Fox News: much more open-minded about explosive devices bringing down 7 World Trade

Page 14 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

MikeMike

Lifer
Feb 6, 2000
45,885
66
91
Yeah, the luciferian occultists in charge indeed are obsessed with ritualizing anything that will traumatize the public, especially through numerologies.



Did you know that 33rd president and 33rd degree mason Harry Solomon Truman (notice the 18 letters) decided to drop the bomb along the 33rd parallel of Japan? on 8/6/1945 (8+6+1+9+4+5=33). And that the bomb exploded at 11:44am (11-44=33)??

Ever wonder why Waco, Oklahoma, Columbine, Virginia Tech, and the BP Oil Spill, all took place in late April? Look up the Luciferian/Satanic calendar. Also pay atention to the amount or innocent killed in the latter three.

Skip to 1:49 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRwuUaKbepw

so the government was involved in Waco, Oklahoma, Columbine, VT and the BP Oil spill? along with Kennedy, 9/11, the first WTC attack... etc?
 

DominionSeraph

Diamond Member
Jul 22, 2009
8,386
31
91
Wait, you mean none of y'all have yet figured out that the 9/11 conspiracy was all the doing of the IPU?

Did anyone see a pink unicorn plant the explosives that took down the WTC? No!
THIS PROVES WITHOUT A DOUBT THAT THE UNICORN WAS INVISIBLE.

See? You silly nonbelievers just can't get around my goddess' existence.
 

MikeMike

Lifer
Feb 6, 2000
45,885
66
91
Wow I thought I've seen crazy but guess not.

yea, k3n seems to feel that anything bad that has happened, has had the government's involvement...

I bet he even believes...

The government told Japan to bomb us to get us into WWII (notice how P is the 16th letter, and H is the 8th letter, but if you add the number of letters in Japan (5) to 16 (P) and then subtract 8 (H) you get 13... yes i just made that up in my head)
 

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,941
1
0
Yeah, the harder thing for me nowadays, is figuring out which "man caused" traumatizing event, aren't orchestrated by the governemnt/elite cohorts.

In Vtech and Columbine, we have drills, stand down orders/horrible SWAT response times. Perpetrators that have relatives involved with military work (cho's sister worked for military contractor McNeil Technologies (?). Harris' dad worked for Lockheed Martin, i think).. Ideal MK ultra candidates. Many Columbine survivors reported a 3rd shooter BY NAME [sharpied out], even in the official government documents themselves. Initial newscasters on Vtech reported atleast 2 shooters (just like they originally said there were 3 shooters, with 1 of them dead, later at Fort Hood massacre) which makes more sense. At the day of Columbine, Clinton led the largest bombing campaingn against Yugoslavia, and some states were about to vote on conceal carry weapon laws a few weeks later. On the week of Vtech, Bush was supposed to face impeachment hearings.

In the first WTC attack, the Egyptian (?) patsies were smart enough to record the conversation they had with FBI agents telling them to "cook the bomb" for a supposed "drill", according to one conspiracy radio host, who has repeated this numerous times before. I don't know much about this event.

At Oklahoma many eyewitnesses reported seeing a 2nd suspect come out of the truck with McVeigh. Infact the sketch was so detailed that it matched so well with one of McVeigh's colleagues (an Olive skinned man, who i forgot his name). There was a surveillance camera facing the spot McVeigh pulled up on, but the FBI confiscated it, and even refused to use it in the trial.

Assassinated radio host and former naval intelligence officer, Bill Cooper, predicted a false flag event where Bin Laden would take the blame, on June 2001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUAOhQqp2eE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_William_Cooper

The Truther Handbook, as formulated and passed down through the years from wave to wave of "believers" states that
in the event of any of the following:
1. indication that arguing party knows significantly more than you do
2. argument has gone over your head
3. argument appears to be going unfavorably
4. you just got owned

the proper procedure is to quickly and rapidly bring up a new topic, hopefully almost unrelated to your first line of questioning. By doing so, you will catch government disinfo agents off guard and can continue your assault on their math, science, logic, and reasoning unabated.

You sir have taken this practice to a whole new level. I don't know whether to be impressed or whether to laugh my ass off.
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
The Truther Handbook, as formulated and passed down through the years from wave to wave of "believers" states that


You sir have taken this practice to a whole new level. I don't know whether to be impressed or whether to laugh my ass off.


Impressively laugh your ass off.
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76

I was looking around that site, and it almost seems that it is a joke site, or a site by sane people making fun of Truthers. It looks like a lot of threads are either dispelling the most insane myths, or end in someone wrecking what even lunacy the thread was about. Granted I only looked at a few threads, but this was a good video posted ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5j_c1tPMiG0
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
I'm pretty sure the Pyramidologists have a separate take on the 9/11 events too... That is, if Orion was lined up with an angle, any angle, to the spire on WTC 1 at anytime.


I used to think that folks who immediately adopt a government conspiracy for most anything is a healthy thing...
We do have a few admitted events in the past that go to the notion that some folks in power bypass the rule of law to effect an agenda and to have folks looking at those types of events is not irrational, imo.

But, in the face of no credible evidence to support the anomalous events of an enormous 9/11 type situation seems to defeat the effort of those with a modicum of mistrust toward the power brokers.

I personally don't trust folks who both have power and opportunity coupled with an agenda... So I wish the efforts of folks similarly stead that invoke illogical linkages would kick back and look at this 9/11 event with a bit more of a scientific approach.
If there are competing and opposed evidence you can't dismiss one in favor of the theory... You must include all the evidence and rationally conclude from that...
I know NIST has not behaved in line with that approach and I guess had they been an investigative body of a criminal type effort they would have...

I really, really think a forensically oriented, fact based effort should be undertaken whose objective is Truth and not some advocacy...
 
Last edited:

DominionSeraph

Diamond Member
Jul 22, 2009
8,386
31
91
Illuminati card game warning about the Twin Towers and Pentagon attacks

Ah, yes; because everyone knows that the best way to keep a secret is to release a cryptogram containing that secret.

:ninja:
n3k si na toidi.
Eally-ray, I'm-ay erious-say.
/:ninja:
 

al981

Golden Member
May 28, 2009
1,036
0
0
again, you're watching a video that has been through the wringer of a studio editing machine. the 'deep thunders' in the CBS video on the 12th are the adulterated noises from the original, as the producer was moving from the pre-recorded field reporter spot, to showing the prerecorded west street video with live studio anchor commentary. that's done with dials and sliders. those 'deep thunders' are the product of words 'second movie' being run through that machine as the producer was switching from one to another. that's the reason they're only picked up on the CBS news video the next day. not some magical second microphone that picks up booms but not conversation, which weren't heard by the people standing right next to the camera.

or hell, the guy posting the videos on youtube could be editing the videos himself to make 'second movie' into the noises you hear.


kyle posted more original footage of the deep thunders on page 1 of this thread. i missed the voices the first go around, and sure enough, the deep thunders are clearly heard at 9-10 second mark of this clip, at roughly the same time someone says "second movie". thus, your reasoning for the deep thunders being the result of "being run through that machine as the producer was switching from one to another" is not credible.

so fenix, what caused the thunders? clearly, the voice(s) were not near the microphone. why did the deep thunders occur before the penthouse collapsed? :D you can use my "voice of god creating a sonic boom that brought wtc7 down" excuse.

kylebisme, have you seen this recently released footage by NIST? the penthouse collapse and audio are completely edited out/missing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XH_Lv_sevwY
 

DominionSeraph

Diamond Member
Jul 22, 2009
8,386
31
91
You'd make a great MK slave in the new ages.

No, for there is no means by which they could EVER override my programming in respect to vegetable juice.

Miku has decided that I like it, so there is just no argument on the subject. Po pi po pi po po pi po.

2163348large.jpg
 

al981

Golden Member
May 28, 2009
1,036
0
0
The context of my comments was regarding eye witnesses being incorrect about what they see or hear and YOU assuming that what people see or hear is reality. There were explosions within the WTC complex -- the Jet fuel that ignited in the lobby of one of the buildings, the battery backups within the office buildings, backup generators full of diesel fuel, etc, etc...

....


Just to clarify:

My point in those sentences you will relentlessly quote is that there is a disconnect between HEARING explosions and there actually being explosives. There are many other things that cause explosions or explosion-like sounds that are not the work of terrorists

LOL! beaujingle now claiming that he was taken out of context, after lying for months that no pre collapse explosions ever occurred. why else would you continue to mention seismographs, seismographs, seismographs? you are erroneously using the seismograph argument (which has been disproven by the way), to deny the fact that hundreds of firefighters and witnesses on the ground gave corroborating accounts of large pre collapse explosions :D Nobody is stating for a fact that explosions = due to explosives, but it certainly opens up the possibility for explosives. Did you conveniently forget about this?:

"A truck bomb at the WTC in 1993, in which approximately 0.5 tons of explosive were detonated, was not detected seismically, even at a station only 16 km away. "

http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/LCSN/Eq/20010911_WTC/WTC_LDEO_KIM.pdf



again, why are you using seismographs to deny the basic fact that large pre collapse explosions did occur? no seismographs picked up the "jet fuel explosions" you mentioned, so how can they possibly pick up other explosions? absolutely pathetic argument. :D:D:D

again, it is a given fact large pre collapse explosions did occur, even for wtc7:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LO5V2CJpzI

firefighters corroborating large secondary explosions:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgMrDS4puK0


let's take a trip down memory lane for the LOL:

Originally Posted by BeauJangles
Those people saw and heard things that sounded like explosions, they aren't lying about that.
They also are not correct in saying that they were explosions.
Why? Because there's no freaking evidence of it and there is a lot
of evidence for other things that may have sounded and felt like explosives going off, but were, in fact other events or other explosions.



Folks, here's littlejingle saying that firefighters are lying when corroborate each other about pre collapse explosions.

My original response to your bullshit lie:

"LOL! you continually deny the basic fact that explosions and rumblings occurred, claiming "no freaking evidence of it", yet somehow contradict yourself in the exact same sentence by saying the explosions were....wait for.... "in fact other explosions". ROFL! grats on self ownage, kid."

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=30326773&postcount=1312





I'd also appreciate if you'd drop the insults and the condescension. Neither is appreciated, nor warranted.

Why? you did the exact same thing to other posters. can't handle what you try dishing out, son? pathetic.

In case you ever feel like going back to it, you couldn't must enough intellectual mustard to answer anything else in the last post I made in the other 9/11 thread, but the link is here when almighty intellect is ready to roll again. http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=30322200&postcount=1289

As for not responding, I left you with a ton of information to deal with and you ignored it all. That was the eighth or ninth time you simply disregarded 95% of what I said to focus on the one thing that made sense to you and, quite frankly, it gets old after a while. I'd have happily responded if you'd bothered to address any of the rest of my post, but of course you never will because you'll get caught in an infinite loop over explosives.

I've answered enough of your "questions". You intentionally played dumb for months, as proven here. Count how many times you intentionally played dumb: http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=30320856&postcount=1284

As I stated previously:
"I'm not spending another hour addressing your questions that I already addressed in post# 1284. when you can admit the basic fact that scores of corroborating eyewitnesses felt rumblings and heard loud explosions that were not picked up on any seismographs (how many times have you been proven dead wrong about your seismograph argument? LOL), then we can continue."
 

al981

Golden Member
May 28, 2009
1,036
0
0
Yip. The whole need for a false flag operation of this scale just doesn't compute. Not just the need for a false flag, but how it was carried out. There are literally hundreds of scenarios that would have not only been easier, and less difficult to carry out with less that could go wrong, but been a LOT better to get America's blood boiling.

of course it doesn't compute for xjohnx:

xj0hnx said:
And? I'm close minded,


I never claimed to be open minded
 

al981

Golden Member
May 28, 2009
1,036
0
0
I concur.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=30916370&postcount=218

"your entire argument is about wikileaks not receiving wtc or 9/11 digital related material. i've pointed out that the JFK files, which have been admittedly sealed for several more decades (LOL what are you hiding, USA?) have not been received/published by wikileaks either. Using your moronic logic, these JFK files do not exist. not difficult to understand. not every plan by every terrorist group / government is digitized. logic has failed you :D"
 

alkemyst

No Lifer
Feb 13, 2001
83,769
19
81
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=30916370&postcount=218

"your entire argument is about wikileaks not receiving wtc or 9/11 digital related material. i've pointed out that the JFK files, which have been admittedly sealed for several more decades (LOL what are you hiding, USA?) have not been received/published by wikileaks either. Using your moronic logic, these JFK files do not exist. not difficult to understand. not every plan by every terrorist group / government is digitized. logic has failed you :D"

umm guise you realize, I mean you do read and comprehend right? Only a very small fraction of the entire data has been released on WikiLeaks. Also it's not everything. There are tons of things that are 100% verifiable that will not be contained within them.
 

MikeMike

Lifer
Feb 6, 2000
45,885
66
91
of course it doesn't compute for xjohnx:

so, you are not open to the fact that it MAY JUST HAVE BEEN, ONLY airliners?

or, do you consider yourself close minded as well...

also

proof Pearl Harbor was an inside job....

P-H+J=13

PROOF, go tell your conspiracy buddies this.
 

DominionSeraph

Diamond Member
Jul 22, 2009
8,386
31
91
As a member of the Super Ultra People Power Club, I have personal knowledge that conspiracies theories are the method by which we mind control those who easily fall for conspiracy theories. Feed these people a conspiracy theory and their reactions are absolutely predictable, giving you complete control over their entire belief structures.

Watch:

Do you conspiracy theorists believe that you're sitting in front of a computer right now? Of course you do. I know you do because we of the Super Ultra People Power Club implanted that belief into you and warped your entire observational system to conform to that programmed belief. It was quite the simple task to accomplish, too.

Do you believe that you're reading this post? Well it doesn't actually exist. Again, we just warped your senses.
In fact, nothing you see or believe is true. We control all of your "reality." And there is no escape. Even "death" is no escape, for we give you no access to death. If you were to place what you believe was a loaded gun to your head and pull the trigger, nothing would happen, since the gun doesn't really exist. It's just an implanted fiction. If you were to "shoot" yourself in some non-vital part such as the hand or the leg your brain would respond by creating psychosomatic pain (see, we know everything), but shooting yourself in the head would not kill you, for it cannot. A fictional construct cannot end conscious thought. That fact is the only weakness of our mind control system -- it is otherwise completely undetectable by those within the Matrix.












(person nice very a not am I)
 
Last edited:

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,941
1
0
LOL! beaujingle now claiming that he was taken out of context, after lying for months that no pre collapse explosions ever occurred. why else would you continue to mention seismographs, seismographs, seismographs? you are erroneously using the seismograph argument (which has been disproven by the way), to deny the fact that hundreds of firefighters and witnesses on the ground gave corroborating accounts of large pre collapse explosions :D Nobody is stating for a fact that explosions = due to explosives, but it certainly opens up the possibility for explosives. Did you conveniently forget about this?:

"A truck bomb at the WTC in 1993, in which approximately 0.5 tons of explosive were detonated, was not detected seismically, even at a station only 16 km away. "

Fantastic, like we've talked about before there were seismographs within Manhattan and the burrows, not 16 km away.

This isn't 1993 and this wasn't the truck bombing in the WTC.


again, why are you using seismographs to deny the basic fact that large pre collapse explosions did occur? no seismographs picked up the "jet fuel explosions" you mentioned, so how can they possibly pick up other explosions? absolutely pathetic argument. :D:D:D

So seismographs were unable to detect jet fuel that had (a) poured down the elevator shafts and subsequently caught on fire or (b) fell down the elevator shafts already on fire and somehow that has relevance to the demolitions charges there were never detected? Since when does a bunch of fuel ablaze equate a controlled demolition?

again, it is a given fact large pre collapse explosions did occur, even for wtc7:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LO5V2CJpzI
firefighters corroborating large secondary explosions:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgMrDS4puK0

Great, so thousands of people (according to you) saw these explosions, yet nobody can find any trace of their existence, there is no record of them happening on any piece of scientific equipment... isn't entirely more likely that, like we discussed before, this is unreliable eye witness testimony.

These people heard "explosions" but we have no proof that those explosions came from actual explosives.

In fact, we have no evidence at all for the story you've constructed which is why this testimony should be seen for what it is: people who were placed in an incredibly stressful situation reacting to the a previously never-before-seen event and try to rationalize what they saw or heard.

Unfortunately, without any supporting evidence, there is nothing more we can really say.

let's take a trip down memory lane for the LOL:

Originally Posted by BeauJangles
Those people saw and heard things that sounded like explosions, they aren't lying about that.
They also are not correct in saying that they were explosions.
Why? Because there's no freaking evidence of it and there is a lot
of evidence for other things that may have sounded and felt like explosives going off, but were, in fact other events or other explosions.

Typical. Take a quote completely out of context and hammer it home like it actually means something. Your inability to contextualize quotes has hamstrung you from the beginning.

Folks, here's littlejingle saying that firefighters are lying when corroborate each other about pre collapse explosions.

Eye. Witness. Testimony. With. Nothing. To. Back. It. Up. In. The. Middle. Of. A. Giant. Building. Falling. To. The. Ground.

My original response to your bullshit lie:

"LOL! you continually deny the basic fact that explosions and rumblings occurred, claiming "no freaking evidence of it", yet somehow contradict yourself in the exact same sentence by saying the explosions were....wait for.... "in fact other explosions". ROFL! grats on self ownage, kid."

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=30326773&postcount=1312

Deny the basic fact? Me? You're the one who claims that what sounds like a microphone getting brushed against something or is an artifact of audio splicing is "proof" that there were explosions.

edit: I'd just like to add one tidbit which you also cannot explain. IF your video is showing us "explosions" why would the news crew cut away and, if they cut away, wouldn't they go RIGHT BACK? I mean, if I were a reporter standing there and I heard explosions like that, I'd want to get back on the air and say something like "HOLY CRAPOLA, THERE ARE EXPLOSIONS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW." Instead, they carry on like nothing happened. Was the Channel 7 local news team also part of the conspiracy now?

You point to a video camera located on a rooftop about half (a quarter?) of a mile away that shakes and claim it is "proof" of explosions. Listen, if the explosions were violent enough to shake a freaking camera, then it is hard to see how they wouldn't have been detected by ANYTHING else. Not to mention that we have no idea what actually caused that shaking.

Your problem, simply put, is that you cannot, will not, and refuse to construct a coherent and rational argument of what happened and what the order of events were. You place your faith in youtube videos showing cameras shaking, yet deny that any scientific instruments demonstrate the contrary. You use the testimony of individuals who you believe support your wild goose chase, yet you don't even bother to do enough research to find out that they don't support you at all and, when that fact is made apparent to you, you act like a petulant child and bitch and moan at me about it. You're the one who brought these people into this argument, yet you cannot even say for sure that they support you or your claims.

Your charade is beyond silly, considering you cannot rectify the following:

1. Your camera shaking versus the lack of seismograph readings. Now, usually we can attribute that discrepancy to the fact that the nearest major seismograph to NYC might not be large enough to detect a localized event that would cause shaking, however, we also know that there were much smaller seismographs on the ground in Lower Manhattan and the burrows that morning and these devices were being used for construction auditing. Due to their significantly higher sensitivity, it is highly surprising these devices cannot verify your camera shaking.

2. You claim that there were pre-collapse explosions, which you implicitly assume are demolition charges. Take a look at any actual controlled demolition on youtube and you'll see that there is no way there could have been a controlled demolition with conventional explosives.

For example, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZevHUR3_L8&feature=related#t=2m or http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79sJ1bMR6VQ&feature=related (the second one is probably a better example). We can clearly see two things that didn't occur in either tower. First, the incredible explosion that occurs low down on the base of the building and, second, how quickly the collapse follows this explosion. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_GpPdgAGwk#t=1m20s

Notice the dramatic difference between these two videos. In the WTC collapse video there are no explosions preceding the collapse and no visible evidence of explosions. The collapse is clearly started at the top of the tower, not at the bottom.

In the controlled demolitions we clearly see that there a series of internal explosions to weaken the building followed immediately by highly visible explosions at the base of the buildings and then their collapse. This collapse is initiated from the base.

There is NO video of either one of the Towers that demonstrates the collapse was initiated at the base.

Zero. Zilch. Nada. None.

Find visual evidence and we'll talk.


4. If demolition chargers were used, why did the thousands of recovery workers never stumble across a single shred of detonation cord, blast caps, or blast residue? Why did no camera on the scene for the recovery capture pictures of any of these things which would be present in the millions for a demolition like this?


3. That your evidence doesn't exclusively support your own half-cocked hypothesis.

Until then, might I remind you that you've now had a few months to stew on the questions that previously stumped you:

What is your explanation for seismographs located within Manhattan and Brooklyn being unable to detect the shaking that is visible on this camera?

Do you recognize the fact that your eye witness testimony does not exclusively support your own theory of what happened? Do you even begin to comprehend that it also fits the version of events that I have been putting forward?

Please address the fact that your eye witness testimony does not exclusively support your theory and acknowledge the fact that eye witness testimony, in any legal or non legal case, is NOT reliable.

Please address why Protec's engineeers, who had multiple seismographs located in Manhattan and Brooklyn detected the plane impacts and the subsquent collapses but failed to detect your mysterious shaking.

Why would the US Government TIP OFF news agencies prior to destroying WTC 7?

Find me an example of a piece of steel from WTC 1, 2, or 7 that was melted. For this game, you need to find steel that is entirely liquid (not just glowing) and has been tested and confirmed to be steel.

Either explain to me the NIST's collapse model or present your own

Why did the planes strike the towers? Why did the plane strike the pentagon? Why did the other plane crash? Did Osama cooperate with the US Government? -- What is YOUR story?

Read. My. Post. especially the parts concerning thermite and melted steel.

Please, please provide some evidence that links these reports to actual explosives, rather than simply self-referentially referring to them over and over again.

Who is part of your conspiracy and who isn't?

These questions are derived directly from the pieces of what you've actually tried to say happened on 9/11.


As for the insults, they're really unbecoming of anyone. Drop it.
 
Last edited:

alkemyst

No Lifer
Feb 13, 2001
83,769
19
81
As a member of the Super Ultra People Power Club, I have personal knowledge that conspiracies theories are the method by which we mind control those who easily fall for conspiracy theories. Feed these people a conspiracy theory and their reactions are absolutely predictable, giving you complete control over their entire belief structures.

Watch:

Do you conspiracy theorists believe that you're sitting in front of a computer right now? Of course you do. I know you do because we of the Super Ultra People Power Club implanted that belief into you and warped your entire observational system to conform to that programmed belief. It was quite the simple task to accomplish, too.

Do you believe that you're reading this post? Well it doesn't actually exist. Again, we just warped your senses.
In fact, nothing you see or believe is true. We control all of your "reality." And there is no escape. Even "death" is no escape, for we give you no access to death. If you were to place what you believe was a loaded gun to your head and pull the trigger, nothing would happen, since the gun doesn't really exist. It's just an implanted fiction. If you were to "shoot" yourself in some non-vital part such as the hand or the leg your brain would respond by creating psychosomatic pain (see, we know everything), but shooting yourself in the head would not kill you, for it cannot. A fictional construct cannot end conscious thought. That fact is the only weakness of our mind control system -- it is otherwise completely undetectable by those within the Matrix.












(person nice very a not am I)

nice troll.