Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 6 votes

WTC 911 EyeWitness~Hoboken


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
3683 replies to this topic

#2071    joc

joc

    Adminstrator of Cosmic Blues

  • Member
  • 12,685 posts
  • Joined:12 Dec 2003

Posted 03 August 2013 - 02:16 AM

Good job SkyEagle! :tu:

Posted Image
once i believed that starlight could guide me home
now i know that light is old and stars are cold

ReverbNation

#2072    turbonium

turbonium

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,325 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2005

Posted 03 August 2013 - 09:40 AM

View Postskyeagle409, on 27 July 2013 - 02:00 PM, said:

There wasn't evidence of explosives to begin with. None in the videos, none on audio, none on seismic monitors in the general area and none found in the rubble because there was none to begin with.

That's a joke, right?

First - you have to look at ALL the evidence.

That evidence will (hopefully) reveal what happened.

Finally, a conclusion is made.


You have it backwards - you make a conclusion first, then start the investigation. You don't have all the evidence, but you don't care. There is enough evidence left to uphold your pre-determined conclusion.

You don't care about the criminals who stole evidence of a crime scene.

You don't want the truth, which is sickening.


#2073    turbonium

turbonium

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,325 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2005

Posted 03 August 2013 - 09:51 AM

Repeat post

Edited by turbonium, 03 August 2013 - 09:52 AM.


#2074    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,307 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011

Posted 03 August 2013 - 02:26 PM

No, it's not a joke.  It is simply the mind in denial, in action.  Wilful ignorance, as the lawyers put it.


#2075    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,155 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 03 August 2013 - 05:13 PM

View Postturbonium, on 03 August 2013 - 09:40 AM, said:

That's a joke, right?

Nope!

Quote

First - you have to look at ALL the evidence.

Which I have, and another reason why I have stated for the record that no explosives were involved in the 911 attacks.

Quote

That evidence will (hopefully) reveal what happened.

Apparently, Osama bin Laden has already claimed responsibility for the 911 attacks, and remember, bin Laden declared war on the United States. In addition, terrorist plans to use airliners to kill thousands of people and crash airliners into buildings was revealed by the Philippine government in 1995. One of those terrorist who was revealed by the Philippine government was the same person who detonated a huge bomb beneath WTC1 in 1993, and nephew of another terrorist who later admitted to his role in the 911 attacks.

Quote

You have it backwards - you make a conclusion first, then start the investigation.

Quote

You don't have all the evidence, but you don't care. There is enough evidence left to uphold your pre-determined conclusion.

The United States and nations of the world are full of investigative reporters looking for a good story to advanced their careers and yet, they found no evidence implicating the United States either and there was no way the United States could have been involved and not get caught in a terrorist operation of that magnitude.

Quote

You don't care about the criminals who stole evidence of a crime scene.

Osama Bin Laden, Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, and Mohammed Atef have been found guilty for the 911 attacks by clear-cut evidence.

http://en.wikipedia....mber_11_attacks

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#2076    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,155 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 03 August 2013 - 05:47 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 03 August 2013 - 02:26 PM, said:

No, it's not a joke. It is simply the mind in denial, in action.

Let's look at reality in another way.  You have said that :

*   A P700 anti-ship missile struck the Pentagon. I might add that the Pentagon was not ship sailing in the ocean at the time it was attacked.

*   Explosives was responsible for knocking down light poles leading to the Pentagon despite evidence proving the light poles suffered impact damage and were knocked down. Add to the fact no evidence of explosives was found near the light poles.

*   No airliner crashed into the Pentagon despite video and FDR evidence, and the fact that aircraft wreckage, which was determined to be from a B-757, was recovered from inside and outside the Pentagon. Furthermore, American Airlines and the Boeing Aircraft Company have confirmed that American 77 crashed into the Pentagon. Human remains from the passengers and crew of American 77 were recovered at the Pentagon and have been identified.

*   After claiming that no airliner was involved in the attack on the Pentagon, you then back-stepped and said the aircraft passed north of the gas station, yet the level of damage leading up to the Pentagon proved that American 77 passed south of the gas station.

*   No aircraft wreckage at Shanksville despite the fact that recovery crews, investigators, United Airlines, and yes,  even Wally Miller, the same person you used as a reference, have confirmed the crash site as that of United 93.

*   You have said that mini-nukes were used during the 911 attacks despite the fact the WTC mini-nuke story was determined to be a hoax. In fact, even Steven Jones debunked the WTC mini-nuke story. Clean-up operations at ground zero was not indicative of a radiological hazard clean-up operation.

In addition, nukes create temperatures in the millions of degrees yet people were standing within a short distance as the WTC buildings collapsed and yet, suffered no radiation sickness nor burns associated with a nuclear detonation.

You have to place the tag-of-denial upon yourself, or perhaps, you are just here to have fun and nothing else.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#2077    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,155 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 03 August 2013 - 05:51 PM

View Postjoc, on 03 August 2013 - 02:16 AM, said:

Good job

SkyEagle! :tu:

Thanks! Babe Ruth doesn't play with a full deck.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#2078    Zaphod222

Zaphod222

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,594 posts
  • Joined:05 Sep 2011

Posted 03 August 2013 - 06:00 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 03 August 2013 - 05:51 PM, said:

Thanks! Babe Ruth doesn't play with a full deck.

I have yet to see a troother who does.

But really, where do you get the energy from to step down into that morass of pure stupidity and deal with minute detalls of their bizarre conspiray, which is fundamentally on the intellectual level of "Look! The moon looks like a Swiss Cheese! Therefore, it must be a Swiss Cheese!"

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. An none of the discombobbled snippets of selective factoids that the troothers cite comes close to that.

11 jihadist committed a jihadist terror attack on that day. Just as thousands of jihadists have been doing before and since. Why a gigantic and convoluted conspiracy would be needed to simulate in an byzantine way what could be done and was done by 11 jihadists with determination, a good plan,and some box cutters is something no troother has answered or can answer.

UFO belivers and Elvis ghost believers are entertaining. 9-11 troothers are pathetic.

Edited by Zaphod222, 03 August 2013 - 06:01 PM.

"The moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible." (Salman Rushdie)

#2079    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,155 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 03 August 2013 - 08:40 PM

View PostZaphod222, on 03 August 2013 - 06:00 PM, said:

I have yet to see a troother who does.

But really, where do you get the energy from to step down into that morass of pure stupidity and deal with minute detalls of their bizarre conspiray, which is fundamentally on the intellectual level of "Look! The moon looks like a Swiss Cheese! Therefore, it must be a Swiss Cheese!"

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. An none of the discombobbled snippets of selective factoids that the troothers cite comes close to that.

11 jihadist committed a jihadist terror attack on that day. Just as thousands of jihadists have been doing before and since. Why a gigantic and convoluted conspiracy would be needed to simulate in an byzantine way what could be done and was done by 11 jihadists with determination, a good plan,and some box cutters is something no troother has answered or can answer.

It is appalling that thousands of people have lost family members and friends in the 911 attacks and then conspiracy theorist come along and have the audacity to say the passengers and crew of the aircraft are not dead but were were part of a government 911 conspiracy and given new identities. They continue to say that Osama bin Laden and terrorist had nothing to with the 911 attacks despite the overwhelming evidence and their admissions they were responsible for the 911 attacks, but  instead, they claim that the U.S. government was responsible despite no evidence whatsoever.

Just a few good reasons why conspiracy theorist have no credibility and instead, they have the audacity to insult family members over the loss of relatives with false and misleading claims and outright lies.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#2080    Scheming B

Scheming B

    Monster Slayer

  • Member
  • 4,790 posts
  • Joined:02 Aug 2013

Posted 03 August 2013 - 11:01 PM

a dozen years later and this is still an argument people have.

This is gonna wind up being the new holocaust or moon landing isn't it?

Stop being frightened. You only see a monster because they want you to see monsters everywhere. They've conditioned you to look for monsters in every shadow, every coat hung on every door. As long as we keep seeing monsters, we'll continue to need protection and that's how other people get to control our lives.


#2081    turbonium

turbonium

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,325 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2005

Posted 04 August 2013 - 05:35 AM

View Postskyeagle409, on 03 August 2013 - 05:13 PM, said:


Which I have, and another reason why I have stated for the record that no explosives were involved in the 911 attacks.


No, you have not looked at all the evidence. Nobody has. Much of the evidence was removed - illegally - before anybody had a chance to look at it.

I've told you this many times, and you know it.

You want to go on living in denial, and fear of the truth.

You are making the criminals very happy.


#2082    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,155 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 04 August 2013 - 05:36 AM

View Postturbonium, on 04 August 2013 - 05:35 AM, said:

No, you have not looked at all the evidence. Nobody has. Much of the evidence was removed - illegally - before anybody had a chance to look at it.

The evidence you speak of never existed in the first place.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#2083    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,155 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 04 August 2013 - 06:56 AM

View Postturbonium, on 04 August 2013 - 05:35 AM, said:

I've told you this many times, and you know it.

Why your so-called evidence never existed in the first place and it is all very simple to understand why.

Quote

*   No explosions seen as the WTC buildings collapsed

*   No explosions heard as the WTC buildings collapsed

*   No explosions detected on seismic monitors as the WTC buildings collapsed

*   No explosive hardware found within the rubble of the WTC buildings after they collapsed

*   Demolition experts at the scene have stated they heard no demolition explosions as the WTC buildings collapsed



The World Trade Center's Steel Structure Was Buckling Before the Collapse

Police, Firemen and Civilians Saw Warning Signs of Collapse of the Twin Towers on September 11th 2001

Before the collapse of either tower, evidence the structures of the WTC were failing was reported by Police, Firemen and civilians. As already mentioned, flying around outside the WTC, the NYPD helicopters reported "an inward bowing of the buildings' columns in the minutes before they collapsed." Inside WTC 1, New York City Fire Department's Assistant Chief Joseph Callan realized the building was in trouble even before the first building, building two, collapsed. Interviewed Nov. 2, 2001, Assistant Chief Callan told New York City Fire Marshal Michael Starace, "Approximately 40 minutes after I arrived in the lobby, I made a decision that the building was no longer safe.

http://www.represent...xplosives2.html


Footage that kills the conspiracy theories: Unseen 9/11 footage shows WTC Building 7 consumed by fire

Its dramatic collapse several hours after the Twin Towers fell triggered a decade of conspiracy theories.

Those who believed that the September 11 attacks on America were not carried out by Al Qaeda terrorists pointed to the fall of World Trade Center Building 7 as proof of their wild claims.
But a newly released video appears to finally prove once and for all that Building 7 was brought down by the intense heat of the blazing World Trade Center - and not explosives, as conspiracy theorists claim.

The video shows up-close shots of the lower floors of World Trade Center Building 7, located just across the street from the Twin Towers, and focuses in on the exterior metal beams of Building 7 as they begin to buckle as they are overheated. The buckling led to floors falling in on one another, causing the building to collapse.

Though the entirety of the collapse is not shown in the video, it does show how there is legitimacy to the explanation provided by the government's 9/11 Commission investigation.
The video was made by a local news reporter and was released through a Freedom of Information Act request.

http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz2ayiGKzzi


WTC photos show buckling steel columns in the minutes before the collapse of the buildings.

http://toolateforreg...owbuckling.html


Busted! The 9/11 WTC Building 7 Conspiracy Theory Debunked

Footage that kills the conspiracy theories: Unseen 9/11 footage shows WTC Building 7 consumed by fire

Its dramatic collapse several hours after the Twin Towers fell triggered a decade of conspiracy theories. Those who believed that the September 11 attacks on America were not carried out by Al Qaeda terrorists pointed to the fall of World Trade Center Building 7 as proof of their wild claims.

But a newly released video appears to finally prove once and for all that Building 7 was brought down by the intense heat of the blazing World Trade Center – and not explosives, as conspiracy theorists claim.

http://www.nowtheend...om/blog/?p=7075


The World Trade Center Fire

In the case of the World Trade Center, the burning jet fuel spread the fire across several floors in a matter of seconds. This massive fire put exceptional strain on the structure at nearly all points on those floors.Additionally, the report suggests that the force of the collision removed much of the fire-resistant material sprayed on the steel, making the structure more susceptible to heat damage.
The heat expanded, twisted and buckled the steel support structure, gradually reducing the building's stability. Any number of things could have happened during this period. For example, connections between vertical columns and floor trusses probably broke, dropping sections of floor on lower levels and breaking connections between the core and the perimeter wall, possibly causing columns along the perimeter to buckle outward.

Every broken connection or buckled length of steel added to the force acting on connected steel segments, until the entire structure was weakened to the point that it couldn't hold the upper section of the building. When this happened, the top part of each building collapsed onto the lower part of the building. Essentially, this was like dropping a 20-story building on top of another building. Before the crash, this upper structure exerted a constant downward force -- its weight -- on the superstructure below.

Obviously, the lower superstructure was strong enough to support this weight. But when the columns collapsed, the upper part of the building started moving -- the downward force of gravity accelerated it. The momentum of an object -- the quantity of its motion -- is equal to its mass multiplied by its velocity. So when you increase the velocity of an object with a set mass, you increase its momentum. This increases the total force that the object can exert on another object.

To understand how this works, think of a hammer. Resting in your hand, it doesn't hurt you at all. But if you drop it on your foot, it can do some damage. Similarly, if you swing the hammer forward, you can apply enough force to drive nails into a wall.

http://science.howst...ctural/wtc7.htm


9/11: Absolute Proof NO DEMOLITION at WTC Twin Towers -- "THE TOWER IS LEANING" & Buckling

"THE TOWER IS LEANING" declares the New York City policeman, ordering everyone to leave the area. This was the word passed down to all police officers in the area.

*   This ABC News clip broadcast on 9/11, PROVES ABSOLUTELY there was NO controlled demolition of the World Trade Center Twin Towers.

*   The North Tower started to buckle several minutes before it collapsed.

*   Controlled demolition is instantaneous. Explosives would cause the building to fall imemdiately. In fact, the speed of collapse is claimed as evidence of controlled demolition.
"The Tower is LEANING" the police see, several minutes before collapse.

*   The police could see that the tower was coming down before it started moving.

*   Then a bystander says he saw the tower buckling before collapse. Explosives did NOT bring down the WTC Twin Towers.

*   The North Tower was leaning and buckling for SEVERAL MINUTES before it gave way.

This (and every other detail) is totally unlike any controlled demolition.





Which brings us back here.

Quote


WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory

Indications of the Imminent Collapse of the World Trade Center Buildings Disprove Explosives Theory

Scientists investigating the Sept. 11, 2001 collapse of the twin towers said, "the World Trade Center towers showed telltale signs they were about to collapse several minutes before each crumbled to the ground."

http://www.represent...Explosives.html


Civil & Structural Engineers on WTC Collapse

"The aircraft moved through the building as if it were a hot and fast lava flow," Sozen says. "Consequently, much of the fireproofing insulation was ripped off the structure. Even if all of the columns and girders had survived the impact - an unlikely event - the structure would fail as the result of a buckling of the columns.

The heat from an ordinary office fire would suffice to soften and weaken the unprotected steel. Evaluation of the effects of the fire on the core column structure, with the insulation removed by the impact, showed that collapse would follow whatever the number of columns cut at the time of the impact."

http://911-engineers.blogspot.com/


Did experts on the scene think WTC 7 was a controlled demolition?

"Several demolition teams had reached Ground Zero by 3:00 pm on 9/11, and these individuals witnessed the collapse of WTC 7 from within a few hundred feet of the event. We have spoken with several who possess extensive experience in explosive demolition, and all reported seeing or hearing nothing to indicate an explosive detonation precipitating the collapse.

As one eyewitness told us, "We were all standing around helpless...we knew full well it was going to collapse. Everyone there knew. You gotta remember there was a lot of confusion and we didn't know if another plane was coming...but I never heard explosions like demo charges.

http://www.implosion... of 9-8-06 .pdf

https://sites.google...wtc7resembledac


No Explosives Used in WTC Collapse, Says Demolition Industry Leader  

Brent Blanchard, a leading professional and writer in the controlled demolition industry, publishes a 12-page report that says it refutes claims that the World Trade Center was destroyed with explosives. The report is published on ImplosionWorld.com, a demolition industry website edited by Blanchard.

Blanchard is also director of field operations for Protec Documentation Services, Inc., a company specializing in monitoring construction-related demolitions. In his report, Blanchard says that Protec had portable field seismographs in “several sites in Manhattan and Brooklyn” on 9/11.

http://www.implosion... of 9-8-06 .pdf

http://www.historyco...ent_blanchard_1

So once again, a list of reasons why your so-called evidence never existed. The buckling of the WTC buildings was proof that fire, not explosives, was responsible for the collapse of the WTC buildings.

Edited by skyeagle409, 04 August 2013 - 07:02 AM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#2084    DONTEATUS

DONTEATUS

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 17,023 posts
  • Joined:15 Feb 2008

Posted 05 August 2013 - 12:09 AM

WHere do we get these guys Sky ? Its like they are actually from a different Planet ! What Happened was right on T.V. that morning ! Do they believe we invented that Disaster !

This is a Work in Progress!

#2085    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,155 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 05 August 2013 - 06:57 AM

View PostDONTEATUS, on 05 August 2013 - 12:09 AM, said:

WHere do we get these guys Sky ? Its like they are actually from a different Planet ! What Happened was right on T.V. that morning ! Do they believe we invented that Disaster !

I've noticed some folks have deliberately placed false and misleading information on the Internet in order to discredit the 911 truther movement, and unfortunately, the schemes actually worked. The hoaxed WTC mini-nuke story and hoaxed WTC7 video are two prime examples where known hoaxes were used by 911 truthers in their arguments.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX