*
News - THE WANTAGATE LISTING OF INSTITUTION DIRECTORS
PART 1: LIST OF DIRECTORS AND RELEVANT OFFICIALS AND OTHERS:
The following is a list of Directors of financial institutions, elected and appointed US and UK officials, Commissioners and others, who may have variously allowed, condoned, accommodated, or whose institutions may have actively participated in, and may continue to participate in, criminal and illegal fiat money financial transactions exploiting the $4.5 trillion compromise financial Settlement agreed for Ambassador Wanta in May and June 2006 and/or circumstances arising therefrom. Typically, this Settlement was negotiated by the duplicitous US intelligence crooks concerned, in bad faith; but the agreement is binding on all parties and has to be implemented. At the very least, each individual listed here may be an Accessory to the Fact of some or all of the felonies under US law listed in Part 3 of this presentation. Many may have been or may be co-conspirators. All the Directors of the World Bank are included, given that, as with all Directors in any context, it is their responsibility to see to it that the institution on the Board of which they serve does not engage in dubious, ethically improper and/or illegal and criminal activities, including the diversion and exploitation of assets belonging to others. Since there is no excuse in law for ignorance of the law – even in the international environment where the Rule of Law has been replaced by the Law of the Jungle – those Directors and others listed here who may profess to be ignorant of the scandalous exploitation of Ambassador Wanta’s underlying $27.5+ trillion of assets held in his USC Title 18, Section 6 corporations’ bank accounts, and/or of transactions derived from Ambassador Wanta’s $4.5 trillion Settlement funds, cannot sustain any such defence for their inaction in failing to take steps to have criminal transnational financial abuses stopped, and those responsible reported and brought before relevant Courts of Law*.

Aass, Svein, Executive Director, Norway, World Bank
Alkhalifa, Abdulhamid, Alternative Director, Saudi Arabia, World Bank
Almofahdi, Abdulrahman M, Executive Director, Saudi Arabia, World Bank
Alzetta, Gino, Executive Director, Belgium, World Bank
Amr, Mohamed Kamel, Alternative Director, Egypt, World Bank
Armstrong, C Michael, Director, Citigroup Inc.
Arshad, Nursiah, Alternative Director, Malaysia, World Bank 
Atkins, Paul S, Commissioner, US Securities and Exchange Commission
Baker, James A, III, former Treasury Secretary and Secretary of State
Baker, John D., II, Director, Wachovia
Barber, Brendan Paul, Member, Bank of England Court of Directors
Barnet, William, III, Director, Bank of America
Barrett, Mathew W, Chairman Barclays Capital
Belda, Alain J P, Director, Citigroup Inc.
Bernanke, Ben S, Chairman, Federal Reserve Board, Director, Bank for International Settlements
Bernasconi, Francisco, Alternative Director, Chile, World Bank
Biggs, John H, Board Member, JPMorganChase
Blair, Anthony, British Prime Minister
Blankfein, Lloyd C, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Goldman Sachs
Bodman, Secretary Samuel P, US Cabinet Member
Borsig, Dr Clemens, Chairman, Deutsche Bank Supervisory Board
Botero, Jorge Humberto, Alternative Director, Colombia, World Bank
Bowles, Randall C, Board Member, JPMorganChase
Bramble, Frank P, Sr., Director, Bank of America
Brown, Kevin M, Acting US Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Briault, Clive, Member of the Board of the UK Financial Services Authority
Browning, Peter C, Director, Wachovia
Bryan, John H, Director, Goldman Sachs
Burke, Stephen B, Board Member, JPMorganChase
Bush, George W, Jr, President of the United States
Butler, The Rt Hon Lord of Brockwell, KB, GCB, CVO, Director, HSBC
Camarasa, Felix Alberto, Executive Director, Argentina, World Bank
Campos, Roel C, Commissioner, US Securities and Exchange Commission
Canuto, Otaviano, Executive Director, Brazil, World Bank
Cardona, Michel, Paris, Alternate Director, Bank for International Settlements
Carioso, Giovanni, Rome, Alternate Director, Bank for International Settlements
Casey, Kathleen L, Commissioner, US Securities and Exchange Commission
Casteen, John T, III, Director, Wachovia
Chao, Secretary Elaine, US Cabinet Member
Cheney, Richard B, Vice President of the United States
Chertoff, Michael, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, US Cabinet Member
Choi, Joong-Kyung, Executive Director, South Korea, World Bank
Ciocca, Pierluigi, Rome, Director, Bank for International Settlements
Clinton, William Jefferson, former President of the United States, CIA operative
Clinton, Senator Hillary, wife of William Jefferson Clinton, CIA operative
Cohn, Gary D, President and CEO, Goldman Sachs
Collins, John T, Director, Bank of America
Coombe, J D, Director, HSBC
Countryman, Gary L, Director, Bank of America
Cox, Christopher, Chairman, US Securities and Exchange Commission
Crosby, Sir James, Member of the Board of the UK Financial Services Authority
Crowen, James A, Board Member, JPMorganChase
Dahlback, Claes, Director, Goldman Sachs
Davies, Mervyn, CBE, Chairman, Standard Chartered
Debevoise, E Whitney, Executive Director, World Bank
Del Missier, Jerry, Co-President, Barclays Capital
DeNoma, Mike, Sands, Peter, Executive Director, Standard Chartered
Deraman, Mat Aron, Executive Director, Malaysia, World Bank 
Derr, Kenneth J, Director, Citigroup Inc.
Deutch, John M, Director, Citigroup Inc.
Deutscher, Eckhard, Executive Director, Germany, World Bank
Dias, Agapito Mendes, Alternative Director, Sao Tome and Principe, World Bank
Dib, Sid Ahmed, Alternative Director, Algeria, World Bank
Dimon, James, Chairman and CEO, JPMorgan Chase
Dodge, David, Ottawa, Director, Bank for International Settlements
Doltu, Claudiu, Alternative Director, Romania, World Bank
Draghi, Mario, Rome, Director, Bank for International Settlements
Duquesne, Pierre, Executive Director, France, World Bank
Dynn, The Baroness, DBE, Deputy Chairman, senior non-executive Director, HSBC
Eick, Dr Karl-Gerhard, Member, Deutsche Bank Supervisory Board 
Engan, Laura J, Deputy Secretary, Wisconsin Department of Revenue
Ervin, Roger M, Secretary, Wisconsin Department of Revenue
Fabritius, Dr Hans Georg, Member of Deutsche Bundesbank Executive Board
Fairhead, R A, Director, HSBC
Familiar, Jorge, Executive Director, Mexico, World Bank
Fawcett, Amelia Chilcott, CBE, Member, Bank of England Court of Directors
Fisher, Paul, London, Alternate Director, Bank for International Settlements
Fisher, Peter, Member of the Board of the UK Financial Services Authority
Flanagan, Brian, Member of the Board of the UK Financial Services Authority
Flint, D J, CBE, Group Finance Director, HSBC
Forseke, Karin, Member of the Board of the UK Financial Services Authority
Forster, Heldrun, Member, Deutsche Bank Supervisory Board
Franks, Tommy R, Director, Bank of America
Francis, Mary Elizabeth, CBE, LVO, Member, Bank of England Court of Directors
Frazier, Gregg T, Chief, Central Audit Section, Wisconsin Department of Revenue
Friedman, Stephen, Director, Goldman Sachs
Fukui, Toshihiko, Tokyo, Director, Bank for International Settlements
Fulton, Paul, Director, Bank of America
Fung, W K L, OBE, Director, HSBC
Galea, Robert, Director, Wachovia
Gates, Robert M, US Secretary of Defense, US Cabinet Member
Geithner, Timothy F, New York, Director, Bank for International Settlements
Geoghegan, M F, CBE, Group Chief Executive, HSBC
George, J Russell, US Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration
George, William W, Director, Goldman Sachs
Gieve, Sir John, CB, Deputy Governor, Bank of England
Gifford, Charles K, Director, Bank of America
Gitt, Jerry, Director, Wachovia
Gonzales, Alberto, US Attorney General, US Cabinet Member
Goodwin, William H., Jr, Director, Wachovia
Gray, William H, III, Board Member, JPMorganChase
Green, S K, Group Chairman, HSBC
Gupta, Rajat K, Director, Goldman Sachs
Gutierrez, Secretary Carlos, US Cabinet Member
Hall, Sir Graham Joseph, Member, Bank of England Court of Directors
Hartmann, Ulrich, Member, Deutsche Bank Supervisory Board
Hasan, Merza H, Executive Director, Kuwait, World Bank
Herringer, Maryellen C, Director, Wachovia
Hertzberg, Gerd, Member, Deutsche Bank Supervisory Board
Heyden, General Michael, Director of Central Intelligence
Horn, Sabine, Member, Deutsche Bank Supervisory Board
Hosomi, Makoto, Executive Director, Japan, World Bank
Hughes-Hallett, J W J, Director, HSBC
Hunck, Rolf, Member, Deutsche Bank Supervisory Board
Hutton, Dame Deidre, CBE, Member of the Board, UK Financial Services Authority
Ingram, Robert A, Director, Wachovia
Ingves, Stefan, Stockholm, Director, Bank for International Settlements
Jackson, Laban P, Jr, Board Member, JPMorganChase
Jackson, Secretary Alfonso, US Cabinet Member
James, Donald M, Director, Wachovia
Jay, The Hon Peter, Member, Bank of England Court of Directors
Jenkins, Roger, Head, Barclays Private Equity, senior Barclays Capital official
Job, Sir Peter, London, Member, Deutsche Bank Supervisory Board
Johanns, Secretary Mike, US Cabinet Member
Johnson, James A, Director, Goldman Sachs 
Johnson, Karen H, Washington, Alternate Director, Bank for International Settlements
Jones, W Steven, Director, Bank of America
Juliber, Lois D, Director, Goldman Sachs
Kagermann, Professor Dr Henning, Member, Deutsche Bank Supervisory Board
Kariniemi, Pauli, Alternative Director, Finland, World Bank
Karnowski, Jakob, Alternative Director, Poland, World Bank
Katafias, William, Senior Vice President, Wachovia
Kaufmann, Ulrich, Member, Deutsche Bank Supervisory Board
Kazmierczak, Peter, Member, Deutsche Bank Supervisory Board
Kempthorne, Secretary Dirk, US Cabinet Member
Kenmire, David, Member of the Board of the UK Financial Services Authority
Kessler, John W, Board Member, JPMorganChase
Ketseal, Mulu, Executive Director, Ethiopia, World Bank
Khan, Zakir Ahmed, Alternative Director, Bangladesh, World Bank 
Kimmitt, Robert M, Deputy Secretary, US Treasury
King, Mervyn Allister, Governor, Bank of England, Director, Bank for International Settlements
Kleinfeld, Klaus, Director, Citigroup Inc.
Kotz, Professor Hans-Helmut, Member of Deutsche Bundesbank Executive Board
Kumar, Dhanendra, Executive Director, India, World Bank 
Kvalheim, Grant, Co-President, Barclays Capital
Kvasov, Alexey G, Executive Director, Russian Federation, World Bank
Laundau, Jean-Pierre, Paris, Director, Bank for International Settlements
Leavitt, Secretary Michael O, US Cabinet Member
Levy, Maurice, Member, Deutsche Bank Supervisory Board
Lewis, Kenneth J, Chairman, CEO and President, Bank of America
Lightbourne, Ishmael, Alternative Director, Bahamas, World Bank
Likierman, Professor Sir John Andrew, Member, Bank of England Court of Directors
Lipp, Robert I, Board Member, JPMorganChase
Liveris, Andrew N, Director, Citigroup Inc.
Lomax, Rachel, Deputy Governor, Bank of England
Lozano, Monica C, Director, Bank of America
Manoogian, Richard A, Board Member, JPMorganChase
Mark, Henriette, Member, Deutsche Bank Supervisory Board
Massey, Walter E, Director, Bank of America
May, Thomas J, Director, Bank of America
McCarthy, Sir Callum, Chairman, Financial Services Authority, Member, Bank of England Court of Directors
McDonald, Mackey J, Director, Wachovia
Meddings, Richard, Sands, Peter, Executive Director, Standard Chartered
Mesiter, Dr Edgar, Member of Deutsche Bundesbank Executive Board
Miagkov, Eugene, Alternative Director, Russian Federation, World Bank
Miles, Professor David, Member of the Board of the UK Financial Services Authority
Mitchell, Patricia E, Director, Bank of America
Moffatt, Sir Brian, OBE, Deputy Chairman, HSBC
Moody-Stuart, Sir Mark, KCMG, Director, HSBC
Mordasini, Michel, Executive Director, Switzerland, World Bank
Morgan, G, Director, HSBC
Morke, Wolfgang, Frankfurt am Main, Alternate Director, Bank for International Settlements
Morrice, Robert, Chairman and Chief Executive, Asia pacific, Barclays Capital
Mulcahy, Anne, Director, Citigroup Inc.
Myners, Paul, Member, Bank of England Court of Directors
Nargolwala, Kai, Sands, Peter, Executive Director, Standard Chartered
Nazareth, Annete L, Commissioner, US Securities and Exchange Commission
Negroponte, John, former Director of Central Intelligence, Deputy Secretary of State
Nemli, Melih, Alternative Director, Turkey, World Bank
Neubauer, Joseph, Director, Wachovia
Newton, S W, Director, HSBC
Nicholson, Secretary Jim, US Cabinet Member
Novak, David C, Board Member, JPMorganChase
O’Brien, Terry, Alternative Director, Australia, World Bank
Parker, Sir Thomas John, Member, Bank of England Court of Directors
Parsons, Richard D, Director, Citigroup Inc.
Paulson, Henry M, Secretary, US Treasury
Peters, Secretary Mary E, US Cabinet Member
Pinto, Nuno Mota, Alternative Director, Portugal, World Bank
Platscher, Gabriele, Member, Deutsche Bank Supervisory Board
Praet, Peter, Alternate Director, Bank for International Settlements
Prince, Charles, Chairman and CEO, Citigroup Inc.
Proctor, Timothy D, Director, Wachovia
Potter, Dr David Edwin, CBE, Member, Bank of England Court of Directors
Quaden, Guy, Brussels, Director, Bank for International Settlements
Rabbatts, Heather Victoria, CBE, Member, Bank of England Court of Directors
Rady, Ernest, Director, Wachovia
Ramirez, Jose Alejandro Rojas, Alternative Director, Venezuela, World Bank
Ramirez, Robert Hernandez, 
Raymond, Lee R, Board Member, JPMorganChase
Reckers, Dr Hans, Member of Deutsche Bundesbank Executive Board
Remsperger, Professor Hermann, Member of Deutsche Bundesbank Executive Board
Rhind, Professor David William, CBE, FRS, FBA, Member, Bank of England Court of Directors
Ricci, Rich, CEO, Barclays Capital
Rice, Condoleeza, US Secretary of State, US Cabinet Member
Richey, Van L, Director, Wachovia
Robert E Diamond, Jr., President, Barclays PLC and Barclays Bank PLC
Robertson, S M, Director, HSBC
Rodin, Judith, Director, Citigroup Inc.
Rogers, John F W, Director, Goldman Sachs
Roth, Jean-Pierre, Chairman, Bank for International Settlements
Rubin, Robert E, Chairman of Executive Committee, Citigroup Inc.
Ruck, Karin, Member, Deutsche Bank Supervisory Board
Ryan, Thomas M, Director, Bank of America
Sands, Peter, Executive Director, Standard Chartered
Sarin, Alun, Member, Bank of England Court of Directors
Scholar, Tom, Executive Director, UK, World Bank
Seng, Louis Philippe, Ong, Executive Director, Mauritius, World Bank
Shah, Shuja, Executive Director, Pakistan, World Bank 
Shaw, Ruth G, Director, Wachovia
Sigert, Dr Theo, Member, Deutsche Bank Supervisory Board
Simmons, Ruth J, Director, Goldman Sachs
Sinamenye, Mathias, Alternative Director, Burundi, World Bank
Slack, Michael, Member of the Board of the UK Financial Services Authority
Sloan, O Temple, Jr, Director, Bank of America
Smith, Lanty L, Director, Wachovia
Spangler, Meredith R, Director, Bank of America
Spellings, Secretary Margaret, US Cabinet Member
Strachan, James Murray, Member, Bank of England Court of Directors
Stark, Professor Jurgen, Vice-President, Deutsche Bundesbank
Stevenson, Hugh, Member of the Board of the UK Financial Services Authority
Strauss-Kahn, Marc-Olivier, Alternate Director, Bank for International Settlements
Thomas, Franklin A, Director, Citigroup Inc.
Thompson, Ken, Chairman and CEO, Wachovia
Tietmeyer, Hans, Frankfurt am Main, Vice-Chairman, Bank for International Settlements
Tillman, Robert L, Director, Bank of America
Tiner, John, Chief Executive, UK Financial Services Authority
Todenhofer, Tilman, Member, Deutsche Bank Supervisory Board
Tucker, Paul, London, Alternate Director, Bank for International Settlements
Verplaetse, Alfons Vicomte, Brussels, Director, Bank for International Settlements
Visco, Ignazio, Rome, Alternate Director, Bank for International Settlements
Von Pierer, Professor Dr. jur Dr.-ing. E.h. Heinrich, Member, Deutsche Bank Supervisory Board
Ward, Jackie M, Director, Bank of America
Watson, Samy, Executive Director, Canada, World Bank
Weber, Axel A, Frankfurt am Main, Director, Bank for International Settlements
Weber, Dipl.-ing. Dr.-ing. E. h. Jurgen, Member, Deutsche Bank Supervisory Board
Weber, Professor Axel A, President, Deutsche Bundesbank
Weldon, William C, Board Member, JPMorganChase
Wellink, Nout H E M, Amsterdam, Director, Bank for International Settlements
Whitaker, John C, Jr, Director, Wachovia
Wigley, Robert Charles Michael, Member, Bank of England Court of Directors
Wijffels, Herman, Executive Director, Netherlands, World Bank
Wilkinson, Geoffrey Charles George, Member, Bank of England Court of Directors
Wilkinson, Jim, Chief of Staff, US Treasury
Williamson, Sir Brian, CBE, Director, HSBC
Winkelried, President and CEO
Wolfowitz, Paul, President (to end-June 2007), United States, World Bank
Wunderlich, Leo, Member, Deutsche Bank Supervisory Board, 
Yang, Jinlin, Alternative Director, World Bank
Young, Dona Davis, Director, Wachovia
Zeitler, Professor Franz-Christoph, Vice-President, Deutsche Bundesbank
Zou, Jiayi, Executive Director, China, World Bank

* Sources: Websites monitored on 30th May 2007 of: Bank for International Settlements; Bank of America; Bank of England; Barclays Bank Plc; Barclays Capital; Citigroup, Inc; Deutsche Bank; 
Federal Reserve Board; Financial Services Authority; Goldman Sachs; HSBC; JPMorganChase; Securities and Exchange Commission; Standard Chartered; US Treasury; Wachovia Corporation; 
World Bank (Alternative Directors are included because the appellation ‘Alternative’ does not absolve them from their responsibilities as Directors of the World Bank; Identities of the countries they represent are shown, except that details of World Bank constituencies are omitted). 

Note A: The terms of some Members of the Court of Directors of the Bank of England expired on 31st May 2007. Note B: Many of the names listed are Directors of other entities. In this list, we show only their Directorships of the institutions or organisations pertinent to this presentation. Data current as posted, as of 30th May 2007.


Now then, I really do wish to end with this Wanta distraction.  I just don't think you and I are going to agree on anything having to do with it.

I saw the crash coming a year and a half before it happened by reading these reports.  You will not convince me that this honorable man who was a friend to Thatcher and Reagan was some tin foil hatter.  Sorry.

Other sources, events, and HARD EVIDENCE led me to believe that it was all real.  I was at a different forum in those days.   I could tell you tales, but that my friend, is another story. . . .


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 4, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Fair enough.  I don't suppose there should be straight lines when talking with anyone.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...



*That wiki article you quoted was almost entirely based on one source. For all intents and purposes it was plagiarized from government propaganda. Didn't you read the "NOTES?" (There were very, VERY few from that second source.)*

Are you talking about the source for "rubles aren't convertible"?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...



*Then he set up some clandestine contacts with some folks in the Netherlands, used taxpayer funds from the treasury, and acquired the Soviet Currency.
*
It (rubles) couldn't be exported. So he got it for cents on the dollar and used it to destroy the ruble?
That's funny.

*Since there is no excuse in law for ignorance of the law – even in the international environment where the Rule of Law has been replaced by the Law of the Jungle – those Directors and others listed here who may profess to be ignorant of the scandalous exploitation of Ambassador Wanta’s underlying $27.5+ trillion of assets held in his USC Title 18, Section 6 corporations’ bank accounts, and/or of transactions derived from Ambassador Wanta’s $4.5 trillion Settlement funds, cannot sustain any such defence for their inaction in failing to take steps to have criminal transnational financial abuses stopped, and those responsible reported and brought before relevant Courts of Law*.*

He made $27.5 trillion by trading non-convertible rubles and now it's sitting in some US bank account?
*
I saw the crash coming a year and a half before it happened by reading these reports.
*
Nutjob claims about $27.5 trillion convinced you the housing market was going to collapse?
Plenty of normal people came to that conclusion just by looking at actual real information.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 4, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...



From your "The Arctic Beacon" link.

_"We know where the money has been held and we know that the U.S. officials in the administration have been making about $4.5 trillion illegally every two weeks by holding back the funds and essentially using the money to make money for themselves"_

So, they're keeping this poor guys $4.5 trillion, almost 1/3rd of US GDP in 2007, and they're making about $4.5 trillion with it, every 2 weeks.

This is the point where everyone knows this BS is beyond laughable.


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 5, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



I think we're done here aren't we?

We've already agreed that yes, rubles weren't convertible for average folks in that time period.  Yes, I have agreed, that wiki stub I posted clearly states what you have intimated it means.

What of it?

The evidence I have posted clearly shows that;

In regards to the Wantagate settlements, Wikipedia information is useless, 
and secondly, as an ambassador following administration orders, Wanta was carrying out a covert intelligence plan.

I think we can both agree that the Soviet Union was constantly desperate for hard international currencies for both trade and barter.  Likewise, corruption was endemic to their system.  To bandy about and say such an operation could not have ever taken place is the height of naivete' wouldn't you say?


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 5, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Agreed.  I think that must either be a typo or someone has bad information.

I have heard figures that the amount that is in escrow could be as high as 27.5 trillion, but it doesn't matter where you park it, you aren't going to profit that much.

Wanta has stated repeatedly however, these are NOT his funds, these are to be repatriated to the American tax payer.

However, I have repeatedly stated in this thread, banking is above my pay-grade.  If you want to understand how this deal is structured, I suggest you have Wanta explain it.  

We could just ask him ourselves, yes?


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 5, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > *Wanta Group Verfies Head of U.S Treasury Detained In Germany Over Failure To Release $4.5 trillion in Wanta Funds*
> ...



Classic case of "garbage in/garbage out."

So what is The Arctic Beacon?

Apparently it is someone named Greg Syzmanski (aka: Greg Anthony).

For paranoids the Internet has become an enabling device.


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 5, 2016)

SAYIT said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...


Please post a link proving said assertion.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 5, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



*Following the money backwards leads to President Reagan, Russian rubles and Ambassador Leo Wanta*








*Ambassador Leo Wanta is the lawful "principle" and "trustor" of funds stashed in accounts all over the world.*


*Editor’s note:*_ The story of how Ambassador Leo Wanta was commissioned by President Reagan to make $trillions for the American people in shrewd (but legal) currency trading that concentrated on buying Russian rubles at a discount to destabilize the Soviet economy surfaced in 1992. The Wanta story was recently revived on the Investigative Journal by Greg Syzmanski through interviews with Ambassador Wanta broadcast on the Republic Broadcast Network. As it turns out, British financial news publisher Christopher Story has published the documents in evidence giving credence to what is arguably the most important story in recent memory. As you will see, several poorly-reported incidents during the 90s helped to bury the Wanta story as a tall-tale. As events unfold and independent researchers put the pieces together, Ambassador Wanta is emerging as a real man whose activities produced $trillions that are stashed away in real banks and invested in real properties. If this story is true—and the evidence is becoming unavoidably compelling—then it will not be long before all the world will know._



*By Don Nicoloff
*
While many Americans argue about a variety of current scandals in federal, state, and local governments throughout the United States, the media has remained suspiciously silent about them. Contrary to the myriad of facts and evidence of government complicity or wrongdoing that independent investigators have been steadily uncovering in their analyses of the "attacks" on the World Trade Center; the "bombing" of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City; the sieges at Waco and Ruby Ridge; the facts behind the shoot-out at the Rayburn Senate Office Building/parking garage in May, 2006; the virtual security collapse and mass invasion by illegal aliens along U.S. Borders; the spraying of our skies, crops, and water resources with chemtrails; the numerous bank, investment, securities frauds and sex scandals among members of the Congress, the Senate and the Roman Catholic Church; the secret formation of a "North American Union" and its NAFTA "Super Highway"; the ill-conceived "War on Terror" and the phony "War on Drugs," the mainstream media has been complicit in conspiracies of silence.

In fact, the media has aided and abetted our "elected" lawbreakers in these coverups by endlessly spewing the "talking points" designed to create dissent, confusion and to ridicule or discredit those who demonstrate courage while exposing these despicable and treasonous acts.

Never before in our history has the erosion of Constitutional rights and civil liberties been occurring at such an accelerated pace. There is no denying that the age of Big Brother is now upon us, but those who are naive enough to believe the propaganda they are being spoon-fed on a daily basis are in complete denial that ours is no longer the land of the free. The mind control programs to maintain the illusion of freedom in the mass American mind have been in place for many years and are being tested and modified as needed.

For those who would argue that the media is "fair and balanced," one need only to perform a Google search on the Internet to learn that "Operation Mockingbird" was the government’s official declaration that the mainstream media will be controlled — at any cost. The $64,000 question is: "Exactly how much money will it take to control the mainstream media?" The answer: "Lots — billions, at the very least."

*Enter Leo Wanta
*
Beginning in the early-1980s, President Ronald Reagan and a small group of his closest advisors initiated a plan to destabilize the Russian ruble. Reagan recruited his most-trusted intelligence agent Leo Emil Wanta to perform this delicate task. Wanta had served the U.S. intelligence community as a Treasury agent, in arms dealing and in other "sensitive" matters. He was chosen for this mission, not only for his loyalty to the president, but also for his unfailing honesty. In addition to his responsibilities in carrying out this covert financial coup against the former Soviet Union, Wanta was also instrumental in thwarting an attempted assassination of President Reagan "in the White House"—yet another event that went unreported by the media.

The presidency of Ronald Reagan was tumultuous, to say the least. Reagan’s administration survived several scandals and he, personally, survived several assassination attempts. Only one of these attempts, the shooting by John W. Hinkley, Jr., would be made public. That shooting was captured live on television and posed a particular problem for the media—there would be no video coverup of the events. Even the shooting of White House Press Secretary Jim Brady was broadcast, along with the apprehension of Hinkley.

In hindsight, a closer look at the 1981 attempted assassination of President Reagan smacks of a conspiracy. Not of Jodie Foster, but of a Montauk-style event. Was it possible that "those in the know" had other plans for our president? The jury who heard Hinkley’s case determined he was "not guilty by reason of insanity." It is quite plausible that Hinkley was a mind-control experiment, a la MK-Ultra. After all, how does one associate the love of a teen actress with the assassination of a U.S. president? Only those familiar with the Montauk experiments would suspect such an association would be the result of mind control programming.

What remained a part of the official media coverup of this failed assassination were numerous pertinent facts. Hinkley’s father, John, Sr. was a former oil-business associate and golfing buddy of George H.W. Bush. Bush was suspiciously absent during the event and, according to accounts of various White House staffers, was resentful of Alexander Haig’s "I’m in control" proclamations. The evening of the assassination attempt, John Hinkley’s brother and his wife were "dinner guests" at the home of the Vice-President’s son, Neil Bush, of Silverado Savings and Loan fame. Coincidence?

President Reagan’s administration began auspiciously with the release of the 63 embassy hostages being held in Iran, an event which was orchestrated to embarrass a sitting president, Jimmy Carter, thus assuring a Republican march to the White House. The failed "secret rescue attempt" which resulted in crashed military helicopters in the desert before the event was successfully launched, may have been orchestrated as well.

In November, 1986, President Reagan admitted to Americans that arms were sold to Iran in the summer of 1985, but he insisted there was no relation to the above-mentioned hostage release. Israel played a part in no fewer than three deliveries of tube-launched, optically-tracked, wire command link-guided (TOW) missiles to Iran, which subsequently resulted in the release of another hostage, Benjamin Weir. Without the release of some 29 other hostages, Israel withdrew from its original agreement with the U.S. and Iran. The U.S. implemented a second strategy, an operation headed by Lt. Col. Oliver North, to sell the arms directly to Iran—with a considerable markup—and then send the profits to Nicaragua, to covertly fund the Contra rebels who were fighting the communist Sandanistas in power.

It was also assumed that the CIA was involved in drug trafficking as part of the Iran-Contra affair, and many have since come forward to confirm those suspicions. Much has already been written by others about the validity of the War on Drugs. As we would soon come to find out, this was the proverbial tip of the iceberg.

*PROMIS
*
In 1982, Inslaw, a Washington, D.C., computer software manufacturer, developed a program called "PROMIS." The program was to be used by the U.S. Justice Department to track cases across the country and would be useful in organizing the department’s case files. One feature of PROMIS was its command-line structure, which permitted some 700,000 instructions. Although the program was designed to be used by the bankruptcy courts, it found its way into the NSA, the DIA, the CIA, the FBI, and Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

Coincidentally, Inslaw sued for payment of the software which was stolen and then pirated. Inslaw sued the Justice Department and won a $6.8 million judgment, a verdict that remains in dispute.

When it was discovered that PROMIS could be used to track military movements and other sensitive data, the software fell into the hands of the Israeli intelligence community and the government of Iraq as well. This could explain the ban on of the sale of PC-486 processor technology to Iraq during the first Gulf War.

According to an article in The American Free Press by Mike Blair, "A Terrorist, the CIA, ‘Blue Death’ and the Inslaw Case", in 1986 a clandestine meeting took place at the Hilton Hotel in Sherman Oaks, California. Present were several key figures: Ted Gunderson, former Supervisory Special Agent for the Los Angeles District of the FBI; Ralph Olberg, a "prominent, American businessman who worked at the Afghan desk of the State Department"; Michael Riconosciuto, "then a long-time weapons and explosives expert linked to the CIA" and "the Inslaw case" and "Tim Osman," the alias assigned to Osama bin Laden "without his beard," according to Orlin Grabbe, the newsman who first reported the story.

At the Hilton meeting, discussions centered on "the supply of U.S. Stinger II missiles and modified Red Chinese 107 mm rockets obtained through Olberg’s Norinco contacts in China," to be used by Afghan rebels against Soviet helicopters and other aircraft. Reports were to then be forwarded to the CIA as to the missiles’ effectiveness against the Soviet aircraft.

It was known that the computer software had also "fallen into the hands of the Israeli Mossad." The article described how the software had been used as a "backdoor entry" into intelligence computers. This meeting was also a precursor to the events of 9/11, indicating the existence of covert relationships between so-called "terrorist organizations" and the U.S. government prior to Sept. 11, 2001.

*Stirring the pot, thickening the plot
*
Enter Leo Emil Wanta, Ambassador from Somalia to Switzerland and Canada. With an initial investment of $150 billion, borrowed from the U.S. Treasury and, thus, the American people, Wanta purchased rubles from contacts in the Netherlands. According to Wanta, the ruble was valued at $1.20 on the international currency market at the time. By purchasing rubles in above-normal quantities, his company, AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc., of Vienna, Austria and other locations, was able to acquire them far below the standard exchange rates. To boot, his company was trading with U.S. dollars and other currencies.

During several live radio interviews on Greg Szymanski’s "Investigative Journal" radio program in early 2006 on the Republic Broadcasting Network, Wanta described purchasing rubles at various prices ranging "from 18 to 23 cents on the dollar." AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc., would then resell the rubles at higher rates to other investors in the financial markets. Dollars were converted into rubles, rubles into yen (or other currencies) and the process would be repeated, over and over again, until the Soviet banks could no longer bear the pressure of cashing in their own currency. According to Ambassador Wanta, "the accounts were distributed throughout secret offshore accounts and had doubled in value every two years."

It should be emphasized that the plan Ambassador Wanta designed was perfectly legal. The same strategy is employed everyday by investors throughout the world. Wanta’s plan differed though, in that his goal, at the bequest of President Reagan, was to cause a financial collapse of the Soviet Union. His repeated purchase of "discounted rubles" enabled him to profit with an advantage not available to others in the financial markets – but was and is still legal. The plan was carried out under Executive Order 12333 (EO 12333, UNITED STATES FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES is a comprehensive executive order, easily found on the Internet, that was signed by President Reagan on December 4, 1981.)

*Bush fingers the Wanta cookie jar
*
Eventually, Wanta’s AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc., along with his other corporations, amassed a sum worth $27.5 trillion. Wanta emphasized that the initial $150 billion startup capital was repaid to the U.S. Treasury and that he intended for the profits to be returned to the American people, according to President Reagan’s orders. While in Hong Kong, Wanta and his Chinese business partner, Howe Kwong Kok, were approached by then President George H. W. Bush. According to Wanta, Bush, Sr., had demanded access to the funds that Wanta had accumulated. Wanta and his partner refused, citing that the funds "belonged to the U.S. Treasury and the American people." Wanta’s partner died of poisoning 10 days after this visit. Bush, former Director of the CIA and a former U.S. Ambassador to China, obviously maintained powerful connections there.

Unbeknownst to Ambassador Wanta, while he was in Switzerland, a plot was unfolding to circumvent his total authority, by presidential order, to safeguard and invest the $27.5 trillion fund he had accumulated through a series of financial maneuvers. The international financial community was well aware of the coup that had taken place, yet not a word had been reported by the worldwide mainstream media. A new president, William Jefferson Clinton, had taken office in 1992 and would soon learn about the financial coup and the efforts of his predecessor, George Herbert Walker Bush, to illegally divert the funds to offshore accounts for personal use.

*Clinton fingers the Wanta cookie jar
*
Prior to Clinton’s arrival in Washington, D. C., it was no small secret that there were an unusually large number of people "in the know" who suddenly died of suspicious circumstances. Personal bodyguards, security personnel and even financial associates who had prior careers in the military or in law enforcement and had since worked for Clinton when he was the governor of Arkansas, had "car accidents" and committed "suicide" in ever-increasing numbers. These people knew too much about the drug deals and financial dealings at the Rose Law Firm where Hillary Clinton was a partner. Even two young boys who witnessed the Mena, Arkansas, drug shipments arriving by train were murdered, in order to protect these dark secrets. The dark secrets followed the Clintons to Washington, D.C.

Shortly after Bill Clinton took over the presidency in 1993, questions were raised by The New York Times about the Whitewater Development and Madison Guaranty loan scandals. The Clintons had invested in the project (at a "loss") and it was learned that the bank had used its influence to hand out political loans amounting to $3 million with deposits of only $300,000. This procedure is practiced by virtually every bank that loans money under the "authority" of the Federal Reserve System. Banks were permitted to loan up to 10 times their actual cash deposits, a practice approved by the Federal Reserve.

*Note:* _Coincidentally, it is this "regulation" that makes it possible to "create money out of thin air." No actual exchange of money occurs between the Federal Reserve and the lending bank, though the loan transaction is recorded on paper as if there had been such an exchange. One can assume that the Fed receives its "cut" from the interest-bearing portion of the loan, as well as the principal portion, 90 percent, which has been financed from funds that actually never existed. Today, the "required" cash on hand is reported to be closer to two percent_.

The Federal Reserve, a private corporation and not an actual government agency, ultimately receives interest on such loans—interest that is funneled into offshore accounts which provide profits for private, foreign banks. When loan payments are in default or dire straits, the banks "repossess" the physical property, whether real estate, a building, house, business development, or any motor vehicle that has been financed through this illusory system. This confiscated property is resold, often at a discount, because the banks and the Fed are willing to "lose" any portion of the 90 percent which has been financed only on paper and not by any tangible means. The process is merely repeated again by the "new owner," until the banks determine that all loans have been "satisfied." The loan schemes devised under the authority of the Federal Reserve account for the false, inflationary valuation of real estate and the rapid depreciation of motor vehicles, are just two examples of our illusory economy. One can assume that all credit agencies operate under the same system.

The New York Times story had precipitated an investigation into Whitewater by the U.S. Justice Department—the same U.S. Justice Department which was complicit in the theft and piracy of the previously-referenced PROMIS software program created by Inslaw: The same U.S. Justice Department that had failed to pay a $6.8 million judgment in damages to Inslaw was now going to investigate a law firm, a bank that illegally loaned money to politicians, a real estate entity that was a "shell" corporation created by attorneys and a former governor of Arkansas who had become president of the United States.

To thicken the plot, former White House Deputy Counsel, Vince Foster submitted several delinquent tax returns for the Whitewater Development project in June, 1993. In July, 1993, Foster "committed suicide" in Fort Marcy Park in Virginia—so the "official" story goes. After a conflict of interest was determined in the appointment of Robert B. Fiske by Attorney General Janet Reno, Kenneth Starr was appointed by a panel of three judges to head the Whitewater investigation in 1994. There was even an investigation into the murder of Vince Foster, who had worked with the Rose Law Firm alongside Hillary Clinton. Although several improprieties by the Clintons were discovered, Foster’s (timely, untimely?) death was ruled a suicide and only James and Susan McDougal received jail time. James McDougal eventually succumbed to a "heart attack" while serving his prison sentence.

Contrary to the findings of the Starr investigation, one of Kenneth Starr’s lead investigators, Miguel Rodriguez, claimed there was a coverup of the forensic evidence discovered in the Foster murder. According to Rodriguez, evidence at the crime scene did not match the evidence contained in the "official report." Rodriguez is recorded on tape describing details of the coverup and his frustration with a corrupt legal system. At the conclusion of the Whitewater investigation, Rodriguez was "demoted" to a state job in California. Mr. Rodriguez, through the miracles of modern medicine, has recently become Miss Michelle Rodriguez.

Aside from the business association between Hillary Clinton and Vince Foster, there were numerous references to a romantic relationship—an extramarital affair. Reports from Secret Service agents and White House staffers detailed accounts of this illicit relationship and others, which were by no means a secret to Washington insiders. The public is reminded of the many dalliances of our 42nd president and the crude manner in which his accusers were handled by his staff, his attorneys and the media. At the time the First Lady was blaming reports regarding her husband’s sexual exploits as part of "a right-wing conspiracy." Numerous White House security agents then came forward with reports of her own trysts with female partners, in various rooms of the White House during nightly security checks.

What was contained in those delinquent tax filings that cost Vince Foster his life? What could have driven him to commit suicide? If what Miguel Rodriguez said about the Starr investigation was correct, that it was being used to coverup the murder of Vince Foster, perhaps Ambassador Leo Wanta could shed some light on a possible motive.

*The Vince Foster connection
*
In 1993, Ambassador Leo Emil Wanta met with Vince Foster in Geneva, Switzerland. Foster had traveled there to make a special pickup of a disbursement that had been formally requested by the President of the United States, Bill Clinton. According to Wanta, he had been working on "Seal projects" and had been requested to transfer $250 million to an account that was retrievable by Foster. The account was destined for the "Children’s Defense Fund," hardly a "Seal" project. Wanta arranged for three payments, approximately $81 million dollars each, to be made and converted to U.S. Treasury notes which were given to Foster, who then gave them to Hillary Clinton.

The "Children’s Defense Fund" was a pet project of Hillary Rodham Clinton. It would be revealing to track the $250 million "appropriation" from Switzerland to its final destination. Congress usually handles such appropriations, which are mandated by legislation. Congress did not authorize the briefcase pickup of $250 million from Geneva, Switzerland—by deputy White House counsel-turned-bagman. If the "Children’s Defense Fund" is actually a CIA operation, then one must also conclude that Hillary Rodham Clinton is a CIA operative.

Shortly after Vince Foster departed for his return trip to Washington (with $250 million in tow), Wanta was arrested by Swiss police. His long nightmare had just begun. He was an Ambassador with diplomatic privileges and was incarcerated in a Swiss dungeon. No one close to Wanta, other than principals within the U.S. administration and intelligence agencies, knew about his imprisonment for quite some time. Were it not for Yitzhak Rabin, the Israeli Prime Minister, he might have remained there for an eternity. Israel, along with several other European countries, held a financial interest in Wanta’s release. Rabin’s communication to Swiss authorities ultimately influenced Wanta’s release from Swiss detention, although he was then immediately shackled and illegally extradited to a Federal Court in New York City, and then to Wisconsin, in order to face phony tax charges.

*Pardon me?
*
Wanta, who not only held diplomatic immunity but was also a U.S. Secret Service/Treasury, CIA, and FBI agent, had been instructed by then FBI Director William Sessions to arrest Marc Rich (Reich). Rich is a key player in arms deals, drug trafficking, oil and mineral exploration, and other big-ticket transactions and is a known CIA operative. Rich, who was operating Martwell Investments, a corporation with suspicious contacts to the United Nations, was indicted by then Prosecutor Rudolph Giuliani. According to accounts originally authored by Christopher Story, a Fellow at the British Royal Society of the Arts, and published by the "International Currency Review," "Economic Intelligence Review" and on his associated website, www.worldreports.org, Rich was tipped off by Mossad agents and escaped arrest by Wanta. It was then that Ambassador Wanta was illegally arrested by Swiss police and incarcerated in a dungeon for 134 days, until his subsequent illegal extradition to New York. Sessions was relieved of duty shortly thereafter.

To add to the mystery, Marc Rich (Reich) was proven by Story, in the "International Currency Review," Volume 31, Numbers 3 and 4, with a mountain of irrefutable documentation, to have entered Canada in 1954 under the name, "Hans Brand," a German national born in Lelbach/Waldeck uber Korbach, Germany, and not in Antwerp, Belgium. "Marc Rich" (Reich) is merely an alias, and contrary to his exaggerated, autobiographical declarations, the facts documented by Story expose the extent to which the government will hide the truth from the public. In 1983, Rich and his partner Pincus Green were indicted by then U.S. Attorney Guiliani for tax evasion and illegal trading with Iran. Both Rich and Green fled to Switzerland to avoid prosecution and remained on the FBI’s most wanted list until January 20, 2001—the day President Clinton gifted Rich with an 11th-hour pardon prior to leaving office. The pardon caused a shockwave of anger and disbelief among those who understood the treasonous nature of Rich’s activities.

*Wanta’s troubles come home
*
Rich’s association with the Clintons may have some relevance to the theft of "Contract #4," a $5 trillion contract previously held between the United Nations and Ambassador Leo E. Wanta, and subsequently "stolen" by the Clintons.

Before the false charges were dismissed in New York City, the federal judge asked Wanta why he was there and why his briefcase contained "$18 billion in Treasury instruments." The judge dismissed the charges on the basis of Wanta’s diplomatic immunity, though she was interested in the large sum in Wanta’s possession. The prosecutor rushed to have all charges dismissed, in an attempt to prevent Wanta’s disclosure of the true facts behind his arrest and appearance in federal court.

Upon his release from the proceedings in federal court, Ambassador Wanta was arrested, now for a third time, by "two New York City policemen on the courthouse steps and without a warrant." The charge: "tax evasion in the State of Wisconsin." Again, Wanta faced trumped up charges, though he had not lived in Wisconsin for years. By this time, in 1993, it was apparent that someone was trying to permanently prevent him from accessing the funds he had amassed at the bequest of President Reagan, for the ultimate benefit of the American people.

According to Wanta, after his illegal arrest and extradition to Wisconsin, he was drugged while incarcerated in an Oklahoma prison, during which no fewer than four attempts were made to have him permanently diagnosed and admitted to a mental institution. Secretary of Defense James Forrestal suffered a similar fate in 1949, until he was eventually "suicided." The reader is reminded that "suicide" is merely doublespeak for "homicide," especially when a government official or operative is in a position to disclose information pertaining to a crime committed by someone in government.

However, due to the enormous amount of money amassed during the financial destabilization of the former Soviet Union, Wanta would not suffer the same fate until the locations of the accounts and pass codes could be determined—accounts he had carefully established to keep the funds from being stolen by several interested parties.

*Note:* _Wanta later described three attempts by agents to murder him while he was illegally imprisoned by Swiss authorities. On one occasion, after receiving advice from a female Chinese physician who had examined him, he refused to eat some cheese that was included with his meal. Another prisoner ate the cheese and died "almost instantly." Wanta had previously been denied medications and treatment for prior-existing medical conditions and he had also been beaten by Swiss intelligence operatives during his illegal incarceration. The Swiss authorities also informed Wanta that Vince Foster had "committed suicide" on the birthday of Wanta’s daughter, a veiled threat to imply that she or another family member may be "taken out" in a similar fashion._

_A summary of Ambassador Leo Emil Wanta’s ordeal in the Wisconsin courts reveals "bogus," trumped-up felony income tax charges that were assessed during a time he was living in a foreign country as an ambassador with diplomatic immunity_.

In June, 1992, Wanta grudgingly paid a Wisconsin tax fine of $14,129 while operating in Singapore. The payment was forwarded to his attorney in Wisconsin, but was not recorded by the authorities until late 1995. A second penalty (of the same amount) was paid under protest in July, 1992, as the first payment "had not been received." A third payment of $30,626.97 was made in July, 2005, based upon "accrued interest" of the previously "unpaid fines." Finally, Wanta’s home was seized and sold for a reported $60,000.

On each occasion, pertinent documents and receipts were "lost," "misplaced," or "never received." The third such payment was actually made on behalf of Ambassador Wanta by Story, the above-mentioned editor, from his personal funds. Incredibly, in October of 2006, a fourth assessment of this "fine" against Wanta was again made by the authorities of the State of Wisconsin, citing similar "reasons" for the fine. Wanta, it is believed, is soon to file a $1 billion lawsuit against the state under RICO statutes and other torts.

*Who is Leo Wanta?
*
Although Wanta’s birth records and his Social Security number indicate his given name at birth was, "Lee Emil Wanta," he is known in intelligence circles as, "Leo Emil Wanta." The fact that Wisconsin authorities levied charges against him under "Leo Emil Wanta" shows the charges to be related to his position within the scope of his intelligence duties, and not as a private individual, "Lee Emil Wanta." The insinuation by the prosecution that "Leo Emil Wanta could not have been the Ambassador to Somalia because he is not black" is further testament of a conspiracy to discredit Wanta, while intelligence agencies and three successive presidential administrations blatantly pilfer public funds—funds that Wanta is still intending to repatriate into the U.S. Treasury.

Subsequent to Wanta’s illegal incarceration and persecution due to the bogus charges levied against him, he received an "Illuminati" 22-year prison sentence in Wisconsin. He was painted as a "liar" and a "con man" by the prosecution, though never actually proven by any evidence in court. To the contrary, fabricated statements made by Wisconsin authorities and the FBI conflicted with those made by the CIA. While Wanta was incarcerated, the CIA was raiding the various assets of AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc., New Republic/USA Financial Group, GES.m.b.H., Aneko Credit PTE, Limited, Marvelous Investments, Ltd., AmeriChina and his other companies, proclaiming that he was actually "dead," even though the CIA was well-informed of his "trial" and subsequent incarceration in an Oklahoma high-security prison. A 26-page handwritten letter to President Clinton at the White House persuaded him to commute Wanta’s sentence to "house arrest" in Wisconsin, but the illegal raiding of the various Wanta-owned, Title 18, Section 6 accounts then continued unabated and continues today.

After years of victimization through illegal imprisonment, torture, beatings, drugging, defamation, and assassination attempts, Ambassador Leo Emil Wanta rose from the ashes of his "death" and began to shock the rest of the world. In 2003, Virginia District Federal Judge Gerald Bruce Lee declared Ambassador Wanta to be the "Principal" and Trustor of the $27.5 trillion in funds obtained via the financial implosion of the Soviet Union. Wanta was now in a position to investigate the various means by which the last of three successive presidential administrations had been systematically embezzling the very funds he was commissioned by President Reagan to accrue to revitalize the beleaguered American economy.

*Violating the public trustor
*
Upon his "release" from prison, Wanta remained under house arrest until May, 2005. Out of the way and powerless to intervene, Wanta watched as the raiding of his corporate accounts continued. To fully understand the enormous deception and level of corruption, one must read the publication, "International Currency Review." This 480-page quarterly is a masterful piece of investigative journalism which decimates the falsehoods, deflections, inconsistencies, and conspiratorial deceptions employed by the Administration, the banks, U.S. intelligence agencies, the U.S. Treasury, the Wisconsin Department of Revenue, and the Wisconsin State / U.S. Departments of Justice. Irrefutable evidence has been revealed in this publication, including official documents, Wanta’s handwritten notes and communications to government officials, court transcripts, public records, bank records and receipts.

The bank documents and illicit transactions that Wanta had documented are also supported, in some instances, by photographic evidence. On at least one occasion, intelligence operatives filmed Senator Hillary Clinton at the Bank of Crozier, Grenada. Wanta and others have documented no less than $742 billion in theft from U.S. Treasury accounts there, where Clinton is alleged to have presented CIA documentation in order to withdraw funds in April, 2003. The evidence was submitted to Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, who has been conducting grand jury investigations into a variety of crimes committed by career politicians and government operatives.

Add to this mountain of evidence supporting Wanta’s claims, in particular the exhaustive list of "participating banks" and elected officials "in the know," and there can be no doubt that there is a concerted effort by the mainstream media, the government and the courts to completely coverup this most-important crisis. Recent developments in foreign countries underscore the level of deterioration of trust and confidence in the U.S. government due to the outrageous plot to conceal the facts of this case and its negative impact on the world economy and exponentially-escalating levels of U.S. debt.

By December, 2005, Ambassador, Principal and Trustor Wanta had agreed to a settlement of $4.5 trillion, in order to prevent the total implosion of the U.S. economy. This settlement would have required his silence about the remaining funds, which would have given the thieves an "out" and allowed them to continue their pillaging. The settlement would also prevent a domino effect from occurring in other world financial markets. The embezzled funds have since circuited the world several times over, being deposited, transferred, and then laundered through off-balance sheet derivatives and other illegal transactions.

*The numbers are staggering
*
It was no coincidence that the settlement funds were "signed off" to U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, former Chairman of Goldman Sachs. Upon instructions from Federal Judge Gerald Bruce Lee, the $4.5 trillion settlement was originally deposited into a Bank of America account in Virginia, where the case was decided in federal court by Judge Lee. The windfall tax that Ambassador Wanta intended to pay to the U.S. Treasury amounted to $1.575 trillion. Just on the accrued interest alone, that windfall tax would have earned "$96 billion per day," according to Christopher Story’s "ICR" accounting. Story estimated that the U.S. Treasury, through the duplicitous activities of Secretary Paulson, lost some $10.5 to $11 trillion in interest during the 7-month period following the original "due date" of the $4.5 trillion settlement.

The State (Commonwealth) of Virginia stood to gain a windfall tax payment of some $270 million from the settlement. Because Vice-President and Treasurer Michael C. Cottrell, M.S., of the Ameritrust Groupe, Inc. conducts business in the State of Pennsylvania that state was due a similar windfall tax payment, though the actual amount is unknown at this time.

Other disbursements promised to foreign officials and/or governments include: "$30 billion to the Russian Federation, [and] $5 billion each to the governments of Canada, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Mexico, and Spain."

*Where’s the money?
*
Previously, similar amounts had been promised to the governments of Israel and Palestine, though the "publicized" $15 billion dual payments to both governments were also stolen. Remember that Yitzhak Rabin had attempted to assist in the release of Ambassador Wanta from a Swiss gulag in Lausanne in 1993. Again, the media did its job by covering up the story.

In addition to the blatant refusal of the U.S. administration and the U.S. Treasury to disburse the funds to the legal trustor, the funds were transferred from bank to bank, moving first from the Bank of America account to Wachovia Bank in New York and onward to Goldman Sachs. Intelligence information shows that the funds still reside at Goldman Sachs, though this is denied by the firm. In fact, a Treasury agent recently confirmed that the funds are there, being held illegally and with the complicity of Secretary Paulson.

Shortly after the North Korean "nuclear missile test" scare in late-2006, it was reported by intelligence sources that President Bush had traveled to that country while Treasury Secretary Paulson went to Latvia. Some of the Wanta funds had previously been tracked through North Korea, en route to India. The reported amount was $25 trillion. Coincidentally, after the "successful" missile tests, North Korea received a secret $55 million payment from the U.S. The media assisted in the promotion of fear, yet failed to report this curiously-timed disbursement of funds.

In mid-December, 2006, both Secretary Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke traveled to China to meet with elders and finance ministers. Though the Chinese repeatedly urged U.S. officials to disburse the $4.5 trillion in Wanta settlement funds (and were repeatedly assured they would be dispersed), Paulson and Bernanke attempted to coerce them into "refinancing" $1 trillion in loans (the Chinese had been propping up the U.S. economy to protect its exports business in America by "purchasing" U.S. debt in the form of U.S. treasury bonds and other securities for several years) at 1 percent interest, far less than the usual 4-5 percent they previously received. To boot, the Chinese had already withdrawn $32 trillion in Clearinghouse Interbank Payment System (CHIPS) accounts ($1 trillion per day) during October and November, 2006, which nullified credit transactions above $100 million.

To add further insult to injury, the Chinese then began purchasing oil with British pound sterling, essentially "dumping" the dollar as the preferred oil currency. This fact was again covered up by the mainstream media, when they reported that China was "attempting to sabotage the dollar, by dumping $1 trillion in credits." The very same accusations were being made on the Congressional floor, prior to the Christmas recess.

Buoyed by frequent updates on the Wanta Plan and reports on the December 23, 2006 arrest of Treasury Secretary Paulson in Germany, the claims made by Ambassador Wanta appear, on all accounts, to be genuine. Paulson was allegedly arrested for attempting to block the settlement a second time. He arrived "late" to the funeral of President Gerald Ford, and was seen sitting behind Nancy Reagan and next to Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice. Due to an impending visit from German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Paulson was reportedly ushered on a plane and flown to Israel. Paulson reportedly was in possession of an Israeli passport, as well. His "diplomatic documentation" in Germany was also in dispute and was not "substantiated" by the U.S. Consulate.

*Pieces are falling into place
*
A careful examination of the Internal Currency Review will reveal that former President George H.W. Bush holds "dual citizenship" with Germany, as he is the reputed "head" of the Deutsche Verteidigungs Dienst, the Dachau DVD, or the Abwehr (underground S.S.). Satellite photos confirm that Bush attended a "secret" meeting of the organization, over which he presides, since taking over its leadership from Dr. Henry Kissinger. Kissinger replaced the DVD founder, Admiral Canaris, who became ill in 1976. Canaris reestablished the DVD in Oklahoma City under the name, Samuel Randall Pittman after World War II. The DVD records were stored in the Murrah Federal Building, which was subsequently destroyed in the infamous bombing by "Timothy McVeigh." CNN also assisted in the coverup of that event, although they "accidentally" transmitted pictures of an "unexploded, stacked bomb" which was visible in the portion of the building that was left standing.

Among the many documents that have mysteriously surfaced on the Internet—documents that support Wanta’s claims—are a series of bank transfer records known as the "Vreeland Faxes." Delmart Edward "Mike" Vreeland, an ONI agent, posted copies of Wanta’s records on the Web which detail multi-billion dollar transactions, account numbers, and recipient information. Of interest to many were the names of the "shell" corporations. "The Francis X. Driscoll Trust" was purportedly a joint account between George H.W. Bush and the Queen of England. "Pilgrim Investments" was found to have ties, among others, to Hutchison-Whampoa Ltd., the global shipping company owned by Li Ka-Shing, a Chinese billionaire and real estate tycoon. Hutchison Port Holdings (HPH) is a subsidiary that controls ports around the world and has the exclusive rights to control the Panama Canal. Though the arrangement appeared to make no sense at all to most Americans, with the information above, we can now understand why the current administration attempted to give the "port inspection" contract to Hutchison-Whampoa in the Bahamas in 2006, under the pretext of "inspecting cargo for nuclear devices."

Though the media reported the Ports Dubai scandal, they failed to accurately describe the attempt to "hand over" American ports to a company from the Middle East. Despite the news that "six" ports were to be handed over to the company, 22 to 29 ports along the East Coast and the Gulf of Mexico would have been a more accurate analysis of the plan.

According to Leo Wanta, on November 1, 2001, U.S. agents secretly met in Manila, Philippines with a "lieutenant" of Osama Bin Laden, Datu Ben Abu. Wanta detailed the identity of participants of the meeting, which was reminiscent to the above-referenced Hilton Hotel meeting in 1986. In a handwritten letter to Vice-President Richard Cheney, Wanta described "Red Mercury, Stinger II missiles and boxes of cash (weapons)."

Also present at the clandestine meeting were a "Dr. Navarro" and a "Madame Teleki (Eva Teleki)." Despite Wanta’s incarceration, it appeared that his expertise was still considered valuable to the perpetrators of 9/11. Cheney forwarded the letter to the head of the NSA, Condoleeza Rice, and then on to the president. Despite the rhetoric we heard leading up to the invasion of Iraq, it was apparent our government was willing to assist those who were later blamed for the WTC/Pentagon attacks — al-Queda. Of course, the media failed to report and investigate this important story as well.

*End notes
*
Little known to the public is the imminent insolvency of several large financial institutions due to the off-balance sheet and tax-free transactions in worldwide derivatives markets. Although the media continue to sensationalize their usual bevy of trivial news stories, the greatest financial scandal in the history of the United States—and in the world—marches onward, while their treacherous conspiracy and complicity to hide the facts in this case demonstrates their willingness to honor treason, corruption, and tyranny.

Despite the best efforts of the government and its intelligence agencies to distort the facts, misinform, or outright lie about the Wanta Plan, the Internet has been a repository of information. As the story has begun to be understood and verified by many outstanding researchers and conspiracy experts, the criminals perpetrating the fraud on the American public and the world have suddenly realized that the clock is ticking, and time is running out. Several Internet talk-show hosts (not worth mentioning by name) have determined the story to be "a hoax." Such ignorant declarations smack of the same hypocrisy that is evident among a "bribed" or "bridled" mainstream media. The citizens of the United States have witnessed countless assassinations of public figures, the subsequent coverups, and the rhetoric that ultimately follows. The problem here is that we have been lied to one too many times, and this story will not "go away," as have those of the past.

The time has come for all Americans to awaken from the mind control, the brain washing, and the dismantling of our individual sovereignty. Ambassador Leo E. Wanta, Michael C. Cottrell, M.S., and Christopher Story (a British citizen) have exhibited a determination to honor the truth, a quality severely lacking among those entrusted with our safety and well-being. These courageous men have demonstrated more loyalty to our country than those who have openly and systematically defied the very laws they, themselves, have created. The crime of the millennium is being perpetrated before our very eyes, and if left to an incompetent, compliant, and conspiratorial media, the price will be far greater than what is now an estimated $75 trillion in stolen funds.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 5, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



You did a great job of explaining the Wanta story...Todd believes that his precious "gubermint" is beyond reproach but that's a bit like still believing in Santa Claus. This corporate entity that is trying to pass itself off as a governmental body lies to the people all the time and with gusto.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 5, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...




The politicians have been trying to get their hands on these funds for awhile which are being stashed in over 6,000 banks. The powers that be have figured out where some of it was kept and used CIA credentials to seize it...but they are looking for the biggest score. I would rather see that money go up in flames than to see it end up in the hands of these parasites on Capitol Hill.


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 5, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Why would my personal conclusion, based on years of adult observation - and you did say you wanted this to be an adult conversation - require a link?

Skepticism is a valuable adult tool and one you apply liberally to other's sources but when it comes to your own sources, suddenly you are an all-believing sheeple.

I have read enough of the CT lunacy to understand exactly who and what I'm dealing with.

You have the capacity to "research" that which interests you at obscure and bogus sites such as The Artic Beacon. If you are truly interested in the connection between the Internet and paranoia - and I'm skeptical - look it up.


----------



## candycorn (Jan 5, 2016)

when 9/11 Conspiratards start talking about all this other bullshit, you know they've been destroyed on their thesis.

Just tell us what happened to the planes if there were no planes involved in 9/11....mmmmmmmmmk?


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 5, 2016)

SAYIT said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > SAYIT said:
> ...


Great post, I agree to a point.

What you need to clarify though, is what makes a site like "The Arctic Beacon" a "bogus site."

I have posted videos, articles and research that tell in detailed analysis why CFR linked sites cannot be trusted and what their agenda is.

Your beef is just that, you don't like the information that is presented, so the site is. . . "bogus."

I'm sorry, you need to tell us what Mr. Syzmanski's interests are.  Why is he writing what he is writing?  Is it just for profit?


No, what I am curious about is the supposition that this fellow Greg Syzmanski has an alias.

The problem with that page source, is that it is in archived page.  I think most of it is dead to tell the truth.

After a little more research, I discovered that his middle name is Anthony.  Likewise, we can disabuse our self of the notion that he undertakes his journalism to "get rich." 

Is it possible that he is disinformation tied to the intelligence apparatus?  Doubtful, as most of us are highly suspicious that you yourself are a Jesuit, and this guy is known to smoke out Jesuits.  So it is possible that this is why you jumped on this guys shit and not on Christopher Edward Harle Story.  After all, it is known to the enlightened that they made Reagan an honorary SMOM, and Mr. Story was good buddies with Reagan.  So naturally, you'd be less inclined to impugn that side of the paradigm, eh?  Perhaps folks should look into Greg's investigations with a little more vigor now that you have chimed in. . . .

Thanks for that.


----------



## Spinster (Jan 5, 2016)

The operative word is "explosion".


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 5, 2016)

SAYIT said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > SAYIT said:
> ...


  See, we have something in common...I am skeptical about anything this corporate "gubermint" tells me...you are skeptical about anything that challenges the official story of "da gubermint"......being skeptical is a good thing, no? It's not detrimental and causes no one any harm, correct?


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 5, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > SAYIT said:
> ...



Nah, I don't think that.

Todd's a great cat.  His posts elsewhere in the forums are top notch.  I also understand and empathize with Candy.  At university I lived in a communal living cooperative with folks that held many POV that were similar to hers.

I just don't think they understands where the root of corruption lay.  Freud's nephew, Edward L. Bernays taught the elites how to model public opinion in such a way that popular democracies could be controlled this way.

I mean, here he and Candycorn are both on the same side in this sub-forum, absolutely sure of their POV, which was given to them by MSM.

But up top, in the politics and current events, CNN, MSNBC, FOX, and PBS will have them at each others throats.  They don't understand where the core of corruption lay.

If they were united in their POV on this topic, then rather than talking past each other and finding no solutions to the nations problems, the elites would not be able to distract and divide the nation.  They would understand the true cause of the nations problems.  If everyone knew the real cause of problems, real solutions could be found.

Seriously, ask Todd what he thinks of the whole Fast and Furious episode.  Or that Benghazi debacle. 

He has no love for the empire.

Ask Candy what she thought about that Arms for hostages deal. . . . neither one of them are chumps.  


But they only believe in CFR, Annenberg foundation approved media.  The elites control what some folks think, and they will not free their own minds, despite all evidence to the contrary.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 5, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...




_*make $trillions for the American people in shrewd (but legal) currency trading that concentrated on buying Russian rubles at a discount to destabilize the Soviet economy surfaced in 1992.*
_
Ahhh...buying something that wasn't trading.

*According to Wanta, the ruble was valued at $1.20 on the international currency market at the time. By purchasing rubles in above-normal quantities, his company, AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc., of Vienna, Austria and other locations, was able to acquire them far below the standard exchange rates.*

Ummmmm....when you're trading in a market, buying in "above-normal quantities" raises the price you pay.
*
Dollars were converted into rubles, rubles into yen (or other currencies) and the process would be repeated, over and over again, until the Soviet banks could no longer bear the pressure of cashing in their own currency.*

That's the thing about a non-convertible currency, no one, let alone a "Soviet bank", has to cash it in.

*Eventually, Wanta’s AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc., along with his other corporations, amassed a sum worth $27.5 trillion.*

To make a profit this large, the USSR would have to have had that many dollars at some point.
That would have been decades of Soviet GDP. And the only way for them to get dollars would be by exporting commodities for hard currency. The current Russian GDP is less than $2 trillion a year.

Moronically ridiculous BS you're swallowing.


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 5, 2016)

Spinster said:


> The operative word is "explosion".


Great comment.

I think that's lost in the shuffle a lot of times.

Those buildings didn't just seem to collapse after the "planes" hit them.  They did a lot more than just collapse.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 5, 2016)

candycorn said:


> when 9/11 Conspiratards start talking about all this other bullshit, you know they've been destroyed on their thesis.
> 
> Just tell us what happened to the planes if there were no planes involved in 9/11....mmmmmmmmmk?



As someone that denied any conspiracy concerning 9/11 for 11 years, when my eyes opened up to the fact that we were lied to, I learned to not discount anything. Could the planes have been holograms? I say it is very possible. I do not know for sure. I only try and explain things that make sense to me. I have spent thousands upon thousands of hours reading, researching, listening to lectures both pro and con because in order to discuss anything intelligently, you have to investigate every avenue in order to come to a conclusion. What I do know now is that it is ludicrous to believe that 19 boxcutter welding terrorists defeated NORAD, the FAA, the NSA, CIA AND the Pentagon...and furthermore to think that after being buttfucked in front of the entire world to believe that they were able to get their shit together so soon and prevent another wave from alleged "terrorist cells" is pathetically funny. There were many reasons that 9/11 happened and as usual, it benefitted those with the gold while making us poorer with less privacy and freedoms. It's called the Hegelian Dialectic....cause, affect, solution.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 5, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > SAYIT said:
> ...



*Todd believes that his precious "gubermint" is beyond reproach
*
Nope. Not even a little bit.

But that has nothing to do with these ridiculous $27 trillion fairy tales.


----------



## candycorn (Jan 5, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > when 9/11 Conspiratards start talking about all this other bullshit, you know they've been destroyed on their thesis.
> ...


Really, the wreckage found was not holographic.  How would the planes be holographic and the wreckage not be?


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 5, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Wanta didn't make just that money off of the USSR Ruble......he had 150 billion dollars in seed money and the financial system was his oyster. George Soros has done the same thing with his billions. You know the old adage, it takes money to make money? Wanta did that to the proverbial "T".


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 5, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > when 9/11 Conspiratards start talking about all this other bullshit, you know they've been destroyed on their thesis.
> ...



*What I do know now is that it is ludicrous to believe that 19 boxcutter welding terrorists defeated NORAD, the FAA, the NSA, CIA AND the Pentagon*

They didn't defeat NORAD, the FAA, the NSA, the CIA and the Pentagon, they overpowered a couple of pilots and a handful of flight attendants.

Seriously, seek help.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 5, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



*Wanta didn't make just that money off of the USSR Ruble......
*
I think it's safe to say he didn't make any money trading non-convertible rubles.

*......he had 150 billion dollars in seed money
*
Sure he did, Sparky.

*George Soros has done the same thing with his billions.
*
I could explain how Soros made money trading British Pounds, but it's clear you're a lost cause.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 5, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...




Umm, yes they did......remember when Payne Stewart's plane lost contact in 1999? They had fighter jets within minutes escorting that plane. No planes were sent until an hour and a half later and they were sent over the Atlantic Ocean. The Pentagon has the most secured airspace in the world so please, explain how there is no recorded evidence of a plane ever hitting the Pentagon? 83 cameras were confiscated by the FBI and 4 frames is the best that they could do? Put on your thinking cap, lil fella......


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 5, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



*They had fighter jets within minutes escorting that plane.*

Yeah, about 80 minutes later.

_According to a U.S. Air Force timeline, a series of military planes provided an emergency escort to the stricken Lear, beginning with an __F-16__ from __Eglin Air Force Base__, about an hour and twenty minutes (9:33 EDT to 9:52 CDT – see NTSB report on the crash) after ground controllers lost contact.

Payne Stewart - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
_
*The Pentagon has the most secured airspace in the world
*
In 2001? Prove it.
*
explain how there is no recorded evidence of a plane ever hitting the Pentagon?
*
Besides the plane and its passengers in the wreckage?
*
83 cameras were confiscated by the FBI and 4 frames is the best that they could do?
*
How fast was the plane traveling just before impact?


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 5, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Dude, seriously, you are becoming the biggest time waster of all time.......go suck the cock of your beloved federal "gubermint" because you don't even have the basics down about the events of that day and I don't have the sligthest inclination to "school" you on it...and frankly? It doewsn't matter anyway. You are basically fucked sans lubrication...spare me a thought when the shit hits the fan.

(snicker)


----------



## candycorn (Jan 5, 2016)

candycorn said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Well,....if you really have spent 10 minutes looking at this and claim that its possible the planes "were holograms", how could they be holographic and the wreckage found not be holographic?


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 5, 2016)

candycorn said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...




As far as I know, they didn't recover the twin engines made of titanium steel that weigh over two tons from either WTC building 1 or 2...do you have evidence to the contrary?


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 5, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...



It is not my "supposition" that Syzmanski has an alias but rather it is his own bio at his own website - evidently written by him in the third person - that states he uses an alias as his comedic stage name and I don't really care what motivates him.

Furthermore it isn't that I dislike what he says but rather that I don't care about the rabbit hole he has dug or what he stores down there and no, I'm not a Jesuit. 

Like most rational adults I find the ranting (and ramblings) of the CT loons here to be for amusement only with their conclusions based on the ranting (and ramblings) of other CT loons. I no longer follow the 9/11HandJobs or the Dale Smiths (or The Artic Beacons) down their rabbit holes as all I ever seem to find is rabbit droppings.

Finally, it is the common cry of all flaming CT loons, when their sources are exposed, to claim the authors to be disinformationalists "tied to the intelligence apparatus." I've heard the same claim made about Alex Jones when he fails to genuflect as proscribed at the 9/11 CT alter.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 5, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> As far as I know, they didn't recover the twin engines made of titanium steel that weigh over two tons from either WTC building 1 or 2...do you have evidence to the contrary?


They recovered one of the engines at Church and Murray street didn't they?


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 5, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > ...Ambassador Leo E. Wanta, Michael C. Cottrell, M.S., and Christopher Story (a British citizen) have exhibited a determination to honor the truth, a quality severely lacking among those entrusted with our safety and well-being. These courageous men have demonstrated more loyalty to our country than those who have openly and systematically defied the very laws they, themselves, have created. The crime of the millennium is being perpetrated before our very eyes, and if left to an incompetent, compliant, and conspiratorial media, the price will be far greater than what is now an estimated $75 trillion in stolen funds.
> ...



Wait ... did someone really say that currency was purchased in quantity at a discount?


Can I buy Euros or British pounds at steep discounts?
Sign me up!

This entire Wanta discussion has been a valuable expose, not of Wanta or of international financial intrigue but rather of the twisted pretzel rationale of the flaming CT.

Poor Smith has been exposed as a flaming CT of the first order.

WooHoo!


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 5, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...



Not quite.

It has not been established that I (or any of the rational adults here) "are skeptical about anything that challenges the official story of da gubermint" but what has been firmly established is that you are skeptical only of everything "corporate gubermint" and most remarkably, you believe your closed mind is something of which to be proud.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 5, 2016)

SAYIT said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > SAYIT said:
> ...





SAYIT said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...


 Lots of radio interviews on youtube of Leo Wanta putting his story out there, fuckwad......frankly, I do not care what you believe or don't believe....keep the faith in your beloved "gubermint" like the good little sheeple that you are. The topic of Leo Wanta came up because I have proof that his actions that crashed the Ruble were piggybacked by the Bush crime family that bought up 10 year securities in oil and gas covertly using the Black Eagle Trust money that was stolen from the Japanese (that had also stolen that gold from China and Korea) during WWII in the Philippines. You see, I know more than you....I read and research...it's what I do. You lamely cling to your "gubermint" in hopes that they tell you the unvarnished truth and that makes you dumber than a day old Down's Syndrome child......wallow in your ignorance as it doesn't mean shit to me.


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 5, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



Just another fine example of flaming CT "rationale."

Smith makes a claim, Toddster slams it with facts, Smith whines about "gubermint" agents.

It just isn't possible to penetrate a closed mind even with facts because the closed mind simply rejects them.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 5, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



How fast was the plane traveling just before impact?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 5, 2016)

SAYIT said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



The Euro is currently $107.39, if we put in a bid for 1 million of them, do you think we could get them for $1.00?
Then we could go to the ECB and "cash in the currency" for the market price, a quick $73,900 profit.

Now that's how you use $4.5 trillion to make another $4.5 trillion.....every 2 weeks. LOL!


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 5, 2016)

SAYIT said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > SAYIT said:
> ...



"Closed mind"? Hardly....I have simply invested over 12,000 hours in reading and research....listening to lectures and documentaries from accredited researchers and authors while discerning the information and vetting it.  I have learned more and understand more than you could even fathom because I have paid my dues and invested the time and effort into learning how things really work and I am not interested in the slightest in being lectured from a "wet behind the ears, knows nothing"" sheeple like you....do you get the message that I am sending?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 5, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...



*Lots of radio interviews on youtube of Leo Wanta putting his story out there, fuckwad*

Yeah, listening to his idiocy first hand is just as funny as seeing it in print.

*I have proof that his actions that crashed the Ruble
*
Wanta was "crashing the ruble" under Reagan, so when did it crash? Give me the timeline.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 5, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...







That's a picture of landing gear inside the Pentagon.
Did a missile leave it there? Maybe a hologram?


----------



## candycorn (Jan 5, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



They recovered as many parts as they could.  Lack of photographic evidence showing it doesn't mean they didn't recover it.

Anyway, here are photos of the plane engines they did recover from AA 11 and United 175.













Here are some engines they recovered from lower Manhattan.


Other large body parts of planes (not to mention passengers) were found at ground zero as well:

Here is a section of the fuseloge:





Here is a picture of Flight 11 wreckage from roof:






Again, you see with your own eyes plane parts from 9/11 above. How could the planes be "holographs" when the wreckage clearly is not?


----------



## PredFan (Jan 5, 2016)

Again, we saw the planes hit the towers, we saw the towers fall. We have the official results and explanation of what we think happened. If anyone thinks it didn't happen that way than you must come up with an explanation of what DID happen. If you can't do that then you have nothing at all.

It's easy to poke holes, real or imaginary, in the official story but it means nothing unless you have a better explanation. So far you conspiracy nutters have nothing.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 5, 2016)

Titanium engines weigh two tons a piece....that is 4 thousand pounds per engine. As I alluded to, I am not saying that  plane did not hit WTC1 and 2....I simply said that I am open to the possibility that they didn't.....what part of that equation are you struggling with?


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 5, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Titanium engines weigh two tons a piece....that is 4 thousand pounds per engine. As I alluded to, I am not saying that  plane did not hit WTC1 and 2....I simply said that I am open to the possibility that they didn't.....what part of that equation are you struggling with?


But you said that they didn't recover any of the engines from the planes. I and others just showed you they did (in addition to others pieces). Do you deny the engine found at the intersection Church and Murray street?


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 5, 2016)

Those pieces don't seem to come even close to weighing two tons to me....do you have access to a scale? It may have been a drone plane, might have been the original planes that were allegedly hijacked and then taken over by a a computer because planes have had the ability to be "taken over" since the 1960's...who's to say? I am just saying that I am open to any possibility....which plane hit building 7?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 5, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Those pieces don't seem to come even close to weighing two tons to me....do you have access to a scale? It may have been a drone plane, might have been the original planes that were allegedly hijacked and then taken over by a a computer because planes have had the ability to be "taken over" since the 1960's...who's to say? I am just saying that I am open to any possibility....which plane hit building 7?



*Those pieces don't seem to come even close to weighing two tons to me....
*
How much do the "real" engines weigh?
How much did the engine from the wreckage weigh?
Obviously, these are the turbines, not the entire engine.
They didn't travel thru the WTC unscathed.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 5, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Those pieces don't seem to come even close to weighing two tons to me....do you have access to a scale?


Ok, they recovered a piece of an engine, not a whole engine. Agreed?


Dale Smith said:


> It may have been a drone plane, might have been the original planes that were allegedly hijacked and then taken over by a a computer because planes have had the ability to be "taken over" since the 1960's...who's to say?


What does finding a piece of an engine have to do with it being a drone plane or computer controlled? Your original statement above was about the validity of "planes" impacting the towers was it not?


Dale Smith said:


> I am just saying that I am open to any possibility....


Ok.


Dale Smith said:


> which plane hit building 7?


No plane hit WTC7.


----------



## ranfunck (Jan 5, 2016)

Does any one have any of the serial numbers off of said parts or the black boxes? If not you don't know what hit the towers or the pentagon for sure


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 5, 2016)

ranfunck said:


> Does any one have any of the serial numbers off of said parts or the black boxes? If not you don't know what hit the towers or the pentagon for sure



Weren't the bodies of passengers in the Pentagon enough proof for you?


----------



## ranfunck (Jan 5, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> ranfunck said:
> 
> 
> > Does any one have any of the serial numbers off of said parts or the black boxes? If not you don't know what hit the towers or the pentagon for sure
> ...


NO


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 5, 2016)

ranfunck said:


> Does any one have any of the serial numbers off of said parts or the black boxes? If not you don't know what hit the towers or the pentagon for sure


Do YOU have access to parts and serial numbers for ANY airline crash that match the said plane that crashed to it's matching parts? If so, please provide your information so we can see that they publish this type of information for public consumption.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 5, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> ranfunck said:
> 
> 
> > Does any one have any of the serial numbers off of said parts or the black boxes? If not you don't know what hit the towers or the pentagon for sure
> ...



I saw the second plane hit the second tower-------It was a passenger plane----HAPPY NOW?      Lots of other people in New York City----or near the shore of the Hudson river in New Jersey saw the first plane hit------it was a plane-----the kind that fly around the skies over there----there are a whole bunch of airports in New York City and in
New Jersey-------none of the things flying around like like car bombs


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 5, 2016)

ranfunck said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > ranfunck said:
> ...



Why not? Unless they had one of those passenger missiles?


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 5, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...



just to look at the uniform colors of the chargers and future LA Rams.nothing more.lol.I dont get into this winning losing thing anymore and will never watch another superbowl again thats for sure,these coachs throw the games all the time i learned last year and the cheatriots are the spolied rich brats of the NFL who get away with scandal after scandal,it took me last year to wake up to all this.thats why i will never put a dime into the corrupt NFL again.its a cartel.

Like i said,i just like looking at a certain teams uniform colors.no other reason.lol the important thing is i will never give them another dime of my money.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 5, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...


which is exactly why everyone should use the ignore button with these shills.thats their objective here their handlers send them here to achieve.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 5, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...


you took the shill to school there.you gave him a major ass beating that he can only cry about in defeat.lol


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 5, 2016)

irosie91 said:


> Gamolon said:
> 
> 
> > ranfunck said:
> ...



. . . . And the Mossad chimes in.



Yeah. . . . . well. . . . 






I was --------- there and and and --------------
I saw elephants smash them to smithereens so your account can't
possibly be true ----- they were big and pink and angry and speaking Yiddish to all their relatives
about becoming doctors

and lawyers and how they were sick of the terrible ways ----- that they were being ignored and if only those damn towers fell
Americans would know what it is like not having a safe space to live in ---- then maybe they would
do something about all this damn global warming


All the pink elephants know these things--- HAPPY NOW?


----------



## Skylar (Jan 5, 2016)

candycorn said:


> when 9/11 Conspiratards start talking about all this other bullshit, you know they've been destroyed on their thesis.
> 
> Just tell us what happened to the planes if there were no planes involved in 9/11....mmmmmmmmmk?



Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and refracted the light from Venus?


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 5, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > SAYIT said:
> ...


If it's inside the Pentagon, more than likely neither a missile nor a hologram left it, probably a spook left it.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 5, 2016)

I just don't get Truthers. Their solution for an absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy they can't back factually is to invent an even more absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy to back it.

And its turtles, all the way down.


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 5, 2016)

Skylar said:


> I just don't get Truthers. Their solution for an absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy they can't back factually is to invent an even more absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy to back it.
> 
> And its turtles, all the way down.


You are referring of course to this absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy you can't factually back, right?


----------



## Skylar (Jan 5, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> > I just don't get Truthers. Their solution for an absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy they can't back factually is to invent an even more absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy to back it.
> ...



I'm referring to the stupidly complicated truther conspiracy. Now with no planes. 

And when we ask how this works, Truthers make up another stupidly complicated conspiracy: 'secret technology'. 

When we ask for evidence on this 'secret technology' doing what they claim, being used, or even existing as they describe it, we get another stupidly complicated conspiracy about the ruble. 

And so on. And so on. And so on.

Its turtles all the way down.


----------



## ranfunck (Jan 5, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> ranfunck said:
> 
> 
> > Does any one have any of the serial numbers off of said parts or the black boxes? If not you don't know what hit the towers or the pentagon for sure
> ...


911 - Aircraft Parts As A Clue To Their Identity  The Precautionary Principle


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 5, 2016)

ranfunck said:


> Gamolon said:
> 
> 
> > ranfunck said:
> ...



*The precautionary principle is based on the fact that the failure to prove a proposition completely does not disprove the proposition.* 

^
From your link.

*precautionary principle*
noun
1.
the precept that an action should not be taken if the consequences are uncertain and potentially dangerous

^
From a dictionary

Your stupid sources get the simplest things wrong.
But they've seen behind the government conspiracy, right? LOL!
Morons.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 5, 2016)

you guys are hopeless,the way you all keep feeding the trolls.

I give up,I can only say this so many times before i get tired of the advise being ignored-


----------



## Skylar (Jan 5, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> someone farted in here.^



I'm rubber, you're glue. 

Neener-neener.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 5, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> > I just don't get Truthers. Their solution for an absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy they can't back factually is to invent an even more absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy to back it.
> ...



yeah these official conspiracy theory apologists better get off the crack they been smoking the fact they believe in this,the most wackiest conspiracy theory on the planet ever invented.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 5, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > Skylar said:
> ...



A building collapsing due to fire and structural damage after being hit by a plane is 'wackier' than the 'no plane' theory?

Yeah, this is why truther's just aren't taken seriously. I think your heyday was 2006.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 5, 2016)

ranfunck said:


> Gamolon said:
> 
> 
> > ranfunck said:
> ...



dude werent YOU the one earlier who said not to waste time with these government trolls? cant have it both ways to advise someone not to feed the trolls when your doing the exact same thing bud.

No reason to post that link,Dale took them to school handing their ass to them on a platter in post#244 here.

World Trade Center probably could not have been destroyed by planes | Page 25 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 5, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > when 9/11 Conspiratards start talking about all this other bullshit, you know they've been destroyed on their thesis.
> ...




see YOU did what the infiltraters refuse to do,look at BOTH sides of the coin.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 5, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> ranfunck said:
> 
> 
> > Gamolon said:
> ...



See, this is what I'm talking about. I just don't get Truthers. When pressed on their wildly complicated, fantastically elaborate conspiracy, they make up all new wildly complicated, fantastically elaborate conspiracies to back them.

And when pressed on the new conspiracy, its another conspiracy, backed by another. And another.

Watch:

Um...911? What's your evidence that those debunking your claims are 'government shills'?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 5, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> ranfunck said:
> 
> 
> > Gamolon said:
> ...



You're right, his idiocy about rubles, his idiocy about response times and his idiocy about cameras really
handed me my ass.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 5, 2016)

someone farted in here.^


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 5, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> someone farted in here.^



9/11HandJob: It's a conspiracy I tell you ... a conspiracy!

Interlocutor: What's the conspiracy?

9/11HandJob: Everything!

Interlocutor: Can you be more specific?

9/11HandJob: Someone farted in here!


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 5, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> someone farted in here.^



How can you tell, with your head up your ass?


----------



## candycorn (Jan 5, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Those pieces don't seem to come even close to weighing two tons to me....do you have access to a scale? It may have been a drone plane, might have been the original planes that were allegedly hijacked and then taken over by a a computer because planes have had the ability to be "taken over" since the 1960's...who's to say? I am just saying that I am open to any possibility....which plane hit building 7?



So how'd the plane engines, the fuselage, the body remains from the passengers get into lower Manhattan?  

Phone calls from the planes prove it was a hijacking.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 5, 2016)

candycorn said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Those pieces don't seem to come even close to weighing two tons to me....do you have access to a scale? It may have been a drone plane, might have been the original planes that were allegedly hijacked and then taken over by a a computer because planes have had the ability to be "taken over" since the 1960's...who's to say? I am just saying that I am open to any possibility....which plane hit building 7?
> ...


 Yeah, they couldn't  possibly fake those at all (rolls eyes). I am not saying that there was no planes or if they were drones or not. What I am 100 percent sure of is that it was an inside job and that explosives were planted in WTC 1,2 and 7. Case closed as far as I am concerned.


----------



## candycorn (Jan 5, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



Nice retreat from the hologram nonsense.  Let's make you retreat a little further.  Shall we?

Now, you're sure that explosives were planted in 3 buildings.  

So the plotters added 2 hijackings onto their "to do" list and crashed the planes into buildings for no apparent reason?  

Why would you need planes if you have bombs planted there already?

Then there is the Pentagon attack;   Are you stating that it was separate?


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 6, 2016)

Not retreating from anything. I am simply not a naysayer when some believe that there wasn't an actual plane that hit the towers. Why would they use planes when explosives were planted? Are you kidding me? I can't believe you would even ask that question...think, son...think.

"Then there is the Pentagon attack; Are you stating that it was separate?"

Separate from what????  You are turning into a time waster.


----------



## candycorn (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Not retreating from anything. I am simply not a naysayer when some believe that there wasn't an actual plane that hit the towers. Why would they use planes when explosives were planted? Are you kidding me? I can't believe you would even ask that question...think, son...think.
> 
> "Then there is the Pentagon attack; Are you stating that it was separate?"
> 
> Separate from what????  You are turning into a time waster.




No answer for why they would hijack planes for no reason....as expected.

You didn't last as long as the other conspiratards.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 6, 2016)

candycorn said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Not retreating from anything. I am simply not a naysayer when some believe that there wasn't an actual plane that hit the towers. Why would they use planes when explosives were planted? Are you kidding me? I can't believe you would even ask that question...think, son...think.
> ...


  I know more than you and I can tell that it irks you....good.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 6, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > It is a real blessing to come across someone like you and some others here that know the things that I do and have taken the time to read and research. It is people like you that keeps me going even when I am being dogpiled on in other forums. I have a close knit group of truthers that are a part of my inner circle and we lean on each other and pass on information to each other. I look forward to learning what I can from you and I hope I am able to return the favor and that you might be able to take some of the things I have garnered and be of use to you as well. We are all in this together and it seems that the powers that be are doubling down on their efforts to bring about their totalitarian, feudalistic two class system of elites and serfs. I want you to know  that there are "white hats" working on our behalf and there are inner- agency wars going on that the media never speaks of and what will help them is people waking up...that is the thankless job that you and a few others have here.
> ...



I meant to get back to this post sooner but got sidetracked. I will address it in more detail when I get home this morning. Great post.....


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 6, 2016)

Skylar said:


> I just don't get Truthers. Their solution for an absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy they can't back factually is to invent an even more absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy to back it.
> 
> And its turtles, all the way down.


Oh, there are facts, you just refuse to listen to them.

Folks tell you who was working for PTECH, you don't listen.

Folks tell you that NIST classified the DATA that they used to model the collapse of WTC, you ignore them.

Folks tell you this, that, and the other, you pretend it doesn't exist.

I have posted fact after fact in this thread.  The FACTS are, none of those Muslims had the qualifications to fly those planes into those towers.  The planes were either remotes, or they didn't exist.  Those are the facts. 

You refuse to believe that.  THE FACTS ARE, THE PLANES THAT ARE SAID TO HAVE HIT THOSE BUILDINGS COULDN'T HAVE.  MATH AND SCIENCE DOESN'T LIE.

9/11: Speeds Reported For World Trade Center Attack Aircraft Analyzed
_For Immediate Release _
_9/11: World Trade Center Attack Speed Analysis_
Pilots For 9/11 Truth have calculated the Equivalent Airspeed for EA990 *peak* speed of .99 Mach at 22,000 feet as the equivalent dynamic effects of 425 knots at or near sea level. This airspeed is 65 knots over max operating for a 767, 85 knots *less* than the alleged United 175, and 5 knots *less* than the alleged American 11. Although it may be probable for the alleged American 11 to achieve such speed as 430 knots is only 5 knots over that of EA990 peak speed, It is impossible for the alleged United 175 to achieve the speeds reported by the NTSB using EA990 as a benchmark.

Pilots For 9/11 Truth have further studied if a 767 could continue *controlled flight* at such reported speeds. According to the NTSB, EA990 wreckage was found in two distinct debris fields, indicating in-flight structural failure which has been determined to have occurred a few seconds after recording peak speed. Based on EA990, it is impossible for the alleged United 175 to have continued controlled flight at more than 85 knots over the speed which failed the structure of EA990.

Full detailed analysis, including analysis of a recent simulator experiment performed, and interviews with United and American Airlines 757/767 Pilots can be viewed in the new presentation, "9/11: World Trade Center Attack" available only at Pilots For 9/11 Truth. Although other factors come into play within the transonic ranges, Dynamic pressure is dynamic pressure. Math doesn't lie. Boeing needs to release wind tunnel data for the Boeing 767. Despite the fact that the data can be fabricated, such a release of data may alert more pilots and engineers to the extremely excessive speeds reported near sea level for the Boeing 767 in which they can decide for themselves. Update: Since our article on WTC Aircraft Speed Analysis was written, more evidence has been gathered to reflect the research provided by Pilots For 9/11 Truth and in the film "9/11: World Trade Center Attack". A more thorough understanding and explanation of why V speeds are established based on wind tunnel tests performed by the manufacturer is also available virtually making the need to gather documents from Boeing based on wind tunnel testing, moot. We already have their results of such tests in the form of the V Speeds they have established through wind tunnel testing required by definition as outlined in the Illustrated Guide To Aerodynamics and all other related text. For more information and to review the evidence gathered, click here.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 6, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> > I just don't get Truthers. Their solution for an absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy they can't back factually is to invent an even more absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy to back it.
> ...


Maybe you should read the information at this link:
Debunked: Pilots for 9/11 truth WTC speeds



> The NTSB report however does not state that the aircraft broke up at 22,000 feet. As the aircraft was descending both engines were shut down by the Relief First Officer, the person suspected of deliberately crashing the 767 (disputed by the Egyptians but not germane to the discussion), and the aircraft was still intact as it went through 17000 feet when both the FDR and CVR lost power due to the engine shutdown. Radar returns then have the aircraft climbing to 25,000 feet where it began another descent, apparently intact till it crashed into the ocean.
> 
> At no point in the NTSB report is it suggested that the aircraft broke up in flight.
> 
> ...


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> What I am 100 percent sure of is that it was an inside job and that explosives were planted in WTC 1,2 and 7. Case closed as far as I am concerned.


What proof do you have of explosive that makes you 100% sure?


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 6, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> > I just don't get Truthers. Their solution for an absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy they can't back factually is to invent an even more absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy to back it.
> ...


More information at this link:
EasyJet 737 incident debunks Pilot for 9/11 truth V-G diagram video



> The claim:
> 
> Pilots for 9/11 truth have published several videos claiming that airliners travelling slightly above the Design Dive Speed; known as Vd, are subject to structural failure. This assertion, amongst others, forms the basis of this video;
> 
> ...


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 6, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > Skylar said:
> ...



Could you please find a direct link to the NTSB report?  I don't really want to


Gamolon said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > Skylar said:
> ...


We are sorry, the page you are looking for can't be found.


The URL may be misspelled or the page you're looking for is no longer available. We recognize that our website used to present a challenge, and that many people have memorized the path through the maze or bookmarked the information they need. Unfortunately, due to the new organization of our website content, those trails of breadcrumbs and bookmarks will no longer work. We apologize but we think you'll have a much easier time finding the information you need using the search options below. Please Contact us if you need any further information.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 6, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Could you please find a direct link to the NTSB report?  I don't really want to


Seriously?

My search turned this up:
http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/AAB0201.pdf


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 6, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > Skylar said:
> ...


Interesting.

I suppose, in the hands of a super experienced pilot you might have a case. . . .


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 6, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > What I am 100 percent sure of is that it was an inside job and that explosives were planted in WTC 1,2 and 7. Case closed as far as I am concerned.
> ...


  Military grade thermite was detected in dust particles for one thing. Then there is the testimony of Dr Steve Pieczenik, who spent thirty years in the CIA that offered to testify in a Senate hearing that a General told him exactly how 9/11 was pulled off. He was also the first to reveal that Osama bin Laden died on December 13 2001 of Marfan's syndrome and had been visited in a military hospital in Dubai and debriefed by the CIA and other intel spooks in July of 2001. He only confirmed what I had already researched but he is definitely a credible source.


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 6, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > Could you please find a direct link to the NTSB report?  I don't really want to
> ...


Thank you for this.  This doc. will take some time to analyze.  


I don't doubt that "pilots for truth" have an agenda.  Though, to be sure, a site titled "metabunk" probably has an agenda as well, wouldn't you say?

I have a terrible migraine today and have to lay down, and then a load of things to get done today.  I am confident that this report is above board though.   


I will analyze it as soon as I get the chance.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 6, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> I suppose, in the hands of a super experienced pilot you might have a case. . . .


We aren't discussing experience yet. Just your link to the data regarding why you agree it was supposedly physically impossible for a plane to perform under those conditions.


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 6, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> > I just don't get Truthers. Their solution for an absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy they can't back factually is to invent an even more absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy to back it.
> ...



As usual with these 9/11conspiracy theories, it's garbage in/garbage out. Read the comments section where a "truther" tries to scientifically debunk the debunk and ends up with serious egg-on-face.

Debunked: Pilots for 9/11 truth WTC speeds

"Two facts emerge from this.

1. This 767 airframe underwent a EAS of 462 knots whilst pulling *2.5G* and with *both elevators* at opposite ends of their travel and survived. To say it could survive that and not survive the 1G flight at the speeds of the WTC attacks is not credible.

2. Pilots for 911/truth either did not read the report; couldn't interpret it correctly; or deliberately concocted the breakup/M.99 at 22,000 feet story, to further their own agenda. Take your pick."


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 6, 2016)

MisterBeale said:


> I don't doubt that "pilots for truth" have an agenda.  Though, to be sure, a site titled "metabunk" probably has an agenda as well, wouldn't you say?


What does this have to do with the data contained in the links? If it's wrong, then show how. If data is made up because of an agenda, then the mistakes should be able to be pointed out right?



MisterBeale said:


> I have a terrible migraine today and have to lay down, and then a load of things to get done today.  I am confident that this report is above board though.
> 
> 
> I will analyze it as soon as I get the chance.


No problems. I hope you fell better. Migraines are not fun.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Military grade thermite was detected in dust particles for one thing.


Military grade was detected? Are you speaking of the Harrit paper or something else?



Dale Smith said:


> Then there is the testimony of Dr Steve Pieczenik, who spent thirty years in the CIA that offered to testify in a Senate hearing that a General told him exactly how 9/11 was pulled off.


This isn't proof at all. An certainly not proof of explosives.



Dale Smith said:


> He was also the first to reveal that Osama bin Laden died on December 13 2001 of Marfan's syndrome and had been visited in a military hospital in Dubai and debriefed by the CIA and other intel spooks in July of 2001. He only confirmed what I had already researched but he is definitely a credible source.


Ok, but where does that prove explosives?

If your first reference is of Harrit and finding military grade explosives, we can start there. If not, what is the reference for your proof of military grade explosives?


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 6, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Military grade thermite was detected in dust particles for one thing.
> ...



*Pieczenik named people in the US Government as having been involved in the 9-11 atrocity and stated:* “It was called a stand down, a false flag operation in order to mobilize the American public under false pretenses….it was told to me even by the general on the staff of Wolfowitz – I will go in front of a federal committee and swear on perjury who the name was of the individual so that we can break it open... he was furious and knew it had happened”...I taught stand down and false flag operations at the national war college, I’ve taught it with all my operatives so I knew exactly what was done to the American public... I am happy to testify in court so that we can unravel this thing legally, not with the stupid 9/11 Commission that was absurd."


http://www1.ae911truth.org/faqs/646...been-used-to-demolish-the-wtc-skyscrapers.htm


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> *Pieczenik named people in the US Government as having been involved in the 9-11 atrocity and stated:* “It was called a stand down, a false flag operation in order to mobilize the American public under false pretenses….it was told to me even by the general on the staff of Wolfowitz – I will go in front of a federal committee and swear on perjury who the name was of the individual so that we can break it open... he was furious and knew it had happened”...I taught stand down and false flag operations at the national war college, I’ve taught it with all my operatives so I knew exactly what was done to the American public... I am happy to testify in court so that we can unravel this thing legally, not with the stupid 9/11 Commission that was absurd."
> 
> 
> http://www1.ae911truth.org/faqs/646...been-used-to-demolish-the-wtc-skyscrapers.htm


Two things.

1. The quote you provided above says nothing about explosives.
2. The link does not work.

I found this working link:
FAQ #8: What Is Nanothermite? Could It Have Been Used To Demolish The WTC Skyscrapers?

You left off the "l" for "html" at the end.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 6, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > *Pieczenik named people in the US Government as having been involved in the 9-11 atrocity and stated:* “It was called a stand down, a false flag operation in order to mobilize the American public under false pretenses….it was told to me even by the general on the staff of Wolfowitz – I will go in front of a federal committee and swear on perjury who the name was of the individual so that we can break it open... he was furious and knew it had happened”...I taught stand down and false flag operations at the national war college, I’ve taught it with all my operatives so I knew exactly what was done to the American public... I am happy to testify in court so that we can unravel this thing legally, not with the stupid 9/11 Commission that was absurd."
> ...


In order to understand what _nanothermite_ is, we first must understand what ordinary commercial _thermite_ is. Thermite is a mixture of a metal and the oxide of another metal, usually aluminum (Al) and iron oxide (Fe2O3), in a granular or powder form. When ignited, the energetic Al-Fe thermite reaction produces molten iron and aluminum oxide, with the molten iron reaching temperatures well in excess of 4000° F. These temperatures are certainly high enough to allow cuts through structural steel, which generally has a melting point of around 2750° F.

There is also a variant of thermite known as _thermate_, which is a combination of thermite and sulfur, and is more efficient at cutting through steel. This form of thermite is believed to have been used in the demolition of World Trade Center Building 7. Although conventional thermite has the capability to cut through structural steel, it is technically an incendiary and not an explosive.

_Nano_thermite (also known as _super_thermite), simply put, is an ultra-fine-grained (UFG) variant of thermite that can be formulated to be explosive by adding gas-releasing substances. A general rule in chemistry is that the smaller the particles of the reactants, the faster the reaction. Nanothermite, as the name suggests, is thermite in which the particles are so small that they are measured in nanometers (one billionth of a meter). The authors of the peer-reviewed Active Thermitic Materials paper, which documents the discovery of these materials in the WTC dust, explain:

Available papers [by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and others] describe this material as an intimate mixture of UFG aluminum and iron oxide in nano-thermite composites to form pyrotechnics or explosives. The thermite reaction involves aluminum and a metal oxide, as in this typical reaction with iron oxide:

2Al + Fe2O3 ? Al2O3 + 2Fe (molten iron), ?_H_ = -853.5 kJ/mole.




 _According to Randy Simpson, director of the Energetic Materials Center at LLNL, “since these ‘nanostructures’ are formed with particles on the nanometer scale, the performance can be improved over materials with particles the size of grains of sand or of powdered sugar”_
The public announcements of the development of nanothermite composite materials as explosives date back several years before 9/11. As Dr. Frank Legge  points out , “ researchers were describing methods of preparing nano-sized particles, using them in superthermite, and calling such material ‘explosive’ in 1997. It would therefore not be correct to assert that by 2001, four years later, they would be unable to utilize the material in demolition.”

In additon, 911research.wtc7.net notes the following:

One of the critiques of theories that  thermite was used to destroy the World Trade Center skyscrapers asserts that thermite preparations don’t have sufficient explosive power to account for the observed features of the buildings’ destruction. This criticism seems to be uninformed by knowledge of some of the aluminothermic preparations known to exist – particularly those being researched for military applications.

Indeed, as 9/11 researcher Kevin Ryan has shown, there is substantial documentation detailing how nanothermite has been formulated to be explosive. For example, a summary report released at the 2008 AIChE conference by chemists at the University of Houston describes how nano-thermite composites can be engineered to create explosives:

Nanoenergetic thermite materials release energy much faster than conventional energetic materials and have various potential military applications, such as rocket propellants, aircraft fuel and explosives. They are likely to become the next-generation explosive materials, as they enable flexibility in energy density and power release through control of particle size distribution, stoichiometry and choice of fuel and oxidizer.

Some critics have also claimed that neither thermite nor nanothermite has ever been used to demolish steel structures. Even if this assertion were true, it would not be proof in and of itself that these materials could not be used in demolition. As Dr. Legge  notes :

It could be true, and probably is true, that the three buildings which came down on 9/11 were the first in which some variation of the thermite reaction was used in demolition. It is however not logical to say something cannot have happened merely because it had not happened before: there has to be a first time for everything. It is certainly true that thermite had been used many times in arson attacks prior to 9/11.

However, we find that thermite has in fact been used to demolish steel structures in the past. For example, _Popular Mechanics_ itself documents that thermite was used in the demolition of structures such as the  Skyride Tower in Chicago and the dome of the German Reichstag. Furthermore,  experiments conducted by civil engineer Jonathan Cole have shown that ordinary thermate can be used to effectively cut through steel columns. And as described earlier, the effectiveness of nanothermite is much higher than that of ordinary thermate.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



there you go feeding the shill again.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...


He indeed goes into meltdown mode and gets angry when he cant get you to fall for  his propaganda and BS he spews.probably because his handlers dont pay him near as much money as he wants for the constant ass beatings he gets here everyday from you and others so he gets frustrated and has his temper tantrems.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 6, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


 You know what is so confusing to me? Why is it that people get so mad when you question the official narrative? What does it hurt? Seriously, some of these deniers act like their sense of decorum has been horrifically offended. Why get all butthurt because some people don't buy all the shit this corporate entity disguised as a "gubermint" tries to feed us?


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 6, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


 I know, but this guy seems to be honestly looking for the truth or why I see things the way I do...worth a shot at least.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Gamolon said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...


Again, where in that quote does it state that explosives and/or thermite were used to make you 100% sure that's how the WTC buildings came down? I have yet to see you quote anything that contains proof.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> You know what is so confusing to me? Why is it that people get so mad when you question the official narrative? What does it hurt? Seriously, some of these deniers act like their sense of decorum has been horrifically offended. Why get all butthurt because some people don't buy all the shit this corporate entity disguised as a "gubermint" tries to feed us?


I hope I'm not coming across as being mad or butthurt. 

If there is proof for what you claim, then provide it. If it holds up to scrutiny, so be it. I have no problems with that. That is what discussion is about.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> I know, but this guy seems to be honestly looking for the truth or why I see things the way I do...worth a shot at least.


Correct on both counts.

If you happen to provide solid evidence for your claims, then that just adds food for thought from my perspective. You may know more than I do about certain things and I may know more than you about certain things. If you can present what you know in a concise and evidence-backed manner, I would welcome that.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 6, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...


Dale WHY do you think me for the post? thats not a flattering comment I am giving you there by any means? the more you feed the troll,the more you make his handlers happy that you took his bait and replied to him since he achieved his objective they sent him here to accomplish,which is waste your time.

hence my fart jokes i give the shills,thats the ONLY reply they are worthy of because their lies have been shot down so many times they have to go into personal attack mode knowing they are defeated.

as you see,i only  respond to them with my fart jokes since i have a lot of fun in doing so with them. some of them they dont think nothing of it but some go and whine about it when i do so.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 6, 2016)

Urgent: Scientists Discover Nano-Thermite Explosives in 9/11 WTC Dust  Used in Controlled Demolitions. investigate 911 Superthermite Nano-Thermite.  Physics Journal Publishes Peer Reviewed Paper. Red Super-Thermite Chips Found -  investigate 9/11


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 6, 2016)

9/11 inside job said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...


 I am "thanking" you because I know that you are just trying to keep me from wasting my time...bear with me.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Urgent: Scientists Discover Nano-Thermite Explosives in 9/11 WTC Dust  Used in Controlled Demolitions. investigate 911 Superthermite Nano-Thermite.  Physics Journal Publishes Peer Reviewed Paper. Red Super-Thermite Chips Found -  investigate 9/11


Have you read the Harrit paper?

Have you read this paper by James Millette where he says the same red gray chips are NOT thermite or nano-thermite?
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/64959841/9119ProgressReport022912_rev1_030112webHiRes.pdf


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 6, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > I know, but this guy seems to be honestly looking for the truth or why I see things the way I do...worth a shot at least.
> ...



 I don't know if I could ever produce enough evidence to convince you that what we think is reality is in essence, a complete and total joke and a lie. I was a denier for 11 years....wouldn't even look at anything that didn't jive with my world view. The start of my path towards learning the things that I know and the 12,000 plus hours of research and reading was a fluke. My son dared me to watch "Loose Change" and he said that if I could watch it and not have any questions afterwards that he would never bother me with it again. I took him up on the challenge and wanted to prove my kid that his old man was no fool. I got about half way through it and I realized that all the witnesses that said they heard explosions in the basement, the man that was pulled out of the elevator that was on fire had never been reported. I got that sinking feeling in my stomach...so I started looking into things and reading stuff that challenged my preconcieved notions. When I had my "Come to Jesus" moment and I realized that I had been played for a chump? I could barely eat and what I did eat didn't taste good...it was like my taste buds took a vacation. I could only sleep for a couple of hours at a time. My boss at the time got really worried about me because I went from being this really out-going guy to being silent and reclusive. He took me out to lunch one day and asked me what was going on and I told him thinking he was going to call me a "kook"....instead, he said "It's a helluva a thing to have everything you believed in ripped apart......don''t worry about work and if you feel like coming in late or feel like coming in early because you can't sleep, it's all good...I got your back"....and he did. This all lasted for a month and then I got pissed and decided to start reading everything I could get my hands on about how the world and this country/corporation really works so I started soaking up information like a sponge. Up until then, I was worried that my short term memory was fading but when I stopped watching TV, it returned and I have been able to retain information that 4 years ago I would have never have thought possible. All I do is read, listen to lectures and watch documentaries on youtube even at work and I jot down notes so I can reserch the information. I have learned a lot of stuff and I have learned how to use Google to do my vetting of information....separate the wheat from the chafe as it were. I have a burden on my heart for all people because I now know what has been done to them. I pray a lot when I am overwhelmed and God gives me peace. There have been times when I have come across information that has been particularly disturbing and I will feel like an angel has wrapped their arms around me. This is my calling...to try and wake people up as to what is really happening. I have no political agenda...I am totally out of the left versus right paradigm. In a couple of weeks I will be giving my first hour long presentation to a group of people. It's scary and I will be nervous but it's what I am suppose to do...don't know if this resonates at all with you...just being real.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...





Dale Smith said:


> Gamolon said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...


I appreciate your outpouring, I really do.

And it does resonate with me. Look, I'm not denying that governments do bad things and try and cover them up. All I'm saying is that I have been researching 9/11 just as you are. More from the structural/demolition side of it. In all my researching, I have read both sides. Nothing has come close to making me believe it was explosives or thermite. 

I'm just here to discuss and debate. If you present information and proof that shows some of my beliefs are wrong, so be it. I can live with that. The problem I have here is with people like 9/11 inside job. All he/she contributes to the discussion is talk of farts, crap, and everyone is a paid shill. Ridiculous. Comments like those aren't worth anything and don't advance the discussion. Don't get me wrong. I too am guilty of making stupid comments like those of 9/11 inside job, but I have made a concerted effort to NOT do that anymore. It serves no purpose.

You seem like a genuine fellow. Let's exchange information. If neither of us moves on our beliefs, so what? We both may learn something new in the process.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



*explosives were planted in WTC 1,2 and 7.
*
You know a massive fire tends to screw up explosives, wiring, detonators, right?
And why didn't they find any evidence of explosives, wiring or detonators?


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> I got about half way through it and I realized that all the witnesses that said they heard explosions in the basement, the man that was pulled out of the elevator that was on fire had never been reported.


Are you talking about the man that William Rodriguez helped?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Gamolon said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...


*
Military grade thermite was detected in dust particles for one thing.
*
Hold on. First you claimed explosives. Now you're claiming thermite?
You know they're different things, right?


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 6, 2016)

I appreciate that a lot and I will listen to what you have to say also. When I was a skeptic, I used the pancake theory to explain WTC 1 and 2 collapsing into it's own footprint but what I did not know and purposely avoided was WTC 7 that was a football field away from WTC 1 and 2. To me, it looks like a totally controlled demolition and it collapses in free fall manner. The Pentagon is another perplexing issue. The hole doesn't seem big enough to fit a plane through and there were 80 some odd cameras that were confiscated by the F.B.I and the only footage that has ever been made available to the public is 4 frames and you can't tell what it was that hit the Pentagon...the most secured airspace in the world. What does throw a wrench in my belief is the plane that went down in Pennsylvania...how was it not able to make it's destination if this was suppose to happen? I have learned from my research that WTC 1 and 2 were a losing proposition from the "git go"...2/3rds occupancy and in 1988 it was given a waiver to find away to get rid of the asbestos that was used for insulation and that would have cost a billion dollars for a project that wasn't making money anyway. They even discussed bringing the buildings down but was told that it would have been too big of a health hazard which is obvious by the fact that so many first responders have taken ill and died. What better way to rid yourself of a money pit and collect the insurance than a "terrorist attack"? Just some food for thought. Then there was the S.E.C investigation that was going on concerning inside trading on Wall Street by Cantor Fitzgerald that could have indicted some very important movers and shakers that just so happened to be having a meeting on the 101st floor of WTC 1. All records and hard drives were destroyed that day. I also discovered that with this attack that the Fed Bank shut down the S.E.C and all trades were able to go through with no scrutiny and authenticity of ownership. There was a group led by the Bush family that had bought up 10 year securities in September of 1991 when the Ruble collapsed that were about to expire to the tune of 240 billion dollars that would have raised many questions about where that money to buy them came from. On September 11, 1990, George H Bush gave his speech about a new world order and fulfilling the promise of the U.N's founders. On top of that, it has been revealed that the Patriot Act was written prior to 9/11 and the apparatus to put this total spy grid in place was just waiting for a catastrophic event that would sway the masses to believe that by collecting our on-line data, that we could be safe. PNAC also wrote in 1999 said in one of it's papers suggesting that the transformation of American armed forces through "new technologies and operational concepts" was likely to be a long one, "absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor" and they got that with 9/11/01/. I have a lot of questions about the events of that day that eat away at me and I can't shake them.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> I appreciate that a lot and I will listen to what you have to say also. When I was a skeptic, I used the pancake theory to explain WTC 1 and 2 collapsing into it's own footprint but what I did not know and purposely avoided was WTC 7 that was a football field away from WTC 1 and 2. To me, it looks like a totally controlled demolition and it collapses in free fall manner. The Pentagon is another perplexing issue. The hole doesn't seem big enough to fit a plane through and there were 80 some odd cameras that were confiscated by the F.B.I and the only footage that has ever been made available to the public is 4 frames and you can't tell what it was that hit the Pentagon...the most secured airspace in the world. What does throw a wrench in my belief is the plane that went down in Pennsylvania...how was it not able to make it's destination if this was suppose to happen? I have learned from my research that WTC 1 and 2 were a losing proposition from the "git go"...2/3rds occupancy and in 1988 it was given a waiver to find away to get rid of the asbestos that was used for insulation and that would have cost a billion dollars for a project that wasn't making money anyway. They even discussed bringing the buildings down but was told that it would have been too big of a health hazard which is obvious by the fact that so many first responders have taken ill and died. What better way to rid yourself of a money pit and collect the insurance than a "terrorist attack"? Just some food for thought. Then there was the S.E.C investigation that was going on concerning inside trading on Wall Street by Cantor Fitzgerald that could have indicted some very important movers and shakers that just so happened to be having a meeting on the 101st floor of WTC 1. All records and hard drives were destroyed that day. I also discovered that with this attack that the Fed Bank shut down the S.E.C and all trades were able to go through with no scrutiny and authenticity of ownership. There was a group led by the Bush family that had bought up 10 year securities in September of 1991 when the Ruble collapsed that were about to expire to the tune of 240 billion dollars that would have raised many questions about where that money to buy them came from. On September 11, 1990, George H Bush gave his speech about a new world order and fulfilling the promise of the U.N's founders. On top of that, it has been revealed that the Patriot Act was written prior to 9/11 and the apparatus to put this total spy grid in place was just waiting for a catastrophic event that would sway the masses to believe that by collecting our on-line data, that we could be safe. PNAC also wrote in 1999 said in one of it's papers suggesting that the transformation of American armed forces through "new technologies and operational concepts" was likely to be a long one, "absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor" and they got that with 9/11/01/. I have a lot of questions about the events of that day that eat away at me and I can't shake them.



*and there were 80 some odd cameras that were confiscated by the F.B.I and the only footage that has ever been made available to the public is 4 frames and you can't tell what it was that hit the Pentagon..*

How fast was the plane going before impact? At that speed, how many frames should there be?

*Then there was the S.E.C investigation that was going on concerning inside trading on Wall Street by Cantor Fitzgerald that could have indicted some very important movers and shakers that just so happened to be having a meeting on the 101st floor of WTC 1. All records and hard drives were destroyed that day.
*
The S.E.C. and the exchanges where these imaginary insider trades occurred would have records of these trades. It's not like the original and only copies would have been sent to Cantor's office just in time for a massive terror attack.

*I also discovered that with this attack that the Fed Bank shut down the S.E.C and all trades were able to go through with no scrutiny and authenticity of ownership.*

Silly gibberish. There is no Fed Bank. If there was, it would not control the S.E.C.
The S.E.C. does not scrutinize and authenticate ownership of stock.

*There was a group led by the Bush family that had bought up 10 year securities in September of 1991 when the Ruble collapsed that were about to expire to the tune of 240 billion dollars that would have raised many questions about where that money to buy them came from.*

These imaginary 10 year securities would not magically disappear because the WTC collapsed.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Gamolon said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



No it wasn't. Sulfur and its derivatives were detected in the dust. Which the truthers insist could only be thermite. Despite sulfur being all through the sheet rock on every floor.

Worse, the the thermite theory is beyond stupid. As thermite doesn't explode. It burns. Even nanothermite only burns as fast as say, black powder. Having 1/10 the reaction velocity of common TNT.

Thermite *burns*. And its insanely obvious when it burns. It creates light so bright* that it can damage your eyes to look directly at it.* *They use nano-thermite to make fireworks.* The WTC 1 and 2 collapsed from top to bottom, from the point of impact with the planes, one floor at a time, all the way to the ground. With each floor collapsing individually.

Which means that EVERY floor would have had to have thermite on it. With the outer panels that hold up half the load of each floor being on the OUTSIDE of the building. With 249 outer panels per floor. Meaning that hundreds of thermite reactions would have been visible for each floor.

And yet, nothing. Not a single thermite reaction seen before, during or after the collapse. Despite the thermite theory requiring hundreds of them PER floor. And tens of thousands between both towers.

Worse, truthers insist that the 'molten metal' at the base of the building was caused by thermite reactions. Here's the problem: thermite creates it own oxegen. It can't be extinguished. Once its begins burning, it does not stop until ALL of its reaction mass has been consumed and converted. With truthers insisting there was 'molten metal' 3 MONTHS after the towers came down.

That means thousands upon thousands of individual thermite reactions burning for 3 MONTHS.

The amount of thermite necessary to sustain such thousands of such reactions for 3 months *would have been rough the size of the WTC itself. *Which begs the question....how did people miss the 110 story pile of thermite? How did people even enter these buildings if they were packed wall to wall with thermite?

And if you want *nano* thermite, its even worse. As it burns orders of magnitude faster. Meaning that the pile of nano thermite necessary to sustain thousands of reactions for 3 months......*would have been roughly the size of the WTC plaza itself. *

Making 'thermite' and 'nano-thermite' among the stupidest, most brain dead and ludicrously complicated pieces of conspiracy batshit this side of the 'no planes' theory. Which Truthers also push.



> Then there is the testimony of Dr Steve Pieczenik, who spent thirty years in the CIA that offered to testify in a Senate hearing that a General told him exactly how 9/11 was pulled off.



Save of course that Steve Peczack didn't work 30 years in the CIA. Nor can Steve name the 'top general'. Nor can he back any part of his story with jack shit. Nor does it make the slightest sense. As why would *anyone* in the military be talking to this guy, let alone a 'top general'? Steve's a psychologist who worked in the State department* 30 years ago.*

There's not a single part of your batshit narrative that pans out or makes the slightest sense.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 6, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > I appreciate that a lot and I will listen to what you have to say also. When I was a skeptic, I used the pancake theory to explain WTC 1 and 2 collapsing into it's own footprint but what I did not know and purposely avoided was WTC 7 that was a football field away from WTC 1 and 2. To me, it looks like a totally controlled demolition and it collapses in free fall manner. The Pentagon is another perplexing issue. The hole doesn't seem big enough to fit a plane through and there were 80 some odd cameras that were confiscated by the F.B.I and the only footage that has ever been made available to the public is 4 frames and you can't tell what it was that hit the Pentagon...the most secured airspace in the world. What does throw a wrench in my belief is the plane that went down in Pennsylvania...how was it not able to make it's destination if this was suppose to happen? I have learned from my research that WTC 1 and 2 were a losing proposition from the "git go"...2/3rds occupancy and in 1988 it was given a waiver to find away to get rid of the asbestos that was used for insulation and that would have cost a billion dollars for a project that wasn't making money anyway. They even discussed bringing the buildings down but was told that it would have been too big of a health hazard which is obvious by the fact that so many first responders have taken ill and died. What better way to rid yourself of a money pit and collect the insurance than a "terrorist attack"? Just some food for thought. Then there was the S.E.C investigation that was going on concerning inside trading on Wall Street by Cantor Fitzgerald that could have indicted some very important movers and shakers that just so happened to be having a meeting on the 101st floor of WTC 1. All records and hard drives were destroyed that day. I also discovered that with this attack that the Fed Bank shut down the S.E.C and all trades were able to go through with no scrutiny and authenticity of ownership. There was a group led by the Bush family that had bought up 10 year securities in September of 1991 when the Ruble collapsed that were about to expire to the tune of 240 billion dollars that would have raised many questions about where that money to buy them came from. On September 11, 1990, George H Bush gave his speech about a new world order and fulfilling the promise of the U.N's founders. On top of that, it has been revealed that the Patriot Act was written prior to 9/11 and the apparatus to put this total spy grid in place was just waiting for a catastrophic event that would sway the masses to believe that by collecting our on-line data, that we could be safe. PNAC also wrote in 1999 said in one of it's papers suggesting that the transformation of American armed forces through "new technologies and operational concepts" was likely to be a long one, "absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor" and they got that with 9/11/01/. I have a lot of questions about the events of that day that eat away at me and I can't shake them.
> ...





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...



Not before, not during, not after. This despite Port Authority bomb squad, complete with bomb sniffing dogs inspecting the WTC plaza a week before 911. Nor was there a single girder cut in a manner consistent with explosive demolition.

Despite the truther conspiracy requiring tens of thousands of such cuts. 

Remember, the WTC 1 and 2 came down exactly opposite of controlled demolition. They collapsed top to bottom, with each floor from the impact site to the ground being destroyed individually. Meaning that each floor would have had to have been demolished *individually*. There are 249 outer panels per floor and 47 core columns. With 77 floors to the ground in one tower and 93 in the other

*.....that's about 50,000 individual explosive charges and 50,000 cuts consistent with explosive demolition per the bomb theory.*

Yet there were none.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 6, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > I appreciate that a lot and I will listen to what you have to say also. When I was a skeptic, I used the pancake theory to explain WTC 1 and 2 collapsing into it's own footprint but what I did not know and purposely avoided was WTC 7 that was a football field away from WTC 1 and 2. To me, it looks like a totally controlled demolition and it collapses in free fall manner. The Pentagon is another perplexing issue. The hole doesn't seem big enough to fit a plane through and there were 80 some odd cameras that were confiscated by the F.B.I and the only footage that has ever been made available to the public is 4 frames and you can't tell what it was that hit the Pentagon...the most secured airspace in the world. What does throw a wrench in my belief is the plane that went down in Pennsylvania...how was it not able to make it's destination if this was suppose to happen? I have learned from my research that WTC 1 and 2 were a losing proposition from the "git go"...2/3rds occupancy and in 1988 it was given a waiver to find away to get rid of the asbestos that was used for insulation and that would have cost a billion dollars for a project that wasn't making money anyway. They even discussed bringing the buildings down but was told that it would have been too big of a health hazard which is obvious by the fact that so many first responders have taken ill and died. What better way to rid yourself of a money pit and collect the insurance than a "terrorist attack"? Just some food for thought. Then there was the S.E.C investigation that was going on concerning inside trading on Wall Street by Cantor Fitzgerald that could have indicted some very important movers and shakers that just so happened to be having a meeting on the 101st floor of WTC 1. All records and hard drives were destroyed that day. I also discovered that with this attack that the Fed Bank shut down the S.E.C and all trades were able to go through with no scrutiny and authenticity of ownership. There was a group led by the Bush family that had bought up 10 year securities in September of 1991 when the Ruble collapsed that were about to expire to the tune of 240 billion dollars that would have raised many questions about where that money to buy them came from. On September 11, 1990, George H Bush gave his speech about a new world order and fulfilling the promise of the U.N's founders. On top of that, it has been revealed that the Patriot Act was written prior to 9/11 and the apparatus to put this total spy grid in place was just waiting for a catastrophic event that would sway the masses to believe that by collecting our on-line data, that we could be safe. PNAC also wrote in 1999 said in one of it's papers suggesting that the transformation of American armed forces through "new technologies and operational concepts" was likely to be a long one, "absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor" and they got that with 9/11/01/. I have a lot of questions about the events of that day that eat away at me and I can't shake them.
> ...


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 6, 2016)

Skylar said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



Building 7??????


----------



## Skylar (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...




So you've capitulated the stupidity and overwhelming evidence contradicting the bomb theory for WTC 1 and 2? 

If so, please say it.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 6, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Gamolon said:
> ...



Its the conspiracy howdown! Spin your claims a'round and round. Pick them up and put them down!


*Truther: *Its the bombs in the WTC 1 and 2 brought them down with explosive demolition!

_Um.....there was no evidence of bombs, nor did any of the bomb squads nor bomb sniffing dogs find any evidence of explosives._

*Truther: *that's because it was thermite!

_Um.....thermite doesn't explode. _

*Truther:* Its the bombs in the WTC 1 and 2 brought them down with explosive demolition!


Sigh....brainwash. Rinse. Repeat.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 6, 2016)

Skylar said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Skylar said:
> ...


 I know more than you...can't say it any plainer than that. I am willing to give you the benefit of all the time I have spent researching and studying for free. A mind is like a parachute.....only works if it is open.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 6, 2016)

Skylar said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...


 WTC building 7..........


----------



## Skylar (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



Show me, don't tell me. 

You made claims about WTC 1, 2 and 7. I demonstrated with better logic, better reasoning and better evidence that your account is meaningless horsehit when applied to WTC 1 and 2. 

And for the second post in a row, you refuse to discuss WTC 1 or 2. 

Which speaks volumes.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...




Make that 3 posts in a row where you starkly refuse to discuss WTC 1 or 2. 

If even you are going to treat your 'explosive demolition' narrative like useless flotsom to be tossed on the rhetorical midden heap, surely you can understand why we treat them the same way?

Use that 'open mind' and try and explain the huge, theory killing holes in your WTC 1 and 2 'explosive demolition' theory.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...


*
Ummm, there were 83 camera tapes that were confiscated and any of them could have shown the incredible aeronautical maneuvers that allowed this pilot that couldn't even fly a single engine Cessna plane to fly mere feet off of the ground and hit the Pentagon into the section of the building where people were trying to track the 2.3 trillion dollars that Donald Rumsfeld said on 9/10/01 could not be accounted for......*

Yeah, we heard you. 83 cameras. How fast was the plane going?

2.3 trillion, from when to when?
Why would they stop tracking after 9/11?

*You must mean the accounting offices of Cantor Fitzgerald...and yes, there were no other records of the accounting and insider trading fraud that was being investigated.
*
Why would all the trading records of all the exchanges be in the Cantor offices?
If the NYSE investigated Dale Smith Trading, they won't send the original and only NYSE records to Dale Smith Trading to ask you about them. LOL!
*
Seriously? You do not know about the Federal Reserve bank
*
So Fed Bank is the Federal Reserve? LOL!
Where does the Fed get the power to tell the S.E.C. to start or stop doing something?
A link to the law involved would be nice.
*
They didn't "disappear" but they were able to be cashed out with no scrutiny or authenticity of the S.E.C
*
Maturing securities still mature even after 9/11.
More gibberish.
*
I am a "giver" and I am here to help......
*
Good to know. When are you going to give me the speed of the Pentagon plane?


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> The Pentagon is another perplexing issue. The hole doesn't seem big enough to fit a plane through



Take a look at this link
The Pentagon Attack: What the Physical Evidence Shows

Scroll down to the section that starts with:
*



			Pentagon Facade Damage Fits a 757
		
Click to expand...

*Let me know your thoughts.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...


*
I know more than you...
*
Was it explosives or thermite? Or both?


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> I appreciate that a lot and I will listen to what you have to say also. When I was a skeptic, I used the pancake theory to explain WTC 1 and 2 collapsing into it's own footprint but what I did not know and purposely avoided was WTC 7 that was a football field away from WTC 1 and 2. To me, it looks like a totally controlled demolition and it collapses in free fall manner. The Pentagon is another perplexing issue. The hole doesn't seem big enough to fit a plane through and there were 80 some odd cameras that were confiscated by the F.B.I and the only footage that has ever been made available to the public is 4 frames and you can't tell what it was that hit the Pentagon...the most secured airspace in the world. What does throw a wrench in my belief is the plane that went down in Pennsylvania...how was it not able to make it's destination if this was suppose to happen? I have learned from my research that WTC 1 and 2 were a losing proposition from the "git go"...2/3rds occupancy and in 1988 it was given a waiver to find away to get rid of the asbestos that was used for insulation and that would have cost a billion dollars for a project that wasn't making money anyway. They even discussed bringing the buildings down but was told that it would have been too big of a health hazard which is obvious by the fact that so many first responders have taken ill and died. What better way to rid yourself of a money pit and collect the insurance than a "terrorist attack"? Just some food for thought. Then there was the S.E.C investigation that was going on concerning inside trading on Wall Street by Cantor Fitzgerald that could have indicted some very important movers and shakers that just so happened to be having a meeting on the 101st floor of WTC 1. All records and hard drives were destroyed that day. I also discovered that with this attack that the Fed Bank shut down the S.E.C and all trades were able to go through with no scrutiny and authenticity of ownership. There was a group led by the Bush family that had bought up 10 year securities in September of 1991 when the Ruble collapsed that were about to expire to the tune of 240 billion dollars that would have raised many questions about where that money to buy them came from. On September 11, 1990, George H Bush gave his speech about a new world order and fulfilling the promise of the U.N's founders. On top of that, it has been revealed that the Patriot Act was written prior to 9/11 and the apparatus to put this total spy grid in place was just waiting for a catastrophic event that would sway the masses to believe that by collecting our on-line data, that we could be safe. PNAC also wrote in 1999 said in one of it's papers suggesting that the transformation of American armed forces through "new technologies and operational concepts" was likely to be a long one, "absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor" and they got that with 9/11/01/. I have a lot of questions about the events of that day that eat away at me and I can't shake them.


It would be helpful if you could post links to the information you are citing or referring to. I know you posted many reasons above, but it's the only way we can all be on the same page. 

Can we start with WTC1 and WTC2? Do you think those were controlled demolitions? If so, why? List the reasons and link to information regarding it. Maybe pick one aspect and start there.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 6, 2016)

Dude, you are a time waster...your mind is already made up. I have posted more than enough evidence over the 35 plus pages of this thread that if you don't see the big picture? I can't help you. You are going to have to have your own epiphany like I did. I can't be hard on you because I was just like you for 11 years and busted on every "truther" so I guess this is payback...karma is a bitch.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 6, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...




Oh, its far simpler than that. The 2.3 trillion in transactions schtick wasn't that 2.3 trillion in transactions could not be accounted for,* but that the systems tracking these transactions didn't communicate with each other.* Making the accounting difficult. It was a call for upgrading the computer equipment at the Pentagon so the different computer systems on different floors could talk to each other:



> In fiscal 1999, a defense audit found that about $2.3 trillion of balances, transactions and adjustments were inadequately documented. These "unsupported" transactions do not mean the department ultimately cannot account for them, she advised, but that tracking down needed documents would take a long time. *Auditors, she said, might have to go to different computer systems, to different locations or access different databases to get information.*
> 
> http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Apr2002/n04032002_200204033.html



Which is made ludicrously obvious when you look at Rumsefeld's WHOLE quote, not just the one sentence Truthers acknowledge exist.



			
				Donald Rumsfeld said:
			
		

> The technology revolution has transformed organizations across the private sector, but not ours, not fully, not yet. We are, as they say, tangled in our anchor chain. Our financial systems are decades old. *According to some estimates, we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions. We cannot share information from floor to floor in this building because it's stored on dozens of technological systems that are inaccessible or incompatible*.
> 
> http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/2001/s20010910-secdef.html



Which the Truthers know, of course. But really hope you don't. As usual, their conspiracy depends on the ignorance of their audience.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Dude, you are a time waster...your mind is already made up. I have posted more than enough evidence over the 35 plus pages of this thread that if you don't see the big picture? I can't help you. You are going to have to have your own epiphany like I did. I can't be hard on you because I was just like you for 11 years and busted on every "truther" so I guess this is payback...karma is a bitch.



Says the man who said, and I quote 'Nothing can convince me'. You talk about an open mind, but you've already admitted that there is nothing that can dissuade you from your beliefs.

_Nothing can convince you._

Even when you have to abandon your own claims, refusing to even *discuss* your own claims regarding WTC 1 and 2......*you still can't admit you were wrong.* Even when we caught you in outright lies about your sources, so profound and so obvious that you refuse to discuss them......*you still can't admit you were wrong.*

Why? Because 'nothing can convince you'.

A rational person could be convinced with evidence. You can't.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 6, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > The Pentagon is another perplexing issue. The hole doesn't seem big enough to fit a plane through
> ...


 Thanks for the link...I will definitely check it out in more detail and get back to you with my thoughts. I work third shift so I need to wrap my internet activity up for the day. I have enjoyed the chat...good on ya.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> When I was a skeptic, I used the pancake theory to explain WTC 1 and 2 collapsing into it's own footprint


Here, I see two things that are wrong with what you say.

1. It is no longer a pancake theory in the sense that each level was destroyed in sequence all the way down. The upper section dropped onto the lower section. The upper section was sheared apart and became a mass of descending debris. That mass eventually became too much for the first, upper floor of the lower section and sheared that floor from it's columns (perimeter and core columns). That floor became part of the descending mass. Then that mass hit the next floor of the lower section. That mass continued down shearing floors form their columns. The perimeter columns, with no floors holding them in place, peeled away from the building proper. Here is a photo that proves this. This photo shows the partial remnants of the core with the floors stripped from it before it to collapsed.




2. The towers did NOT fall into their own footprints. The perimeter columns peeled away and fell OUTSIDE of the 208' x 208' footprint. Here is a drawing showing the damage radius. Not a characteristic of controlled demolition at all.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Gamolon said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...


Yuck, third shift.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 6, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> WTC 1 collapsed in 9.2 seconds start to finish.


This is NOT true.

Look up the TOTAL collapse times. From collapse initiation to when the last piece of either tower hit the ground (approximately).


----------



## jillian (Jan 6, 2016)

TheCrusader said:


> The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.
> 
> So 18/110 means approximately 16% of the total building's weight was affected.
> 
> ...



how many times do those conspiracy theories have to be debunked?


----------



## Skylar (Jan 6, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > WTC 1 collapsed in 9.2 seconds start to finish.
> ...



The 9.2 second claim is complete horseshit. The first debris *ejected from WTC 1 in  the initial collapse* hit the ground in 9.2 seconds. As it should have.

The tower itself took significantly longer.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 6, 2016)

TheCrusader said:


> The floors don't carry the weight, asshole, the core carries the weight, and the 84th floor core is designed to carry not just the load of the core above it but the load of the floors above it.
> 
> That core is called a core because it is supported by a foundation "tap root".  So the 84th floor core is supported entirely and stably by the entire structure and its weight below it.
> 
> Now you're telling me, that (in this case) 26 floors, drop 1 floor's distance onto the 84th floor, causing the core to do what exactly?


The core was not like a solid tree truck like you claim. The the floors were not like tree branches like you claim. 

The core was composed of 47 vertical columns and the horizontal beams that connected them all together. The key here is CONNECTED together. Now the floors were CONNECTED to the outer perimeter of this core and the inner perimeter of the perimeter columns. 

The core was not some solid entity like you claim when comparing it to a tree trunk. 

Answer this.

If I removed all the HORIZONTAL components by overstressing/shearing their CONNECTIONS by an immense VERTICAL load, what would remain? All the VERTICAL columns? What would keep them upright? As you said above, the core was supported by the ENTIRE structure.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 6, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> TheCrusader said:
> 
> 
> > The floors don't carry the weight, asshole, the core carries the weight, and the 84th floor core is designed to carry not just the load of the core above it but the load of the floors above it.
> ...



Comparing the WTC to a tree trunk is fucking retarded. The WTC was mostly empty air. While a tree trunk is almost entirely solid.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 6, 2016)

We should probably just make a list of the horseshit that has been offered in this thread alone. As its a wasteland of 'fire and forget' conspiracies that they allege.....and then flee from when the truth comes out. 

Remember the 30 year CIA agent who was told by a 'top general' how 911 was done?

He never worked at the CIA. And hasn't been a government employee since the early 80s. He's just an Alex Jones regular.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 6, 2016)

Skylar said:


> We should probably just make a list of the horseshit that has been offered in this thread alone. As its a wasteland of 'fire and forget' conspiracies that they allege.....and then flee from when the truth comes out.
> 
> Remember the 30 year CIA agent who was told by a 'top general' how 911 was done?
> 
> He never worked at the CIA. And hasn't been a government employee since the early 80s. He's just an Alex Jones regular.



My favorite is still the $27.5 trillion from trading non-convertible rubles.
If the government would withhold that kind of money, secretly wiring buildings with magical explosives is nothing.


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 6, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> > We should probably just make a list of the horseshit that has been offered in this thread alone. As its a wasteland of 'fire and forget' conspiracies that they allege.....and then flee from when the truth comes out.
> ...



Yanno, I started to make a list of the happy horseshit that these Bozos have posted as "well known facts," using direct quotes but the forum was a bit unstable and about 30 minutes of effort was lost.

The question is what motivates otherwise normal people to get so wedded to these CTs that they willfully, even eargerly post lie after lie in defense of them and then quit with a lame "I just know more than you" or "I've done 12,000 hours of research."

Perhaps they just aren't otherwise normal people.

I must admit I am weary of refuting the same old 9/11 CTBS, rehashed by the next generation of "enlightened" Truther but I still enjoyed watching the two of you patiently, methodically, rationally and factually reduce the theories to dust and the theorists to virtual tears.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 6, 2016)

jillian said:


> TheCrusader said:
> 
> 
> > The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.
> ...



how many times do we have to watch YOU the coward, run off with tail between your legs and throw your childish one liner insults when we debunk  this one,the looniest 9/11 conspiracy theory of them all?


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 6, 2016)

three farts in a row from the government shills before my last post.


----------



## candycorn (Jan 6, 2016)

jillian said:


> TheCrusader said:
> 
> 
> > The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.
> ...




It's no longer a place to discuss 9/11 since the peeps are obvious and known (19 men from the ME), the targets are known (WTC and the Pentagon), and who was behind it is known(OBL).  It exists so lonely little boys can get attention.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 6, 2016)

still ANOTHER fart from the biggest USMB troll of them all.^


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 6, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > I don't doubt that "pilots for truth" have an agenda.  Though, to be sure, a site titled "metabunk" probably has an agenda as well, wouldn't you say?
> ...



Well, I finished looking all 160 pages over, and there is definitely some fishy shit going on.  That was a shocker.

But then, I don't trust that Architects and Engineers for Truth group either.  That Pilots for Truth group seems to be a disinfo group now as well.  Guess I should have known better.  It's almost like they wanted someone to find out.

What I can't figure out it this, why wouldn't metabunk tell the truth either?  Neither of those sites tell why that plane really went down, but they both leave bread crumbs for the interested person to find their way to pieces of propaganda, which, as it turns out, is real.  Indeed, how sinister the system _really_ works.     Ah, again, the agenda of the elites.  MOOSLIMS ARE BAAHHHD.  lol

After reading that report, I find it strange that Pilots for Truth would purposely use a NTSB accident brief that quite clearly is an Airliner that crashed b/c of Jihad, not b/c of the mechanical breakdown or engineering tolerances of the plane.

Quite a shock that one, seriously.  What a person can learn about what goes on in a cockpit, holy shit.

I tell you what, I'd have to seriously reconsider flying on a plane flown by a Muslim co-pilot after reading that shit.  That is some scary stuff right there.


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 6, 2016)

Now. . . . if there were only NTSB accident reports for the planes on 911. . . . 

This thread probably wouldn't exist. . . .


----------



## MisterBeale (Jan 6, 2016)

Or even if NIST would declassify the data it used to model how the WTC structures fell rather than tell us that by releasing it, it would be a "threat to public safety?!?!"

What a load of crap.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 7, 2016)

SAYIT said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Skylar said:
> ...



So am I. There was a period in about 2006 or so when Truther's tried to capture the public consciousness with batshit claims they couldn't back up....but that no one took the time to refute. And then skeptics starting taking the truther claims apart. And the 'Truther movement' started feeding on itself.

At this point is down there with the moon landing hoaxers and flat earthers. And rarely worth my time to debate. I got pulled in when some of the birther threads got sent here.....and I got nostalgic. 

And given that none of the claims have change and its all the same debunked horseshit.....nostalgia gets old quick.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Jan 7, 2016)

someone farted in here.^


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 8, 2016)

TheCrusader said:


> Now ask yourselves, if you cut the support between 84% of something, and 16% of something, how does that change the relationship that 84% of something can still HOLD THE FUCKING WEIGHT of 16% of something?


First, the load generated by the descending 16% isn't just 16% anymore. If set a bowling ball on a scale and got 16 lbs, would 16lbs still register on the scale at the time of impact if I dropped that same bowling ball on that same scale from 12 feet?

Second, it's not 84% of the remaining structure. The vast majority of the descending upper section impacted the floors, which were designed to hold up their own weight and what was placed upon them, NOT the floors and structure above.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 9, 2016)

Skylar said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


 You haven't debunked anything concerning 9/11/01....just denial. You suffer from cognitive dissonance because having to come to the conclusion that your beloved politicians are nothing but bought off or compromised shills is too painful for you to comprehend. I have no political agenda and I do not subscribe to any ideology that doesn't deal with truthfulness and transparency. You want to believe that we were told the truth about 9/11, the first WTC bombing, the OKC Murrah building bombing, etc, etc....knock yourself out. It took a  lot of soul searching research and "de-programming" courtesy of our corporate media to discern fact from fiction but once the scales fell from my eyes? Everything made sense I was able to see the agenda and where this is all going. You don't "impress" me at all...you just have a big mouth....kinda like a bass in a lake here in Texas.


----------



## candycorn (Jan 10, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> > SAYIT said:
> ...



Every 9/11 conspiracy theory has been debunked.  Thoroughly. Your most recent gambit into Thermite, Thermate, or Nano-thermite is just another example.  The items do not explode yet we had explosions when the planes (you once referred to as holograms) hit the buildings...with their engines (the ones you said were not found).  

Your refusal to acknowledge it does not change the fact.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 10, 2016)

candycorn said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Skylar said:
> ...



It has been disputed but never debunked. You cling to the official story like a little kid that still wants to believe in Santa Claus. I still contend that military grade nano-thermite was used to bring down all three buildings in downtown Manhattan because traces of that was found in the dust that was collected. You are going to have to reach the point where you have your own epiphany because I can only lead you to water but it is up to you to drink. I spent 11 solid years busting on anyone that questioned the official story until I had my own "Come to Jesus:" moment and it was the single hardest thing that I ever had to deal with. When it hit me that I had been lied to, I could barely eat or sleep for a month. It was like the whole world had been pulled out from under me and I think that is what you are afraid of coming to that realization. I do not envy you when you finally realize that this was a totally staged event. Shake off the programming and open your eyes.


----------



## candycorn (Jan 10, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> It has been disputed but never debunked. You cling to the official story like a little kid that still wants to believe in Santa Claus. I still contend that military grade nano-thermite was used to bring down all three buildings in downtown Manhattan because traces of that was found in the dust that was collected.


Okay, where did it come from?  How did it get placed in the buildings with nobody noticing?  If "traces" were found, why didn't they totally destroy the buildings and incinerate everything in site--file cabinets, bodies, telephones, etc...?  Why aren't all 25-40,000 people who were at ground zero dead from inhaling the stuff?  

Answer those will you?  Of course you won't.  You can't.  You know it. I know it.  I just demonstrated it.   



Dale Smith said:


> You are going to have to reach the point where you have your own epiphany because I can only lead you to water but it is up to you to drink. I spent 11 solid years busting on anyone that questioned the official story until I had my own "Come to Jesus:" moment and it was the single hardest thing that I ever had to deal with.


Okay, let me ask you this...what caused your "come to Jesus" moment...what caused you to be the ignoramus you are today?



Dale Smith said:


> When it hit me that I had been lied to, I could barely eat or sleep for a month.


Oh brother...


Dale Smith said:


> It was like the whole world had been pulled out from under me and I think that is what you are afraid of coming to that realization. I do not envy you when you finally realize that this was a totally staged event. Shake off the programming and open your eyes.



More shrill anecdotes and zero evidence, testimony, or argument.  

So typical, so played...and oh so tiresome.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 10, 2016)

candycorn said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > It has been disputed but never debunked. You cling to the official story like a little kid that still wants to believe in Santa Claus. I still contend that military grade nano-thermite was used to bring down all three buildings in downtown Manhattan because traces of that was found in the dust that was collected.
> ...



I have been patie


candycorn said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > It has been disputed but never debunked. You cling to the official story like a little kid that still wants to believe in Santa Claus. I still contend that military grade nano-thermite was used to bring down all three buildings in downtown Manhattan because traces of that was found in the dust that was collected.
> ...



I have tried to be patient with you, I have explained to you how implausible it is that three buildings could fall down straight inside
their own footprint. I have made a more than sufficient case as to why hasn't the FBI released the 83 videos snatched from the Pentagon and surrounding businesses that would and could prove what actually hit the Pentagon that day....but you want to be a prick. Let me tell ya something, little man...your tone would be much different and you wouldn't be so quick to insult me if you were not hiding behind a keyboard and standing in front of me......you keyboard warriors crack me up. I am smarter than you and I know more than you. If you ever wish to confront me or want to take issue with what I say here? You need only to make your way to the DFW area. I will GLADLY meet you and we will see if you are as brazen and bold as you are when your fat ass is sitting behind a computer screen...can ya dig it?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 10, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



*I still contend that military grade nano-thermite was used to bring down all three buildings in downtown Manhattan*

That's not an explosive. Why did you change your mind?


----------



## candycorn (Jan 10, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



Of course you didn't answer...as I predicted.  And you know more about this than me?  Sonny, you don't know shit.  See, if you did know something...ANYTHING...you'd be able to answer....you'd be confident to answer.  Your silence tells us all we need to know about your intellect and your insecurity...both of which are profound and pronounced. 

WTC 1, 2, and 7 did not fall in their own footprints.  Otherwise there wouldn't have been 10-20 other damaged buildings around Ground Zero idiot.  

As for the 83 videos, as memory serves, they were viewed and returned.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 12, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> I have explained to you how implausible it is that three buildings could fall down straight inside their own footprint.


This is simply not true. Below is the damage radius.






Dale Smith said:


> I have made a more than sufficient case as to why hasn't the FBI released the 83 videos snatched from the Pentagon and surrounding businesses that would and could prove what actually hit the Pentagon that day


How many of the videos were pointed in the direction of the plane and impact point?


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 12, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > I have explained to you how implausible it is that three buildings could fall down straight inside their own footprint.
> ...



But ... but ... but ... Smith has conducted exhaustive "research"  (12,000hrs) and even had "an epiphany." He even claims to be smarter and more knowledgeable than you.

So how could Smith possibly be wrong unless:
1) His sources were wrong or willfully lied
2) He's not as smart or knowledgeable as he believes
3) He has some nefarious agenda and is willfully lying
4) All of the above


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 12, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> You haven't debunked anything concerning 9/11/01....just denial.


Dale,

I went through this thread and made a list of the claims that you believe in that are just plain wrong. Would you please address them?



Dale Smith said:


> WTC 1 collapsed in 9.2 seconds start to finish.


Incorrect. There are videos of the collapses. Please show me one that shows the collapse from start to finish that was 9.2 seconds or quicker.



Dale Smith said:


> The inner core of  WTC 1 and 2 was rebar incased in concrete. At the very least the inner core should have been left standing.


Incorrect. This is just plain false.



Dale Smith said:


> and there was no resistance as every floor collapses essentially at the same time and in free fall manner.


Incorrect. Every floor did NOT collapse at the same time.



Dale Smith said:


> As far as I know, they didn't recover the twin engines made of titanium steel that weigh over two tons from either WTC building 1 or 2...do you have evidence to the contrary?


Incorrect. They recovered parts of the engine.



Dale Smith said:


> Military grade thermite was detected in dust particles for one thing.


Incorrect. We can discuss if you'd like.



Dale Smith said:


> The Pentagon is another perplexing issue. The hole doesn't seem big enough to fit a plane through


Incorrect. I have posted information to the contrary.



Dale Smith said:


> Thanks for the link...I will definitely check it out in more detail and get back to you with my thoughts. I work third shift so I need to wrap my internet activity up for the day. I have enjoyed the chat...good on ya.


Thoughts?


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 12, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > I have explained to you how implausible it is that three buildings could fall down straight inside their own footprint.
> ...


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 12, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Thanks for the link...I will definitely check it out in more detail and get back to you with my thoughts. I work third shift so I need to wrap my internet activity up for the day. I have enjoyed the chat...good on ya.





Dale Smith said:


> Gamolon said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...


Sorry, I don't see any response.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 12, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > I have explained to you how implausible it is that three buildings could fall down straight inside their own footprint.
> ...



Exactly. Why would a security camera at a gas station be pointed at the sky? It would be pointed at the gas station. 

Yet this too just becomes more of the conspiracy. Following the axiom of batshit.....anything that doesn't ape the conspiracy becomes part of it.


----------



## Skylar (Jan 12, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > You haven't debunked anything concerning 9/11/01....just denial.
> ...



Nope. The truther conspiracy is 'fire and forget'. They make claims, the claims are demonstrable bullshit....they move on to other claims.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 13, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > I have explained to you how implausible it is that three buildings could fall down straight inside their own footprint.
> ...



Oddly enough, WTC 3, 4, 5 and 6 did not collapse but the WTC 7 that was on the outer ring of this diagram did...right inside it's own footprint.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 13, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > You haven't debunked anything concerning 9/11/01....just denial.
> ...



"There are videos of the collapses. Please show me one that shows the collapse from start to finish that was 9.2 seconds or quicker."

According to NIST ( National Institute of Standards and Technology) that was funded by Congress to investigate the collapses, WTC 1 fell in 11 seconds and WTC 2 fell in 9 seconds.

As far as your contention that the WTC core wasn't rebar encased in concrete. Allow me to remind you that it was a 60 to 40 ration concrete to steel.

I will take your word that they found engine pieces from the wreckage of WTC 1 and 2 but they found nothing at the Pentagon...they claim that the engines melted. I do not buy it.

As far as the the thermite question goes....Explosive Residues: Energetic Materials and the World Trade Center Destruction

The hole for the Pentagon.....


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 13, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Gamolon said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...


This information is incorrect also. A part of WTC7 fell outside it's footprint and damaged Fiterman Hall accross the street.

Are you also now admitting that the "fell inside it's own footprint" is false regarding WTC1 and WTC2 after being shown proof?

Why do you keep moving the goalposts when shown evidence contrary to what you claim instead of admitting it was wrong and moving forward? What does WTC, 3, 4, 5 and 6 have to do with you claiming that WTc1, WTC2, and WTC7 fell inside their own footprint?


----------



## Skull Pilot (Jan 13, 2016)

TheCrusader said:


> The planes impacted about the 92nd floor, which means that only 18 floors were above the impact.
> 
> So 18/110 means approximately 16% of the total building's weight was affected.
> 
> ...



The planes didn't destroy the WTC the resulting fires did by weakening the structure


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 13, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Gamolon said:
> ...



No, not at all I still contend that the buildings fell down in basically their own footprint. I do not believe that the weight of 20 stories could cause the other 90 to collapse with no resistance. I have also seen the footage of WTC 7 going straight down in it's own footprint...I mean, the videos are there for everyone to see. I was a denier for 11 years and refused to look at anything that didn't fall in lockstep with my belief. If you really think that you are going to make me believe that this was just a massive series of unfortunate coincidences and miss-steps by NORAD, the CIA, the NSA, CIA and the Pentagon and were outsmarted by 17 alleged terrorists armed with nothing but box cutter blades taking directions from a guy on a laptop in a cave in Afghanistan? We might as well agree to end this conversation. I followed the money and I found out who had the most to gain, what the repercussions would be..,..like how the Patriot Act was written in advance of this event. That enough should set off your bullshit detector....but whatever. I enjoyed the discussion.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 13, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> According to NIST ( National Institute of Standards and Technology) that was funded by Congress to investigate the collapses, WTC 1 fell in 11 seconds and WTC 2 fell in 9 seconds.


Incorrect. Here is the FAQ page from NIST regarding the collapse times.
FAQs - NIST WTC Towers Investigation

To summarize, the times you quote are when the first exterior panels hit the ground after collapse initiation, NOT for the total collapse. There are videos that support this.



> *11. How could the WTC towers collapse in only 11 seconds (WTC 1) and 9 seconds (WTC 2)—speeds that approximate that of a ball dropped from similar height in a vacuum (with no air resistance)?
> *
> NIST estimated the elapsed times for the first exterior panels to strike the ground after the collapse initiated in each of the towers to be approximately 11 seconds for WTC 1 and approximately 9 seconds for WTC 2. These elapsed times were based on: (1) precise timing of the initiation of collapse from video evidence, and (2) ground motion (seismic) signals recorded at Palisades, N.Y., that also were precisely time-calibrated for wave transmission times from lower Manhattan (see NIST NCSTAR 1-5A).
> 
> ...





Dale Smith said:


> As far as your contention that the WTC core wasn't rebar encased in concrete. Allow me to remind you that it was a 60 to 40 ration concrete to steel.


Where did you get that information from? The following site lists 200,000 tons of steel for the WTC COMPLEX (not just WTC1 and WTC2). The site also lists 425,000 cubic yards of concrete for the WTC COMPLEX (not just WTC1 and WTC2). Do you know how much concrete was used in the bath tub that surrounds the buildings? How about the foundations? There was no rebar encased concrete in the core. This was garbage started by Christopher Brown years ago and has since been debunked. If you would like to go over the physical impossibility of there being a concrete core surrounding the 47 core columns, I will be happy to show you.
The World Trade Center — Facts and Figures



Dale Smith said:


> I will take your word that they found engine pieces from the wreckage of WTC 1 and 2 but they found nothing at the Pentagon...they claim that the engines melted. I do not buy it.


What about the "small hole" in the Pentagon claim? I have provided you with evidence that shows this to be incorrect.



Dale Smith said:


> As far as the the thermite question goes....Explosive Residues: Energetic Materials and the World Trade Center Destruction


How about the paper by James Millette that refutes the findings of Thermite in the dust? Harrit's paper is a joke. Harrit's paper declares that further studies are needed, but that never happened. People have asked him for samples of his dust, but he refuses. He says it's not paint but only compared it to ONE types of primer paint. There were two types used in the towers. So many things wrong with this paper. Care to discuss?



Dale Smith said:


> The hole for the Pentagon.....


See my statement above.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 13, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Gamolon said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



*they found nothing at the Pentagon...they claim that the engines melted. I do not buy it.
*
Who claimed the engines melted?
*



*
Part of an engine is visible above.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 13, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> I have also seen the footage of WTC 7 going straight down in it's own footprint...I mean, the videos are there for everyone to see.


If it went down in it's own footprint, how did Feiterman Hall get damaged by it?



Dale Smith said:


> I was a denier for 11 years and refused to look at anything that didn't fall in lockstep with my belief. If you really think that you are going to make me believe that this was just a massive series of unfortunate coincidences and miss-steps by NORAD, the CIA, the NSA, CIA and the Pentagon and were outsmarted by 17 alleged terrorists armed with nothing but box cutter blades taking directions from a guy on a laptop in a cave in Afghanistan? We might as well agree to end this conversation. I followed the money and I found out who had the most to gain, what the repercussions would be..,..like how the Patriot Act was written in advance of this event. That enough should set off your bullshit detector....but whatever. I enjoyed the discussion.


You have been shown that many of your claims are incorrect. What you believe after being shown this is up to you. You have yet to acknowledge that the claims you have been making are WRONG.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 13, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > According to NIST ( National Institute of Standards and Technology) that was funded by Congress to investigate the collapses, WTC 1 fell in 11 seconds and WTC 2 fell in 9 seconds.
> ...




As I said, this is one issue that we are going to just have to agree to disagree on. For every point you make, I can counter it with someone else and vice versa. Former military men have also questioned it and they definitely bring up some very salient points and from a different point of view.'

http://patriotsquestion911.com/Article Military Officers Challenge 911.pdf


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 13, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Gamolon said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



*NORAD, the CIA, the NSA, CIA and the Pentagon and were outsmarted by 17 alleged terrorists armed with nothing but box cutter blades
*
Nope. The 19 terrorists overpowered a handful of crew.
NORAD, the CIA, NSA and Pentagon had nothing to do with it.

*I followed the money and I found out who had the most to gain,
*
Sure you did.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 13, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> As I said, this is one issue that we are going to just have to agree to disagree on. For every point you make, I can counter it with someone else and vice versa.


Yet you haven't have you? 

1. You claim the towers fell in 9.2 seconds. False. I have proven that. Or are you going to present evidence that supports it?

2. You claim the towers fell in their own footprint. False. I have provided evidence that shows a 600 foot damage radius. The footprint of the towers was 208 feet.

That's just a couple.

If you want to counter, then do it please. you have yet to counter anything I've presented.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 13, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > I have also seen the footage of WTC 7 going straight down in it's own footprint...I mean, the videos are there for everyone to see.
> ...


 I disagree...you have just posted an alternative viewpoint. You claimed that WTC 1 fell in 15 seconds when the NIST, which was paid for by "da gubermint" to investigate the structure failure says that it came down in 11 seconds and they also admit that WTC 2 came down in 9 seconds......believe what you want to believe and whatever makes you sleep better at night.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 13, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Gamolon said:
> ...



Your understanding of the events that day are rather sad and what the duties were of each agency that got publiclly buttfucked in front of the entire world...but it is typical....Go, "Merica!


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 13, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> I disagree...you have just posted an alternative viewpoint. You claimed that WTC 1 fell in 15 seconds when the NIST, which was paid for by "da gubermint" to investigate the structure failure says that it came down in 11 seconds and they also admit that WTC 2 came down in 9 seconds......believe what you want to believe and whatever makes you sleep better at night.


No, I posted FACTS from the NIST website and how the "9 second" originated. It's not a "veiwpoint". Every single video you watch of the collapses from initiation until it's completed (or can no longer be seen due to dust), shows the collapse taking WAY longer than 9.2 second.

What "facts" have YOU presented that show 9.2 seconds to be the case? I have yet to see one.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 13, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > As I said, this is one issue that we are going to just have to agree to disagree on. For every point you make, I can counter it with someone else and vice versa.
> ...


 One fell in 11 seconds...one fell in 9 seconds and that is the official story of the NIST that backs the official story....so you lose that one.

When you have a building that is 110 stories tall and there is no history of there ever being a controlled demolition of a building that tall? I would say that the ones that planted the explosives did a great job given the circumstances.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 13, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> I disagree...you have just posted an alternative viewpoint. You claimed that WTC 1 fell in 15 seconds when the NIST, which was paid for by "da gubermint" to investigate the structure failure says that it came down in 11 seconds and they also admit that WTC 2 came down in 9 seconds......


Just to show you that you are wrong, here is the link once again, to NIST's FAQ with the quoted section.
FAQs - NIST WTC Towers Investigation



> NIST estimated the elapsed times for the first exterior panels to strike the ground after the collapse initiated in each of the towers to be approximately 11 seconds for WTC 1 and approximately 9 seconds for WTC 2. These elapsed times were based on: (1) precise timing of the initiation of collapse from video evidence, and (2) ground motion (seismic) signals recorded at Palisades, N.Y., that also were precisely time-calibrated for wave transmission times from lower Manhattan (see NIST NCSTAR 1-5A).



So now you have that, coupled with videos of the collapse show the collapse times of the towers to be much longer than 9.2 seconds.

Are you going to refute that with your own evidence? This isn't a matter of opinion. Facts are facts. You want to leave it as "we're just going to disagree" because you can't refute what I have presented which makes your claims wrong.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 13, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> One fell in 11 seconds...one fell in 9 seconds and that is the official story of the NIST that backs the official story....so you lose that one.


Read the link above regarding the NIST FAQ page. Videos also support what is said there. You are wrong on every level. Or are you disagreeing with video evidence and NIST's FAQ page just to be difficult? Care to explain why you don't want to believe video evidence and NIST's own FAQ page?



Dale Smith said:


> When you have a building that is 110 stories tall and there is no history of there ever being a controlled demolition of a building that tall? I would say that the ones that planted the explosives did a great job given the circumstances.


What does this even mean?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 13, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



It's true, NORAD, the CIA, NSA and Pentagon weren't on any of the planes that day.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 13, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > I disagree...you have just posted an alternative viewpoint. You claimed that WTC 1 fell in 15 seconds when the NIST, which was paid for by "da gubermint" to investigate the structure failure says that it came down in 11 seconds and they also admit that WTC 2 came down in 9 seconds......
> ...


 No, I haven't seen a single video that shows 15 seconds plus of either tower taking that long to collapse ...but even if it took 20 seconds to fall from 110 stories to the ground would I buy the official story. NIST says 11 seconds for one building and 9 for the other but be that as it may, I not believe the bullshit we were told even though there was a time when I did.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 13, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Gamolon said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



*I would say that the ones that planted the explosives
*
I thought you said it was thermite?


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 13, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> No, I haven't seen a single video that shows 15 seconds plus of either tower taking that long to collapse ...but even if it took 20 seconds to fall from 110 stories to the ground would I buy the official story. NIST says 11 seconds for one building and 9 for the other but be that as it may, I not believe the bullshit we were told even though there was a time when I did.


Bottom line is your belief that the buildings collapsed in about 9.2 seconds is completely unfounded and proven to be wrong. 

You are correct in saying that this discussion should end as there is nothing more anyone can show you when you blatantly choose to ignore FACTS that prove what you claim as being wrong.

Have a good day.

If you choose to provide evidence against what I have shown you, feel free and we can pick it up once again.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 13, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



NORAD sent military jet fighters 15 minutes after Payne Stewart's private jet lost contact


Gamolon said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > No, I haven't seen a single video that shows 15 seconds plus of either tower taking that long to collapse ...but even if it took 20 seconds to fall from 110 stories to the ground would I buy the official story. NIST says 11 seconds for one building and 9 for the other but be that as it may, I not believe the bullshit we were told even though there was a time when I did.
> ...



NIST even said that the buildings came down in 11 and 9 seconds...and like I said...even if it took 20 seconds for them to collapse, it still defies the laws of physics because 90 floors that were unaffected by the plane crash should provide plenty of resistance. The official story is not plausible in my honest opinion...but you think it does I respect that as well as your opinion....good on ya.


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 13, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> NIST even said that the buildings came down in 11 and 9


And I have repeatedly shown you that this is wrong, yet you refuse to take your fingers out of your ears and stop saying "la la la la la".

I have given you a link to NIST's FAQ page...

See what I said there? *NIST'S FAQ PAGE*?

The page from *NIST* explains where they got the 11 and 9 second timeframe from. It's NOT the total collapse timeframe, it's the timeframe it took the outside perimeter panels to hit the ground when they came loose from the structure at the collapse initiation.

You continue to claim NIST said something and I provide you links from NIST that prove otherwise.
The fact the you cannot or will not understand this fact is mind boggling.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 13, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



*NORAD sent military jet fighters 15 minutes after Payne Stewart's private jet lost contact
*
And they didn't have anything close on 9/11.
And that's not proof of explosives. Or thermite.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 13, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > NIST even said that the buildings came down in 11 and 9
> ...





Gamolon said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > NIST even said that the buildings came down in 11 and 9
> ...


And I have made it very clear that even if the NIST claimed that it was as much as twenty seconds before WTC 1 and 2 fell completely to the ground that it would not change my mind that it was a controlled demolition. They said it was 11 and 9 seconds respectively and they are trying to sell the official story...you see, they are on YOUR side. You believe the official version...I don't nor will I ever buy this load of horseshit...you, on the other hand do buy the official version and I respect that. Why can't you respect MY right to no longer buy into what I believe is a load of horseshit? Why does it offend your sense of decorum that I don't believe anything "da gubermint" tells me? How does it affect you personally? I have more than made my case as to why the official version reeks to high heaven...you have made your case as to how it doesn't. You are not going to "one up" me when it comes to this no matter how hard you try....let it go and move on because we are never going to agree.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 13, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


 Todd, you don't have the intellect to even comprehend...you really need to shut the fuck up because your comprehension abilities of what I posted about is akin to that of a mentally challenged 8 year old. I don't have the patience nor the energy to spoon feed you.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 13, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



*Todd, you don't have the intellect to even comprehend
*
I comprehend that you said explosives. And then you said thermite.

Which was it?


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 13, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> And I have made it very clear that even if the NIST claimed that it was as much as twenty seconds before WTC 1 and 2 fell completely to the ground that it would not change my mind that it was a controlled demolition. They said it was 11 and 9 seconds respectively and they are trying to sell the official story...you see, they are on YOUR side.


It doesn't make one bit of difference which "side" they are on. Facts are facts. You have been shown that your 9.2 second collapse time was garbage. If you want to continue to spew it, that's up to you.



Dale Smith said:


> You believe the official version...I don't nor will I ever buy this load of horseshit...you, on the other hand do buy the official version and I respect that. Why can't you respect MY right to no longer buy into what I believe is a load of horseshit?


Because it's a forum where people debate right? I can respect your opinion as long as the facts to associate with it are correct. So far, many of you "facts" that you base your beliefs on have been shown to be wrong. Whether your man enough to admit that or not is up to you.



Dale Smith said:


> Why does it offend your sense of decorum that I don't believe anything "da gubermint" tells me?


I'm not offended in the least. I'm just here to present facts against your incorrect claims. Like I said before, you can believe anything you want as long as it's based on factual evidence. It's your "factual" evidence I have an issue with.



Dale Smith said:


> How does it affect you personally?


It doesn't. Why are you here then? Are you here to just spew your beliefs and leave or did you come here to debate? You started out with an open mind for discussion and when you had your facts and claims that were the foundation of your beliefs countered, you took a different tone.



Dale Smith said:


> I have more than made my case as to why the official version reeks to high heaven...you have made your case as to how it doesn't. You are not going to "one up" me when it comes to this no matter how hard you try....let it go and move on because we are never going to agree.


Again, I am not asking you to agree with what I believe. I am asking you to own up to the incorrect claims made in this thread. You have yet to do that. The 9.2 second collapse time is a perfect example. Will you continue to use that wrong information in the future or will you use the correct information?


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 13, 2016)

Gamolon said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > And I have made it very clear that even if the NIST claimed that it was as much as twenty seconds before WTC 1 and 2 fell completely to the ground that it would not change my mind that it was a controlled demolition. They said it was 11 and 9 seconds respectively and they are trying to sell the official story...you see, they are on YOUR side.
> ...



NIST claims that WTC 1 collapsed in 11 seconds and WTC2 9 seconds which is under the 9.2 seconds that I claimed.......what more do you want?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 13, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Gamolon said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...



*.......what more do you want?*

A link that proves your claim?


----------



## Gamolon (Jan 13, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> NIST claims that WTC 1 collapsed in 11 seconds and WTC2 9 seconds which is under the 9.2 seconds that I claimed.......what more do you want?


Dale,

NIST is NOT claiming that. I have provided you with a NIST FAQ page which tells you where the 11 and 9 second timeframe comes from. The 11 and 9 second timeframe comes from the time it took EXTERNAL PANELS to fall from the upper section and hit the ground. This is NOT a total collapse time.

Do you understand the difference between external panel pieces being sheared from the building proper and hitting the ground and total building collapse?


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 13, 2016)

Get over it........I don't give a flying fuck about even a 10 second discrepancy....the Manhattan buildings were filled with explosives designed to bring them down....believe what you wish to believe but you will never change my mind at all..


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 13, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> Get over it........I don't give a flying fuck about even a 10 second discrepancy....the Manhattan buildings were filled with explosives designed to bring them down....believe what you wish to believe but you will never change my mind at all..



I'm glad they weren't filled with thermite, as you claimed before.


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 13, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> And I have made it very clear that even if the NIST claimed that it was as much as twenty seconds before WTC 1 and 2 fell completely to the ground that it would not change my mind that it was a controlled demolition. They said it was 11 and 9 seconds respectively and they are trying to sell the official story...you see, they are on YOUR side. You believe the official version...I don't nor will I ever buy this load of horseshit...you, on the other hand do buy the official version and I respect that. Why can't you respect MY right to no longer buy into what I believe is a load of horseshit? Why does it offend your sense of decorum that I don't believe anything "da gubermint" tells me? How does it affect you personally? I have more than made my case as to why the official version reeks to high heaven...you have made your case as to how it doesn't. You are not going to "one up" me when it comes to this no matter how hard you try....let it go and move on because we are never going to agree.



The only case you've made is to make eminently clear to any rational adult that you have formed your conclusions based on false info and when provided with real, irrefutable facts you are unwilling (or incapable) of modifying your conclusions.

What you have proven is that what is left of your long defunct 9/11 CT Movement is the clean-up crew ... the not-too-brights who bought the DVDs, T-shirts and coffee mugs and assorted BS produced by those who turned a handsome profit off your gullibility and have abandoned you and your cause because the BS they recognized the BS they produced and promoted had been totally exposed.



Dale Smith said:


> Get over it........I don't give a flying fuck about even a 10 second discrepancy....the Manhattan buildings were filled with explosives designed to bring them down....believe what you wish to believe but you will never change my mind at all..



The fact is you are unwilling (or incapable) of admiting that your 9 second claim of collapse, or that the buildings fell in their own footprints, and that no plane wreckage was found were all proven to be bogus but seemingly nothing can penetrate your thoroughly closed mind and how you have wasted "12,000 hrs researching" 9/11.

There is nothing to "get over" for those who have countered (with supporting facts) the loony 9/1 CTBS you've posted, ya pompous jackass.

You must believe you are the first (and best) CT to wander onto USMB all full of himself and his "knowledge."

There are dozens of threads here in which your arguments were made by more competent and knowledgeable posters who, like you, had there swelled heads handed to them.

You really aren't nearly as important as you seem to think but you have served as a willing punching bag for those who actually know something about 9/11 and, as such, I thank you.


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 13, 2016)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > Get over it........I don't give a flying fuck about even a 10 second discrepancy....the Manhattan buildings were filled with explosives designed to bring them down....believe what you wish to believe but you will never change my mind at all..
> ...



I often wonder how and by whom these controlled demo CTs think the buildings were rigged and how that rigging survived the high speed crash of the jets and the chaotic fires that ensued.

I guess to be a 9/11 CT one must be ready, willing and able to ignore facts and reality in order to justify their disdain for Americans and our "gubermint."

Either that or the thought of having wasted "12,000 hours" of "research" is just too much for them to bear.


----------



## Dale Smith (Jan 14, 2016)

I rest my case.....


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jan 14, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> I rest my case.....



So no actual evidence of explosives then?


----------

