“we already know all ‘airplane’ impact videos were forged: this much is proven”
onebornfree - you dont believe that do you? none the less a very impressive video.
I’m afraid so. Here’s a brief summary of what I 99.99% believe to date, so you may name call or whatever to your hearts content.
1]: the original 9/11 MSM broadcasts [all US stations] were all 100% prefabricated digital fakes. There were no live broadcasts from downtown Manhattan [nor from the Pentagon “crash” scene] that day.
2] Consequently all of the alleged “live” MSM footage of the collapses of WTC1, 2, and 7 are also digital , pre-fabricated computer generated fakes. There was no original live collapse footage broadcast that day for any building in the WTC complex [or at the Pentagon] .
2] All of the “plane crash into building videos” of either network or amateur origin, and for either WTC1 [Fl.11], or 2 [Fl.175], are also 100% digital fakes, not live footage shot by intrepid heroic cameramen/women .See also: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5-xcvv_fRQ
4] All of the post 9/11 higher resolution videos and stills released , of either buildings collapsing, or of planes flying into buildings [all mostly released in 2007 and 2010] , and allegedly either taken by the government or “amateurs” , are also digitally created fakes.
5] Most, or possibly all of the roughly 3,000 alleged victims never died, because they never existed in the first place. Most, if not all are computer generated persons manufactured via face-morphing software and then given false background histories. In other words, these “persons” only existed in computer files, never in the real world. See also: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoZEuj1VPv0
Regards, onebornfree
onebornfree - personally i would think that would be almost impossible to be that HUGE. This is a FREEDOM forum why would anyone name call for someones beliefs?
Questions though:
there are people that actually worked on a daily basis in the twin towers you arent refuting that are you? So are you suggesting that ppl were told not to come in early that day? or how is it possible to bring down that those buildings without killing a decent amount of people?
what about the firefighters? that Jeremy Glick guy who lost his father on 9/11 he thinks its a huge conspiracy too. Arent you implying that he is an actor too?
so there werent even planes that crashed into the WTC at all? or are you suggesting (which i think is plausible) that they were drone planes for eye witness reports, and that just the photo evidence is fake?
One of the denses populations in the US (especially during business hours), in the wealthiest city in the world (camera phones might of been rare, but lots of people had pocket cameras), in either the 1st or 2nd largest filmography/photography/paparazzi cities in the world (for sure in the US, not really sure about the world. it makes it more dramatic if i say world ), that not a single person released a video that wasnt a fake? What makes you so sure that this didnt happen?
Personally I have come to believe there is conspiracy. However it’s not some secret world government plotting behind closed doors but a conspiracy of people hiding their crass incompetence and/or deliberate mistakes.
-
I remember when I visited the WTC in 1982 we were clearly told the buildings could withstand the impact of a Boeing 707 aircraft. What if the buildings were really not that sound and somebody in the appropriate NYC office closed both eyes on the matter?
-
What, if after years of running around the world protecting “freedom and democracy” somebody realized the mainland USA didn’t have an effective air defense anymore in spite of an enormous “defense” budget?
-
What if the air defense systems were available but, due to crass incompetence on part of the much glorified military, they weren’t used?
-
What if airport security measures in place by at least two decades (trust me, I spent the '80s and the '90s setting off metal detectors all over Europe and the US and being frisked by LaWanda’s predecessors. I’ll tell you only this: for God’s sake, don’t set off a metal detector in Belgium) were only designed for psychological reasons and not to stop real hijackers?
-
What if intelligence agencies, including the fabled Mossad, had really been caught unaware? The first rule in the intelligence community is “You must pretend you knew all along, especially when you are caught with your pants down”.
-
What if intelligence did its job but was ignored by those who had to decide what to do with the info? What if the reports were simply ignored?
-
What if somebody knew a fair share of the blame laid on not allowing crews and passengers to fight back? After all the hijackers were armed with box cutters (or at least this is the official story) not machine guns. A couple of hostesses with Beretta’s (the Israelis have had frangible bullets that can be used inside pressurized airplanes since the early '80s) could have taken them out or at least stopped them from reaching the cockpit before a distress call was sent.
-
What if, at least minute, somebody understood what was going on and deliberately made a quick decision to let the attacks proceed?
Of course these are nothing more than mere speculations. I have taken a blow to the head too many and may have a touch of Alzheimer’s but in my life I learned a precious lesson: never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained with stupidity (and incompetence).
Of course there may be a sinister conspiracy at large but while people are busy debating about controlled demolitions and structural damages few have considered bureaucracies tend to be staffed by idiots and tremendously prone to crass mistakes.
I am loathe to disagree with Kakugo but I think that is precisely what the 9/11 Commission said. “Oops, mea culpa, the bureaucracies are inefficient that’s why we need to create a super-bureaucracy (DHS)… and no one will be fired because ‘no one could have imagined this scenario, it’s just too evil.’” They blamed it on “lack of imaination” and “barriers to communication between intelligence agencies.” And then we got DHS, TSA and the PATRIOT Act - the biggest power grab since FDR - to “solve” these problems. How convenient.
As far as the principle of not attributing to malice what can be explained by incompetence, I would not that this principle should only be applied as far as the government fails to achieve its stated goals. This is because its stated goals are not its actual (praxeological) goals - the government does not really care about the poor or the defense of the person and property of its citizens, it only pretends to care to the extent required to maintain an illusion with the majority - buttressed by propaganda - that it actually does care.
But when it comes to the actual (praxeological) goals of the State, it is not incompetent at all. It is stunningly efficient. As the parasite par excellence, its primary praxeological goal is to live at the public’s expense. To accomplish this overarching goal, it must tax, inflate, expand its debts, wage unnecessary wars on foreigners, implement stifling controls at home and on the borders, monopolize lines of economic production, control the movement of goods, services and information, divide groups that would naturally congregate and force association between groups that would naturally segregate (divide-and-conquer, unify-and-conquer), implement all manner of central-planning and “egalitarian” redistribution schemes, and so on. The State is ultimately ruled by the hereditary class of natural elites of parasitism.
Viewed in this light, and in combination with the many other Big Lies promulgated by this very same Establishment (Google “Operation Northwoods” “Sinking of the Lusitania” and “Gulf of Tonkin”) the official explanation of 9/11 is no longer merely a transparent and benign CYA of incompetents. It is that for all those incompetents who were not on the inside track and really were caught with their pants down.
Please read David Ray Griffin’s books on this subject. He deals only in verifiable facts and when you see how he lays it out, you realize that there is really no intelligent way to understand 9/11 as a “big accident”. It just isn’t.
Clayton -
On the question of video fakery, I would recommend that everyone watch this. I think that OBF’s position is too extreme. It doesn’t make sense for the video footage to be 100% pre-fabricated… surely, someone would have snapped a photo that would have contradicted the fake footage. If they faked it, they used layering as shown in the linked video (e.g. look at the “nose out” mistake). This would have permitted them to fabricate the planes while preserving factual footage of the “impact” (perhaps they used a cruise missile or perhaps they just planted explosives and relied on TV to convince people that there had been planes).
“All of the post 9/11 higher resolution videos and stills released , of either buildings collapsing, or of planes flying into buildings [all mostly released in 2007 and 2010] , and allegedly either taken by the government or “amateurs” , are also digitally created fakes.” This just isn’t true and doesn’t make sense. The video addresses this for the cruise-missile hypothesis (electromagnetic jamming/denial combined with sweeps for film) but no measure could have guaranteed that not a single still photo of the building collapse would be caught by any amateur photographer - they’re visible for miles and miles in every direction. Sep. 11 was a clear day.
And there were real people in the buildings, though probably not 3,000.
Clayton -
Take it up with NIST; they said the core columns collapsed in the lower floors in rapid-fire success. “Low-pressure” played no role in the collapse according to the NIST report (that would be the official story that you are apparently trying to rebuke us for rejecting).
Clayton -
The one conspiracy I do believe in was that the government probably let 9/11 happen. Same way they let Pearl Harbor happen 70 years ago as an excuse to enter the war. I’m not sure I believe in the other 9/11 conspiracies though.
I do think that it is possible that the Patriot Act was already written before 9/11.
I can’t find the cite right now, but language from several bills that had been pushed by the law enforcement establishment (FBI et. al.) prior to 9/11 is present in the PATRIOT, verbatim.
Clayton -
My understanding is that most of the P.A.T.R.I.O.T Act legislation was written during the Clinton presidency as a result of the OKC bombing. But it failed to pass at that time and was therefor just “put on the back burner” until 9/11.
Regards, onebornfree
Isn’t this how that law was written? I remember Judge Napolitano saying that the PATRIOT Act is meant to be difficult to read for the sake of blindly passing it when it was just a bill. He said that it’s basically a compilation of edits to various pieces of the entire US Code. In order to even read The PATRIOT Act, one must have the entire US Code in front of them in addition to the law itself.
Or do I have it wrong?
My understanding is that most of the P.A.T.R.I.O.T Act legislation was written during the Clinton presidency as a result of the OKC bombing. But it failed to pass at that time and was therefor just “put on the back burner” until 9/11.
That seems very plausible.
Forgive me if this has already been addressed, I’ve just skimmed some of the responses, but why would the perpetrators feel it necessary to take out Building 7? What was housed in that particular building that needed to be destroyed? It just seems greedy, for lack of a better word, to destroy the 2 towers and then also want to get Building 7.
I mean, put yourself in charge of masterminding this thing. You have the 2 planes crash into the towers and then use explosives to finish them off. That seems reasonable; the public will believe that. But then you decide to destroy a building that didn’t get hit by a plane. That just seems to me to be beyond stupidity. It’s as if you wanted to invite the investigation.
You’d be surprised. Just check some of the older, locked 9/11 threads here out .
My current belief is that the towers were empty and had been mostly that way for years. The occupants were mostly fictitious, it seems.
I’m not entirely sure without more checking, but the odds are good he is an actor[ as there are so may others].
.
I assert that it is impossible to know, given the fakeness of all of the videos depicting planes entering buildings. Planes may well have been in the area that morning ,and genuine witnesses might well have seen them, but there appears to be no solid proof that any of them flew into buildings.[Nor at the Pentagon or into the ground at Shanksville]
,
Cell phone cameras did not exist in 2001 as far as I am aware. True, people had regular video cameras etc. and so someone, somewhere must have genuine 9/11 footage of something or other. And yet, every piece of 9/11 footage examined, at least at this site: http://www.septemberclues.info/ , bears unmistakeable signs of being fraudulent.
Also bear in mind that it is virtually impossible to track, with a camera, an aircraft flying at the alleged speed of 500 mph close to the ground, ask any sports photographer who has tried to track Formula 1 race cars at 180 mph or whatever.
One theory is that all cameras in Manhattan and surrounding areas were made inoperable via H.E.R.F. or similar technology, [apparently a normal military procedure] .
Regards, onebornfree
What would be the motive behind demolishing WTC 7? I don’t doubt it could have been done simply for the added effect. But I think I read once, or heard, that the SEC and various other government agencies used space in the building for file storage, and that some incriminating documentation was destroyed along with the building. Anyone know anything about that?
There were a total of 9 buildings in the WTC complex. All of them were destroyed on 9/11.
Regards, onebornfree.
Well, I found this:
“FACT 2: WTC Building 7 – on its 23rd floor – housed an Emergency Command Center for the City of New York that Mayor Rudolph Giuliani had built in the mid-1990’s. On the morning of September 11th, Mayor Giuliani did not go “to his Command Center – with its clear view of the Twin Towers – but to a makeshift, street-level headquarters at 75 Barkley Street.” WTC 7 also held the offices of numerous government agencies, including the Department of Defense, the CIA, the Secret Service, the IRS, and the Security and Exchange Commission. Late 2001 was the time of “the height of the investigation into Enron, so the majority of Enron’s SEC filings were likely destroyed when World Trade Center 7 came down.””
“I’m not entirely sure without more checking, but the odds are good he is an actor[ as there are so may others].” – Onebornfree.
I’m sorry but I can’t just let this one go. You can’t just say it’s an actor and then move on. These “actors” have families, neighbors, relatives, coworkers, etc… I mean, aren’t these people still walking around today? Aren’t some of the wives of the men on board the planes still doing interviews? Surely some acquantance would stand up and cry foul!
Phi, if you were the mayor of New York, would you have rushed to your command center located at the foot of 2 burning WTC towers? I wouldn’t have, seems kind of dangerous if you ask me.
People have put forward hypotheses on everything from covering up the Enron scandal (SEC had offices in WTC 7) to covering up OKC (which was itself an inside job) as the FBI purportedly had files on OKC in WTC 7. Secret Service and even CIA had offices there. The office of the mayor of NYC also had a command-and-control bunker on the 23rd floor. Some have speculated that this bunker was used to coordinate the whole scenario. The burning and demolition of WTC 7 would wrap it all up quite nicely.
In any case, I think that footage of the north face of WTC 7 shows that WTC 7’s demolition was botched and actually occurred in two stages. The first stage was probably initiated less than an hour after the second tower collapse or - my theory - immediately subsequent to it (the idea being to claim that the collapse of the larger tower triggered some kind of failure in the foundation of WTC 7 that - in combination with its raging office fires - triggered its collapse. But this initiation “fizzled” and only one section of explosive charges blew, leaving a gaping hole running the entire height of the building, visible on the north face in a couple chopper shots on YT - hardly any footage of this face of WTC 7 even exists.
The building collapsed so much later because demo teams had to re-enter the building; throughout the day they had to check and re-check every charge and wire in the building to be absolutely sure that this time, it blew properly. After the dust settled, the higher-ups realized that this was a real gaping hole in the “unprecedented-therefore-plausible collapse story” where two planes smash into two buildings and not only trigger their collapse but the collapse of a third as a “freak accident”. From that day forward, almost no mention was made in the media of WTC 7. All 9/11 memorial footage always depicts just the twin tower collapse sequences. For a long time, many Americans were not even aware that there was a third building collapse at the WTC.
To CYA, they decided Mr. Silverstein would be the fall-guy for this error. They ordered him to participate in a TV interview; in that interview, he would say the precise phrase “so the order was given to pull it and then we watched the building come down”; just confusing and ambiguous enough that it wouldn’t raise eyebrows on its own but still specific enough that it could be used as incriminating evidence in a smear campaign if any kind of 9/11-investigation ever got traction on this particular issue. “Time to earn your insurance money, Mr. Silverstein!”
Clayton -