PDA

View Full Version : Dr. Judy Wood's Book: Where Did The Towers Go?


Pages : 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8

cont
23-02-2012, 08:02 PM
mishy, do you know about Richard Hall's analysis?

New 9 11 Video Analysis by Richard D Hall (Part 2) - YouTube

dontdrinkurmilk
23-02-2012, 08:03 PM
The victim picture on a couple of pages back is photoshopped. I don't know how anyone can say it isn't.

In the game of "spot the difference" there is a bit more hair above the ear in the top photo, but that can be easily inserted.

dontdrinkurmilk may be worried that admitting a photoshopped picture exists means the victim didn't exist. not necessarily. Perhaps they wanted a more picturesque background for some reason?

Hi,

No I am not worried, in a previous post I made, I actually say that even if it was photoshopped, that proves nothing, it certainly does not prove the person did not exist.

cont
23-02-2012, 08:06 PM
Hi,

No I am not worried, in a previous post I made, I actually say that even if it was photoshopped, that proves nothing, it certainly does not prove the person did not exist.

You do now admit it looks photoshopped. I'm not going to fault anyone for saying it was photoshopped.



BTW Richard Hall's theory is the CGI was used to cover the "Ball" anti-gravity drone.

dontdrinkurmilk
23-02-2012, 08:12 PM
You do now admit it looks photoshopped. I'm not going to fault anyone for saying it was photoshopped.



BTW Richard Hall's theory is the CGI was used to cover the "Ball" anti-gravity drone.

No I didn't admit that, ''I said even if it was'' (hypothetically speaking), years ago I used to like mr hall and his UFO programme, but with this theory he's really just being daft.

cont
23-02-2012, 08:20 PM
Anyway I'd like to know what mishy thinks about it. I suspect a number of innovative weapons were used to bring down the towers.

dontdrinkurmilk
23-02-2012, 08:24 PM
Anyway I'd like to know what mishy thinks about it. I suspect a number of innovative weapons were used to bring down the towers.

If you and you're ''facts'' say so.

mishy
23-02-2012, 08:52 PM
mishy, do you know about Richard Hall's analysis?

New 9 11 Video Analysis by Richard D Hall (Part 2) - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1650zz-2EA)


I've seen it before & tbh I don't know what to make of it. Could be something in it, could be bs, I'll keep an open mind. Similar to what 7forever bangs on about I think.

Whatever hit the towers (if anything) wasn't a plane, which means the media were complicit in the attacks. Which means no truth will come out on the MSM. Ever.

Oh look, another blatant photoshopped vicsim..:eek:

http://septemberclues.info/images/VICSIMS/FLIPrescorla_richard_small.jpg

http://septemberclues.info/vicsims_photo-analyses.htm

cont
23-02-2012, 08:56 PM
Oh look, another blatant photoshopped vicsim..:eek:

http://septemberclues.info/images/VICSIMS/FLIPrescorla_richard_small.jpg

http://septemberclues.info/vicsims_photo-analyses.htm

So they've used the same head on two separate photos. Why do that? Why don't both the memorials use the one photo?

Also, are you sure that one isn't the same photo. One could be a photo of a used photo, the other the original image.

mishy
23-02-2012, 09:12 PM
So they've used the same head on two separate photos. Why do that? Why don't both the memorials use the one photo?

Also, are you sure that one isn't the same photo. One could be a photo of a used photo, the other the original image.


Why do it? I don't know, there's many like it. Surely such a man would have better photo's? His family must have some surely? Why is his facial expression exactly the same. Try taking photos of someone days/weeks/months/years apart and get the exact same facial expression.

There is facial construction software out there though..and I would imagine that those in power have more powerful software than this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fu7bTemvEKk&fmt=18

cont
23-02-2012, 09:22 PM
Why do it? I don't know, there's many like it. Surely such a man would have better photo's? His family must have some surely? Why is his facial expression exactly the same. Try taking photos of someone days/weeks/months/years apart and get the exact same facial expression.

I wondered in the case of that image, the man appears to be wearing the same uniform. It's possibly the same photograph. One of the photos was folded, and in a poor condition, and then scanned or photo'd. The other was new version made from the original image.

I agree the other photos look photoshopped.

mishy
23-02-2012, 09:36 PM
Some of these are just ridiculous. Their families didn't have better pictures? :confused:

http://septemberclues.info/images/VICSIMS/RIDICULOUSLYBADPICS/1325-How.jpg
http://septemberclues.info/images/VICSIMS/RIDICULOUSLYBADPICS/1876-Ric.jpg
http://septemberclues.info/images/VICSIMS/RIDICULOUSLYBADPICS/2847-Joh.jpg
http://septemberclues.info/images/VICSIMS/RIDICULOUSLYBADPICS/2911-Dav.jpg

http://septemberclues.info/vicsimripiculous.htm

mishy
23-02-2012, 09:45 PM
This one...http://septemberclues.info/images/VICSIMS/RIDICULOUSLYBADPICS/2911-Dav.jpg

Makes me think of this.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTSA_sWGM44&feature=related

dontdrinkurmilk
23-02-2012, 10:01 PM
Some of these are just ridiculous. Their families didn't have better pictures? :confused:

http://septemberclues.info/images/VICSIMS/RIDICULOUSLYBADPICS/1325-How.jpg
http://septemberclues.info/images/VICSIMS/RIDICULOUSLYBADPICS/1876-Ric.jpg
http://septemberclues.info/images/VICSIMS/RIDICULOUSLYBADPICS/2847-Joh.jpg
http://septemberclues.info/images/VICSIMS/RIDICULOUSLYBADPICS/2911-Dav.jpg

http://septemberclues.info/vicsimripiculous.htm

Well, you have said yourself, that even if these were photoshopped images (which I don't think they are), then that does not prove these people did not exist previously.....so what's your point, where are you going with this?

You can't even think of a motive behind it, because there is not one, it would be completely illogical to do that.

dontdrinkurmilk
23-02-2012, 10:07 PM
Break down of all the victims:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_people_died_in_the_September_11_attacks

More people are added to the list of fallen every day as a result of their efforts at Ground Zero during the weeks and months following the attacks.


At least 2,985 people died in the September 11, 2001, attacks, including:
19 terrorists
2,966 victims [2,998 as of Spring 2009]


All but 13 people died on that day. The remaining 13 later died of their wounds. One person has died since the attacks, of lung cancer. It is suspected to have been caused by all the debris from the Twin Towers.


There were 266 people on the four planes:
American Airlines Flight 11 (crashed into the WTC): 92 (including five terrorists)
United Airlines Flight 175 (crashed into the WTC): 65 (including five terrorists)
American Airlines Flight 77 (crashed into the Pentagon): 64 (including five terrorists)
United Flight 93 (downed in Shanksville, PA): 45 (including four terrorists)


There were 2,595 people in the World Trade Center and near it, including:
343 NYFD firefighters and paramedics
23 NYPD police officers
37 Port Authority police officers
1,402 people in Tower 1
614 people in Tower 2
658 people at one company, Cantor Fitzgerald
1,762 New York residents
674 New Jersey residents
1 NYFD firefighter killed by a man jumping off the top floors of the Twin Towers


There were 125 civilians and military personnel at the Pentagon.
1,609 people lost a spouse or partner on 9/11. More than 3,051 children lost parents.
While it was mostly Americans who were killed in this horrific attack, there were also 327 foreign nationals. Here is the breakdown, according to country:
Argentina: 4
Australia: 11
Bangladesh: 6
Belarus: 1
Belgium: 1
Bermuda: 1
Brazil: 3
Canada: 27
Chile: 2
China: 4
Cote d'Ivoire: 1
Colombia: 17
Democratic Republic of the Congo: 2
Dominican Republic: 1
El Salvador: 1
Ecuador: 3
France: 1
Germany: 11
Ghana: 2
Guyana: 3
Haiti: 2
Honduras: 1
India: 1
Indonesia: 1
Ireland: 6
Israel: 5
Italy: 4
Jamaica: 16
Japan: 26
Jordan: 2
Lebanon: 3
Lithuania: 1
Malaysia: 7
Mexico: 16
Moldova: 1
Netherlands: 1
New Zealand: 2
Nigeria: 1
Panama: 2
Peru: 5
Philippines: 16
Portugal: 3
Poland: 1
Russia: 1
South Africa: 2
South Korea: 28
Spain: 1
Sweden: 1
Taiwan: 1
Ukraine: 1
Uzbekistan: 1
United Kingdom: 67
Venezuela: 1
Updated Answer from Another Contributor:
In total 3,497 people died in the attacks on September 11, 2001.
2,735 civilians in the World Trade Center died
87 passengers and crew members aboard American Airlines Flight 11 that hit the North Tower
60 passengers and crew aboard United Flight 175 that hit the South Tower
343 New York City firefighters and rescue workers and 23 New York City law enforcement officers, 47 Port Authority workers and 37 Port Authority Police Officers, lost their lives when they rushed in to save the victims in the World Trade Center
36 passengers and crew aboard United Flight 93, who gave their lives stopping four hijackers over Pennsylvania
64 passengers and crew aboard American Airlines Flight 77 that crashed into the Pentagon, killing them and 125 people in the building.



In addition
19 cowards - the terrorists who hijacked four airliners and murdered 3,497 people - also died.

mishy
23-02-2012, 10:24 PM
Well, you have said yourself, that even if these were photoshopped images (which I don't think they are), then that does not prove these people did not exist previously.....so what's your point, where are you going with this?

You can't even think of a motive behind it, because there is not one, it would be completely illogical to do that.


3000 people didn't die on 9/11, it's a lie. The perps didn't need to kill 3000 people, they just needed to sell the illusion that 3000 people died.

Why use real planes and real victims when you have total control over a complicit media & Hollywood to sell the illusion? It would be illogical. Why risk one of the planes ending up in the Hudson River? Why risk having the families of 3000 angry people chasing you through the courts. Make the victims up, no dodgy lawsuits, make money from memorial scams..profit.

It's not just one or two of the victims that are questionable, it's hundreds.


http://www.septemberclues.info/deconstructing.htm

mishy
23-02-2012, 10:29 PM
Break down of all the victims:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_people_died_in_the_September_11_attacks

At least 2,985 people died in the September 11, 2001, attacks, including:
19 terrorists
2,966 victims [2,998 as of Spring 2009]

In addition
19 cowards - the terrorists who hijacked four airliners and murdered 3,497 people - also died.

Gotta love the wiki for getting it right. :rolleyes:

dontdrinkurmilk
23-02-2012, 10:34 PM
3000 people didn't die on 9/11, it's a lie. The perps didn't need to kill 3000 people, they just needed to sell the illusion that 3000 people died.

It is true, You would not have the balls, to speak to the victims families or friends would you and say you're a lair, your son/daughter/friend/bother/sister did not die it's all a ''fairy tale''.

Again why photo shop images? This is not proof that the people did not exist.

Why use real planes and real victims when you have total control over a complicit media & Hollywood to sell the illusion? It would be illogical. Why risk one of the planes ending up in the Hudson River? Why risk having the families of 3000 angry people chasing you through the courts. Make the victims up, no dodgy lawsuits, make money from memorial scams..profit.

It's not just one or two of the victims that are questionable, it's hundreds.


http://www.septemberclues.info/deconstructing.htm

Because it is impossible, all the people on the streets that saw planes striking the buildings what about them?

The physical evidence found of plane parts and passengers, what about them? Oh yeah sorry they were staged right? Or not as you think it was all CGI??


Hundreds is that it? Should you not be saying all 3k victims are questionable? After all you think that none of them really died right?

dontdrinkurmilk
23-02-2012, 10:36 PM
Gotta love the wiki for getting it right. :rolleyes:

That ''in addition'' part was a Updated Answer from Another Contributor BTW.

mishy
23-02-2012, 10:50 PM
It is true, You would not have the balls, to speak to the victims families or friends would you and say you're a lair, your son/daughter/friend/bother/sister did not die it's all a ''fairy tale''.

Again why photo shop images? This is not proof that the people did not exist.

Then where are are many thousands of friends and family on the 9/11 truth threads? I can't recall seeing any, apart from the 'my mothers, next door neighbours cousins, sister in law was in the south tower' people that when asked for a name are never to be seen again. It doesn't make sense that there aren't normal truth seeking relatives about. Just a few controlled ones like the building 7 people and the 'Jersey girls'.

They faked the images so they could cash in on the memorials and make the whole thing more believable.



Because it is impossible, all the people on the streets that saw planes striking the buildings what about them?

But there aren't many witness statements to be found, and many of the statements mention anything from just explosions to commercial airliners. Once the second plane hit on live TV they didn't need to speak to people in the street, they could just keep on replaying the strike over and over & anyone saying that there wasn't a plane were shouted down because of the (fake) TV shots.

The physical evidence found of plane parts and passengers, what about them? Oh yeah sorry they were staged right? Or not as you think it was all CGI??

Wouldn't be hard to plant evidence in the confusion. Especially if the area had been evacuated.


Hundreds is that it? Should you not be saying all 3k victims are questionable? After all you think that none of them really died right?

Many of the memorials don't even have a picture :confused:

dontdrinkurmilk
23-02-2012, 11:13 PM
Then where are are many thousands of friends and family on the 9/11 truth threads? I can't recall seeing any, apart from the 'my mothers, next door neighbours cousins, sister in law was in the south tower' people that when asked for a name are never to be seen again. It doesn't make sense that there aren't normal truth seeking relatives about. Just a few controlled ones like the building 7 people and the 'Jersey girls'.

They faked the images so they could cash in on the memorials and make the whole thing more believable.

What about AJ's and others who boast that there are family members looking for the truth, what about the families who questioned the 9/11 commission and complained about it, are they fake?

What about these family members of victims named in this report:

(Aug. 4) -- The proposed Muslim community center at ground zero is a "slap in the face," says the sister of a New York City firefighter who died on 9/11. But a New Jersey man whose son perished in the attacks is torn between his wish to help build a "better world" and his fears that the project will only spark more anger and suffering.

Families who lost loved ones when hijacked planes slammed into the World Trade Center towers on Sept. 11, 2001, were wrestling with their feelings today, a day after the controversial Islamic center cleared a critical hurdle.

Mark Lennihan, AP
Developers plan to tear down this building near ground zero in lower Manhattan to build a Muslim community center. The project has been dubbed "the ground zero mosque."

The project's fiercest critics argued that the center would be an insult to those who died at the hands of Muslim extremists.

But Herb Ouida, whose son Todd died in the attacks, says he supports the Cordoba Initiative's project.

"To call it a mosque is not right. It's a community center that includes a prayer center," Ouida told AOL News today.

The 68-year-old father from River Edge, N.J., says he is deeply concerned about the tone of some of the opposition to the project.

"What we are doing [when we oppose the community center] is we are saying to the world that we are at war with Islam. And we can't be. I want my grandchildren to live in a better world," he said.

"To say that we're going to condemn a religion and castigate a billion people in the world because they're Muslims, to say that they shouldn't have the ability to pray near the World Trade Center -- I don't think that's going to bring people together and cross the divide."

But Ouida, who along with his wife started a foundation to help fight childhood anxiety, a condition Todd struggled to overcome as a boy, said he understood the grief victims' families are still going through.

"Pain just sometimes causes you to lash out," he said. "And I know is that there's a lot of pain."

Nancy Nee of Long Island, N.Y., wants Muslims to be able to build a community center -- just not so close to ground zero, where her brother, 35-year-old firefighter George Cain, died 10 years ago.

"We're upset," Nee, 48, told AOL News today in a phone interview. "Not at the fact that Muslims have a right to practice their religion here ... we're not like that. But I feel that it's a slap in the face to put it close to ground zero."

Nee said the building's size, as well as its location, was a problem. "It's a 13-story building that will tower over the other buildings," she said. "It's almost like a trophy. The whole thing just reeks of arrogance at this point."

On 9/11, Marvin Bethea rushed to the World Trade Center to try to save lives, and has had trouble breathing ever since. The former Emergency Medical Services worker says he had to retire in 2004 when the breathing problems he acquired from toxic materials at the site made it too hard for him to work. But Bethea said he supports the Islamic center anyway.

"Even though my life has changed, I don't hate the Muslims," Bethea, 50, said. "Especially being a black man, I know what it's like to be discriminated against. I've lived with that."

Bethea believes racism is stoking the controversy.

"I understand the families are hurt and lost," he said. But "how do you sit here and condemn all Muslims as being terrorists?" he said. "That's just bigotry and hatred. We're a better nation than that. The diversity that we have, this is what New York is about. But we have such prejudices, some of us. We have a long way to go."

New Jersey resident Barry Zelman says it's inappropriate to have an Islamic center just steps from ground zero.

"We can say all Muslims did not do this, which is true. But they [terrorists] did it in the name of that religion. That was a primary underlying rationale for what they did," he said.

Zelman, 56, lost his brother Kenneth in the attacks and doesn't like the symbolism of the proposed community center. "You wouldn't have a German cultural center on top of a death camp," he said.

Jack Delaney, former director of EMS for New York Presbyterian Hospital, lost two of his men on Sept. 11 and remains permanently disabled because of an injury he sustained from falling debris at the World Trade Center site.

"You could say that I'm sensitive to some of these issues," Delaney, 53, said in a phone interview.

Delaney says he has no problem with Islam, but can't understand why the group sponsoring the center isn't being more sensitive to the wishes of the victims' families and survivors.

"If they truly are concerned about reaching out to the American people, I don't understand why they need to build a cultural center there," he said. "They realize that it's a raw nerve. And ... that makes me question why they actually want to build this mosque where they want to build it."

Charles Wolf of New York City lost his wife, Katherine, in the attacks. "She was a wonderful girl," said Wolf, 56.

He said he supports the Muslim community center "100 percent."

"I'm not going to brand any group for the actions of a few of the fringe," Wolf said. "The fact that the extremists who did this to us have now moved us in this direction through our fear and hatred, to be exactly like them ... it will come back to haunt us."

He accused certain politicians, like former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, of using the controversy over the community center to "foster a public backlash against Muslims." Giuliani called the project "a desecration" on the conservative Jeff Katz radio show this week.

Wolf thinks that sentiment is wrong, and said Americans can't support the rights of certain groups over others.

"This country was founded on the principles of religious freedom for all," he said. "Are we doing to start denying that to people? If we start doing that we start dismantling the values this country was founded upon."


But there aren't many witness statements to be found, and many of the statements mention anything from just explosions to commercial airliners. Once the second plane hit on live TV they didn't need to speak to people in the street, they could just keep on replaying the strike over and over & anyone saying that there wasn't a plane were shouted down because of the (fake) TV shots.

What about the radar that saw flight 175 turning into NYC at the time just before impact?

No not too many witnesses I suppose, just these below:

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/United_Airlines_Flight_175_Crash_Evidence

Witness accounts

Lakshman Achutan (audio interview)

Lakshman Achutan was attending a meeting on the ground floor of the north tower of the World Trade Center when it was attacked. He describes the initial impact, his escape, and his view of the second plane as it approached the south tower.
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/afc911bib:@field(DOCID+@lit(afc911000144))

Sgt. 1st Class Stephen Atha

While sitting in the Chevy Suburban, he told his coworker it looked like the World Trade Center was on fire. As he turned on the radio and heard that a "small plane" had crashed into Tower One, "we saw the second plane come in as clear as day over the water right into the building, and ... I said 'This was not an accident,'" Atha said.
http://www.dcmilitary.com/dcmilitary_archives/stories/101801/11338-1.shtml

Daniel Bang

Daniel Bang, a 21-year-old financial analyst, was about one block away when he watched the second plane hit the South Tower.
"I had no idea what was going on, I just saw the side of the building explode out, he said.
http://www.sfgate.com/today/0912_chron_nyscene.shtml

Rich Bautista

Rich Bautista, 56, a construction consultant, was headed to a 9 a.m. appointment on 59 Maiden Lane, two blocks away from the World Trade Center, when he heard the first blast. "It was so fast, it was so loud," he recalls. "I just came out of the Fulton Street subway when I heard this terrifying explosion. I looked up and saw smoke surrounding the World Trade Center. People started running. There was mass hysteria." Bautista's co-worker Ernie Kneuer, 29, saw flames pouring out of the building. They went up to the 40th floor of their building just in time to see the second plane collide. "I saw dozens of people jumping to their deaths from the 80th floor," says Kneuer. "Bodies were landing on nearby rooftops and on the plaza."
http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/sept11/features/5183

Mark Belair

I saw the second plane hit. I had just come out of the subway at Sixth Avenue and West Fourth and noticed everyone on the sidewalk looking up. I followed their gaze to see a tremendous black gash in the north tower, about 30 blocks away, and overheard someone say a plane had just crashed into the building. At first we thought it must have been an accident, a small plane that lost control. Then it dawned on me that the damage was too great for a small plane or an accident. I figured it must have been an act of terrorism - horrible, but over. Then the second plane banked in low and, as I watched, slammed through the south tower and exploded into a fireball.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/parents/story/0,,554123,00.html

John Bloom

Then, as he watched horrified, Bloom saw the second plane approach: "For a moment it was pointed directly at me, then about five seconds before impact the pilot made an adjustment and banked about 20 degrees. He was making a correction! To go in at an angle? To make sure he hit the center?
"He sailed in so smoothly. There was that little moment when you see a plane level out before it touches down. It almost eased into the building. I waited for the blast, and it was strangely delayed. He entered on the opposite side of the tower but I saw the fire shoot out of my side before I heard the explosion. He had hit much lower, around the 50th floor, and this time the gash was infinitely worse."
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20060905/ai_n16707300

Jennifer Bodner

When she saw the second plane, she thought it was some sort of rescue plane, coming to help, or to put out the fire.
“I don’t know what I was thinking,” she said. “Then it hit the second building. I don’t even remember what happened after that. We all looked at each other and said, ‘We have to get out.’”
www.dailyhome.com (Web Archive copy)

Jena Bridges

Jena Bridges, a fifth-year law associate, was in a partner’s office at Broadway and 42nd Street waiting for a conference call when smoke and flames erupted from the north tower.
"One of the partners said, ‘Holy s**t!’ I turned around and looked out the window and said, ‘Oh my God,’" Bridges said. "Then as we were watching, we saw the second plane bank around into the second building, and there was this huge ball of fire."
http://www.cdalumni.org/news/vii1/November%202001/nyc-attacks.html

Richard and Cathy Brown

It was then that we heard and saw the second plane. As soon as we saw it, the basic shape of the attack became clear to me. We saw the pilot level the wings and heard him gun the engines, as if on takeoff. We couldn't see the actual impact, because of a building in front of us, but it exploded right above us.
September 11: An Oral History, Dean E. Murphy

James Calcagnini

James Calcagnini '84, president of East Coast Options Services, a commodities brokerage firm, worked in Building 4, adjacent to the second tower... As he walked across the courtyard, he looked up to see first tower ablaze and minutes later heard a roar and saw the second plane strike....
http://www.nd.edu/~ndmag/w2001-02/9-11survive.html

Ted Campanello

Ted Campanello '85 worked on the 29th floor of WTC Building 7 (the smaller, third building to collapse) as a vice president for Salomon Smith Barney. He was on his way to the building and looking up at the smoke coming from the first tower when he saw the second plane coming out of the corner of his eye. When it hit, he ran into the basement of the Hilton Millennium Hotel but after about five minutes went back outside and headed east...
http://www.nd.edu/~ndmag/w2001-02/9-11survive.html

Dana Carey

‘There's another plane,’ I exclaimed. We watched as it disappeared behind the first tower and was transformed into a ball of fire...
http://www.sygeplejersken.dk/sygeplejersken/default.asp?intArticleID=7006

FIREFIGHTER JOSEPH CASALIGGI
I left my rollup and my standpipe kit in the lobby. I went outside to the rig, changed the cylinder. While I was changing the cylinder, I was keeping an eye because the chauffeur was hooking up to the standpipe. I was keeping an eye, making sure he didn't get hit with anything.
It was at that time when I saw the second plane hit the building. I called a mayday. I told them the second plane hit the south tower of the building. I wasn't sure which floors it was, but I knew it hit the upper floors of the south tower.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110430.PDF

Peter Collins

Another co-worker, Peter Collins, a vice-president at Rowland Communications, saw the second plane strike the second tower.
"As we're watching the building on fire, I saw this plane sweep over the bay and I knew it was from Newark," Collins said. "It kept climbing, and all of a sudden it just went into the building. There was a spectacular fire and then a few seconds later you heard a pop. It went directly towards it, never deviated."
He said the scene was surreal.
"You're so used to terrorism happening all around you and you become numb to it," Collins said. "You see the spectacular happening right in front of you and you're just like 'whoa.' "
http://www.esubjects.com/curric/general/english_two/unit_two/pdf/ItWasAwful_HardNews.pdf

Carl Cunneff

Police guided us across the West Side Highway, then we heard a loud roar and looked up to see a second jet headed right for the south tower. We heard the engines speed up as it turned sideways and hit the corner of the building head on. It looked like it melted into a fireball.
http://web.archive.org/web/20010914230246/http://people.aol.com/people/special/0,11859,174592-3,00.html

EMT SEAN CUNNIFFE
We were lined up on West Street, west side, right by the pedestrian bridge, between six and one, over here somewhere. I don't remember the supervisor's name, but they had us line up, put our stretchers and equipment on it. We were just waiting for further instruction.
As we were waiting there, counting the people jumping, that's when we saw the scope of it. We counted 39 people. It was sad. That's when it stopped being exciting and reality kicked in and we were hanging out.
The second plane came in. It was the biggest noise I ever heard in my life.
Q. Did you see the plane?
A. Yeah. We saw it, we heard it, we felt the heat from it, the debris. We ducked under a truck...
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110164.PDF

PARAMEDIC KEVIN DARNOWSKI
Right before the tolls on the Brooklyn side heading towards Manhattan at the Battery Tunnel, we were sitting in traffic and we watched United Flight 175 hit tower two, which was the south tower of the World Trade Center.
At that time everybody was just in shock. The firefighters and I were just really trying to get through the traffic when the plane hit, and we were just standing there in like awe of what was happening.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110202.PDF

Daya-Dominguez
Gabriella Daya-Dominquez (Husband worked in the South Tower of the World Trade Center on 9/11)
"My husband in the meantime, what was occurring with him at that moment was he was just entering his office. He was about 200 yards from the building. He saw the plane coming very low overhead. He saw it make a U-turn and bank right into his building. At that point he said he knew that this was not an accident, this was an attack and all hell broke lose. The pandemonium in the city was already going on. First with the North Tower. People were just standing there staring. They weren't really running, they were just watching. But by the second tower hitting people started running frantically.
http://www.arlingtonva.us/departments/Libraries/history/LibrariesHistoryOralHist911Citizens.aspx (Currently Broken)

Police Officer Tracey Donahoo

"One of the officers behind me said, 'Oh my God, Tracey, another airplane is coming!' I could hear the plane just coming and coming, and the engine was getting louder and louder. Then I heard it hit the South Tower. There was a shower of debris and parts of the plane... Airplane parts were falling and crushing police cars...
Women at Ground Zero, Susan Hagen and Mary Carouba

Greg Dubinsky

At the time, I was on the eighth floor, watching through the window, after we were informed that the first plane had hit. And I actually saw the second plane vanish behind the building. And the building just erupted in a cloud, a huge cloud of explosion. And I witnessed people jumping, I guess out of desperation from the towers.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/15/smn.12.html

Ingrid Ernst

Ingrid Ernst, a flight attendant on Lufthansa Airlines, was looking out her hotel window across the Hudson River from New York City on Tuesday morning when she saw a jumbo jet penetrate the second World Trade Center building.
``It was going as fast as a regular plane. I didn't realize what was happening, Ernst, 23, of Hamburg, Germany, told the Daily News by phone from the Sheraton Hotel in Weehawken, New Jersey.
Ernst was relaxing by her window, planning her vacation in Los Angeles today, when she saw one of the hijacked passenger planes crash into the middle-to-upper floors of one of America's tallest landmarks.
``You saw the plane disappear, then fire on the other side, she said of the jet, which appeared small from her vantage across the river. ``It was like you are in a movie - it takes you awhile to realize what's happening. You're just shocked, you can't think anything at the moment.

Daily News, September 12 2001

Evan Fairbanks

(VO) In a day filled with images we may never forget, this one stands out. The extraordinary footage of an American Airlines jet slicing through the number two tower of the World Trade Center. That image was captured by 40-year-old freelance cameraman Evan Fairbanks who had been working two blocks away.
Mr. EVAN FAIRBANKS: I suddenly saw a white flash from the left side of the frame, and I--and it lasted long enough for me to be able to identify it as a--as a jet.
CHUNG: When you saw that plane hitting the Trade Center tower, could you actually fathom what you were viewing?
Mr. FAIRBANKS: Not at all. It was very surreal. I felt like I was in another dimension, and, you know, we weren't even on the same planet. I guess as the human stories start to emerge, and we see more people, and we hear more names, it will become a lot more real to me. But right now, I feel like I'm still in the bubble of--of the day, and the whole experience is just kind of numbing.
CHUNG: (VO) Fairbanks has been a cameraman for 16 years. But today he wasn't operating on ex-perience; it was instinct. And that's what drew him back for one last shot. That's when the tower began to collapse.
Mr. FAIRBANKS: I was looking in the view finder, and I just saw this reverse mushroom cloud billowing down, and I realized my proximity, and immediately just turned and started running north.
CHUNG: (VO) But for Evan Fairbanks, this is the image that will haunt him and us for the rest of our lives.
Mr. FAIRBANKS: The image of that plane, just coming out of nowhere, coming into the frame and dis-appearing into the side, into the south side of the tower as if a floor had been hollowed out and it was a hanger that it was just landing in. We've seen these images in movies, and we know that it's all artificial, and Hollywood makes it. And it's hard to put together that it's real this time.
America Under Attack, ABC News, 10pm September 11 2001

EMT JARJEAN FELTON
...I seen the second plane coming. I'm thinking isn't that plane too low? I'm like... then I noticed, I seen it turn. It turned and went right in the building. But we're behind, like this is the building, it went in, and you see the explosion in the front...
Q: On the other side than you?
A: Yeah...
http://sfgate.com/gate/pictures/2005/09/10/ga_jarjean_felton.pdf

FIREFIGHTER THOMAS GABY
Q. The second plane?
A. I saw it coming in, I heard it, and bang, it hit.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110140.PDF

FIREFIGHTER JOSEPH GALASSO

After the first plane hit, we were here, actually. We could see the towers actually from here. So after the first plane hit, we saw it on the news. So we came up here to look out the window, and we saw it. We watched the second plane hit. Just as the second plane hit, that's when we received the alarm.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110322.PDF

Nicholas Gasper

Nicholas Gasper, a city transit employee who was standing on the Brooklyn side of the Brooklyn Bridge, said he watched the second plane "doing a tilt into the building. From what I saw, it looked like the plane sliced into the tower."
Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, September 12 2001

Karen Lane Gilsenan

Then, it happened again. We saw an airplane, coming from the south and headed right toward the second WTC tower. It looked so odd there. Planes are never flying in the middle of Manhattan like that. We were so close that I knew that it was a United Airlines plane. Yet the moment I saw the plane, it was clear that terrorists were attacking NYC. We all screamed. I grabbed my bag and ran for the stairs. "Get out, get out," we yelled as we ran.
www.wheaton.edu (Web Archive copy)

John Del Giorno, Helicopter Reporter, WABC-TV New York

We were climbing through eleven hundred feet towards an assigned altitude of fifteen hundred feet, and then we saw it. Paul Smith, my pilot, saw it before I did - an airliner, traveling from south to north, traveling low and fast.
"Now what's this guy doing?" I asked Paul.
"You see this yahoo?" he shot back...
I could see the rear profile with engines on both wings as it approached the statue [of Liberty]. A Boeing 737, I thought. And then it dipped. Not a graceful, gradual airliner turn like you see in commercials; this was a sharp, abrupt turn that put the plane into a forty-five-degree bank, and it flew into the shade being created by the smoke plume from the north tower...
I moved and focused the camera, placed the remote in my lap, pressed "play" and "record," and looked back up my camera monitor. It now contained the image of a huge fireball.
"Did he just...?"...
"Holy shit," Paul said calmly. "Yeah. He just hit the building!"

Covering Catastrophe: Broadcast Journalists Report September 11

Police Officer James E. Hall

While assisting a female burn victim, I observed PO Rivero look up towards the WTC tower #2. At this time the undersigned heard the sound of jet engines and observed an aircraft with a blue color tail fly directly into the south face of WTC Tower #2.
http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa-transcripts/pa-police-reports01.pdf

Tara L. Harper

I was actually six blocks south of the World Trade Center at work when this attack happened. I heard about the first plane, and SAW the second plane hit. Once the second plane hit we knew it was terrorism and left our building.
http://unbound.intrasun.tcnj.edu/unbound/signal/miracle.htm

Stuart Hoffman

I happened to look up just as the other plane came in and crashed into the World Trade Center. I saw the plane, I saw it crash through, the ball of flame.
www.nationalstudent.tv (Web Archive copy)

FIREFIGHTER SCOTT HOLOWACH
At that time, I started walking towards Engine 3. Engine 3 drove south to the south pedestrian bridge to make a U turn to come back and as I'm walking towards the Engine to find out what Lieutenant Walsh wanted us to do, I heard the sound of a jet plane. I looked up and saw it pretty close and I was like holy shit. What's going on with the with the flight patterns. All of a sudden, the wings turned and it dove right into the building and it was screwed up.
At that time Chief Ganci was behind me and he thought there was another explosion in the north tower and that's when I turned around and said Chief, listen, there is a second plane that hit the other tower. He was like no no no no, we have another explosion. I said no, Chief, I witnessed it. I watched the plane hit the other tower. He is like are you sure. I said Chief, I'm 100 hundred percent positive I watched the second plane hit the other tower.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110114.PDF

Arthur E. Imperatore Jr

...Arthur E. Imperatore Jr., president of NY Waterway, based in Weehawken, N.J., said he had dropped his kids off at school and was driving to his office when he saw the second aircraft hit the other WTC tower. "From my car I could see both towers burning.
http://www.fireboat.org/press/prof_mariner_jan02_1.asp

Melissa Johnson

...I heard some shouts and a bunch of footsteps. A swarm of people was running towards me. Above the people I saw a big jet aimed at the World Trade Center. In a second, it became buried into the South Tower.
September 11: An Oral History, Dean E. Murphy

Dana Kincaid

I passed by the WTC a few minutes before the first impact, but did not hear or see it -- I must have been in the elevator of my building when that happened. When I got to our office cafeteria, a group of people were watching the fire in the north tower, a few blocks directly north of us.
At 9:14 am, I sent this e-mail via Blackberry to my husband:
I saw it! I saw the second plane fly right into the south tower. We wee looking at the fire from the first crash, which we heard was a small plane. The second plane was a JET. It was a big plane, looked like a 727, AND IT WAS DELIBERATE. I can't tell you how upset I am.
http://angrytoyrobot.blogspot.com/2006/09/another-one.html

Bruce Kratofil

...both Rachel and I heard a plane. Looking over the southern tip of Manhatten, we could see the United jet roaring in, just skimming the tops of the buildings. Normally, when you see a jet that close, it is taking off or landing and is moving relatively slowly. This one was at full throttle. I remember yelling something like "What's he doing there?" but it went quickly behind us and was blocked from view by the buildings along the water. We didn't see the impact, but we could hear it and feel it.
http://www.bjkresearch.com/ny

Adolfo Laurenti

“I saw this airplane coming from, I spotted around uh above the Statue of Liberty and coming in and coming down and down and my thoughts was that it was probably doing some form of reconocance [sic] over lower Manhattan to see what was coming in and when it got closer I thought well maybe its not a great idea to have a jet liner to deal reconocance over a you know populated area.”
Then it kept coming down and down and one point you had to realize, its really a matter of second but you had to realize that its not going to move up.
www.nationalstudent.tv (Web Archive copy)

Seymour Levy

It was approximately 8:50 AM, on a spectacular picture perfect New York City September morning, as I ascended the steps of the Canal Street subway station in lower Manhattan. It was then that I noticed a crowd of spectators all pointing skyward... southward towards Manhattan's tip. Then I saw it. Thick black smoke and flames emanating from the top floors of one of the twin towers.
"I think a plane hit the building," commented of one of the bystanders. I thought to myself, could this be possible on such a crystal clear day? My next thoughts were, how are the firemen ever going to get to reach those trapped in this inferno? As I gaped in awe, I saw it happen. Another plane smashed into the second tower emitting a gigantic fire ball and explosion. Is this really happening? Is this some sort of special effect Hollywood production I'm seeing? A frenzy of police sirens, and fire truck horns erupted, coming from all directions racing downtown at a maddening pace.
http://americanhistory.si.edu/september11/collection/record.asp?ID=108

Jacalyn Lee

Jacalyn Lee was on her way to work a few blocks from the Trade Center shortly before 9 a.m. when a low-flying plane roared above her.
"I said to the guy next to me, "It's going to crash in. It's going to crash in.' Then it crashed in, Lee said. "You thought anybody who was in there had to be dead.
http://www.sfgate.com/today/0912_chron_nyscene.shtml

Mark Lewis

MICHAEL MCKEE, BLOOMBERG NEWS
I was in a taxi, heading down Manhattan’s West Side Highway for a conference at the World Trade Center when the first airliner flew over us and crashed into the North Tower. It was 8:50 a.m.
Traffic came to an immediate halt. I jumped from the cab, climbed the fence and ran three blocks to the trade center as it began falling apart. I interviewed witnesses, including two financial industry workers riding their bikes to work.
"It was like a mirage," said Mark Lewis, a systems analyst at Citigroup Inc.’s Salomon Smith Barney unit. "I looked up and saw (the plane) melting into the building."
Just then we heard a tremendous noise, looked up and saw another large passenger plane slam into the South Tower, 50 or 60 stories up. Glass and debris rained down as we ran into a nearby building.
The Beaumont Enterprise, September 12 2001
http://www.poynterextra.org/extra/pdf/BeaumontEnterpriseW.pdf

Sherman Lewis

[Northwestern University] Trustee Sherman Lewis, whose office in the World Financial Center is across the street from the World Trade Center, was driving to work when he saw the plane crash into the building. He turned around and went home, said Ronald Vanden Dorpel, vice president for university development.
University Wire, September 21, 2001

Dina Manieri

Dina Manieri, who works for Morgan Stanley in Exchange Place, saw the plane hit the second building.
"My God. It's worse than the devil. I think this is the Third World War . That somebody could do this on purpose . . ." she trailed off shaking and crying.
The Star-Ledger (Newark, New Jersey), September 11 2001

EMT BRAD MANN

"We arrived shortly after the first plane hit the tower and began setting up EMS operations," says Mann. "By the time we realized what happened, we looked up and saw the second plane hit the second tower, and within a few minutes we were just running for our lives. It was like nothing I have ever seen in 15 years."
http://www.cigaraficionado.com/Cigar/CA_Archives/CA_Show_Article/0,2322,182,00.html

Assistant FBI Director Barry Mawn

I could see the north tower from here and really a huge black hole which was still, you know, some fire and smoking on the north side of the tower.
My initial thought was this was a terrible accident, but I requested that these people start to respond to the World Trade complex and that I would meet them down there. We were observing the evacuation when we actually saw the second plane come down, flying north to south, actually turn around. And then we lost it momentarily behind the buildings, and then the next time we saw it, it was headed straight for the south tower.
http://www-cgi.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0202/18/lt.17.html

Gene McGillian (unspecific - could be either plane)

"I saw (the plane) maybe 200 yards before it hit," said Gene McGillian of Dobbs Ferry, a broker at the New York Mercantile Exchange. "I saw all kinds of debris and body parts on the ground and on car hoods. You had to move pretty quickly because there were pieces of metal hitting the ground. It was horrible."
http://www.lohud.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20010912/SPECIAL01/109120302/-1/SPECIAL0106

Kimberly Morales

"It was banking and it was flying far too low," says Kimberly Morales, a college student who was coming out of the Chambers Street subway station. "I could see a little bit of space between its nose and the South Tower. And then they came together in a big explosion and a huge ball of fire. It was instant."
September 11: An Oral History, Dean E. Murphy

Murray Murad

Maybe about 10 to 12 minutes after that first plane, I heard another plane. Then I said to myself, weíre being attacked.
I ran downstairs. No sooner did I run downstairs and look up, that I saw the second plane strike the south tower. It was such a vicious hit and such a precision hit, it was unbelievable.
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/Murad_Murray.txt

FIREFIGHTER JAMES MURPHY
After that I ran up to the roof on the third floor with me and Eric Bernsten. We were watching it. We could see it from here. We have an unobstructed view. The other guys came up too. All six of us were on the roof...
Then we saw the second one come up. It looked like it was coming up the East River from here. I guess it was coming from the south. I thought it banked over the East River, which is what it looked like. I thought it made a left over the East River and went right into it going from east to west. But as it turns out, it came from the south. Then we saw it just go right into the building and explode.
I remember talking to Eric. I remember Eric saying something, "Oh, my God, there's another plane." I was saying to him, "That plane is closer to us. It's really not a big plane going towards the building." Two seconds later it rammed into the building. You don't expect it. We just freaked.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110323.PDF

Haleh Nazeri

I stood on the street with about 100 or so other people and watched the fire with horror. Then all of a sudden I saw another plane, it was so loud and so low and so wrong. I knew before it even hit in that fraction of a second that something was terribly wrong and that my world would never be the same. When the plane hit, as you have all now seen, it created quite a bit of debris, which I saw flying towards me. The entire crowd turned and starting running the other way.
http://www.iranian.com/Features/2001/September/911/


Andrew Nelson

"There was no sound as these tremendous buildings went down," said Andrew Nelson of San Francisco, who was in New York visiting family and friends. "The World Trade Center was there this morning. I'm looking where the towers should be and they are not there."
Nelson was having coffee in a friend's West Broadway loft when the first of the hijacked commercial jets slammed into the World Trade Center.
"I'm watching the World Trade Center go up in flames," he said at 8:55 a.m., not knowing that he was watching the signature moment of the most staggering terrorist attack on the United States unfold.
"All of a sudden we heard this whoosh of low-flying jet, there was this murmur in the streets, knots of people were looking south and started screaming.
"The entire World Trade Center is on fire. Look at the shrapnel falling. It is falling into the streets."
Several minutes later, with crowds of store clerks, office workers and tourists gaping at the destruction, a second plane appeared in the sky.
"This plane banked around the side of the World Trade Center looking like it was going right at it. There was a huge fireball and it just exploded. People on the street screamed, cried no, no, no, and sobbed," he said. "It is horrifying. There is debris falling from windows. . . People on the street are gesturing, crying, in shock."
Some time later, the two buildings collapsed, first one, then the other. "The funny thing is, from a mile away on West Broadway, there was no sound. There was no sound when these buildings went down," Nelson said.
http://www.esubjects.com/curric/general/english_two/unit_two/pdf/ItWasAwful_HardNews.pdf

CHIEF OF THE DEPARTMENT DANIEL NIGRO (FDNY)

At some point after our arrival and after we had moved to the west side of West Street, I heard a loud roar of a jet, looked up and saw the second plane impact the south tower. At that point it was clear to me it was a terrorist attack. Earlier I didn't know what it was. I assumed it was an accident.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110154.PDF

FIREFIGHTER ROBERT NORRIS

We all got out of the rig, and we were standing there. We watched another plane come in. I felt the plane was coming underneath the pillar of smoke that was coming out of the first tower, but obviously it veered into the tower, and it took another hit.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110396.PDF

BATTALION CHIEF BRIAN O'FLAHERTY (FDNY)

Just then out of the corner of my eye, I could see this plane. I just remember the dark. It was in the shadow. It looked low. I thought, "What the heck is the guy doing?" I watched it, watched him turn and crash right into the south tower. Right away I knew it was terrorism or terrorists. I didn't know what the first one was, but I knew what the second one was.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110431.PDF

Scott Pasquini

Scott Pasquini had by now walked down toward Battery Park, along the river, and was standing in a crowd of people looking up at the North Tower when he heard a sound overhead and watched the second plane hit the other tower.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A38407-2001Sep15

Mike Penzer

About 9:03 a.m., as I was still looking north toward the Trade Center, I heard the very loud sound of a jet passenger plane flying very low behind me. I spun around and saw the plane directly above the Statue of Liberty and about to fly over our heads. Then, the plane avoided a high-rise just north of us and flew into the south side of the South Tower at about the 70th floor level. The huge plane disappeared into the even larger building, and a huge ball of flame and smoke erupted.
http://www.nabe.com/am2001/penzer.html

Dominic Perella

Dominic Perella had just gotten home to Brooklyn after working the overnight shift at the Associated Press. He was getting ready for bed when his roommate shouted into his room, saying Perella must not have known what happened when he left work.
"We went onto the roof, which has a Manhattan view," Perella said. "We saw the second plane approach. I thought it was a rescue plane or something, and then it disappeared from sight."
http://www.cdalumni.org/news/vii1/November%202001/nyc-attacks.html

PARAMEDIC JOEL PIERCE

...I watched eventually the second plane, I saw it. It looked like it was circling around south, then came back north, striking the south side of Tower No. 2.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110485.PDF

Stanley Praimnath
As Praimnath enters his office, his phone is ringing. A friend from Chicago asks Praimnath if he heard about the north tower being hit. He assures her all is fine.
But all is not fine. It is 9:03 a.m. and United Airlines Flight 175 is staring him in the face.
"Suddenly I see this big gray airplane with red letters on the wing and tail filling my window," Praimnath says. "It’s coming right at me."
Praimnath drops the phone and tucks under his desk in a fetal position as the plane obliterates the wall. The impact is a prolonged, gut-wrenching screech, a hideous, metallic roar. "It sounded like a huge steel cage being ripped apart," Praimnath recalls...
http://stanleypraimnath.com/1.htm

David Reck

David Reck was handing out literature for a candidate for public advocate a few blocks away when he saw a jet come in "very low, and then it made a slight twist and dove into the building."
http://www.gallupindependent.com/1999-2001/9-11-01.html

Andrea Refol

It was our 4-year-old Jordan's first day of pre-kindergarten. We left our house at 8:22 a.m.; I was on my way to a doctor's appointment, the radio was on, and we heard the news report. I had my first contraction. We were driving down Sackett Street in Brooklyn, and we watched the second plane make contact. My first thought was, Oh, my God, my appointment -- I'm supposed to have a baby!
http://nymag.com/news/articles/wtc/6months/testimonials/2.htm

Luigi Ribaudo

About 18 minutes later, Luigi Ribaudo -- who works nearby, in Tribeca -- heard a twin-engine plane making what he said was a strange noise. He looked up; he saw a plane that was "too low."
"It was going to hit something and it hit and exploded inside," he said.
http://www.esubjects.com/curric/general/english_two/unit_two/pdf/ItWasAwful_HardNews.pdf

EMT Mercedes Rivera
"As I passed by St. Vincent's Hospital below 14th Street, Paul said, 'Wow. Look at that plane. It's pretty close.' I said, 'Jeez, you're right. Look at the size of that plane.' We watched that plane get closer; it flew over us, it went over the Hudson River, then we saw it make a tilt and go right into the South Tower. It was like science fiction.
Then we saw the explosion...
Women at Ground Zero, Susan Hagen and Mary Carouba

Police Officer J Rivero

At this time I heard a loud roar coming from the south I yelled 'Al look at this shit' the plane smashed into W.T.C. #2...
http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa-transcripts/pa-police-reports01.pdf

Steven Schiraldi
Steven Schiraldi, a Wall Street financial manager, was reached by phone in New York moments after the second tower of the World Trade Center was hit by a plane.
"I saw the second plane fly right past my window," he said.
Then he cut the conversation short with the comment: "I have to go now. They told us to evacuate the building. There is complete chaos here."
Later he told Catholic News Service that after he saw the plane fly past his office window, he watched it crash into the trade center. "It disintegrated on impact. My heart was pounding. I've never been so scared in my life."
His office building is about a half mile from the World Trade Center, and once he was evacuated he couldn't breathe from all the soot outside. All around him people were "screaming, crying and praying," he said.
http://www.archden.org/dcr/archive/20010919/2001091906wn.htm

Keith Schwer
Exiting the hotel within minutes, Schwer emerged to the heart of a chaotic scene—and thankfully was not struck or injured by falling debris. But once he saw the tail of the plane jutting out from the burning building, he realized this was not an explosion or an earthquake; it was an attack—and one that wasn’t over yet.
"We walked toward the Hudson River, so I saw the second plane coming down the river. It was so strange—I saw the plane bank, then I heard it coming and I saw that it was headed for the South Tower. I saw it go into the building."
http://system.nevada.edu/News/Publicatio/Regents--R/2001/rr_oct01.pdf

Ken Siebert
Ken Siebert, who works at 195 Broadway, also not far from the World Trade Center, said he had come out of the Church Street subway station as the second plane approached the center.
"I saw the plane bank and turn," Mr. Siebert said. "He turned, definitely turned, and banked it in there."
To Mr. Siebert, such movements indicated to him that terrorists were piloting the aircraft.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2001/09/12/myork_ed3_.php

Mitchell Simmons

Mitchell Simmons was in his lower-midtown Manhattan office Tuesday morning when a co-worker said, "You should see this, a plane just flew into the World Trade Center." Simmons, spokesman for e-mail list company 24/7 Media, joined staffers in CEO Dave Moore's 28th floor office, which had a clear view of the Trade Center.
"At that point, we thought it was an accident," Simmons said. "There were no news accounts yet."
Simmons added, "As we watched the building burn, we saw the second plane come around. It was very surreal because it felt like a movie, but it was reality."
As they watched the plane slam into the second tower, co-workers cried out in horror. "We knew then they were very deliberate attacks."
http://directmag.com/news/marketing_marketers_eyewitness_history

EMS CAPTAIN MARK STONE
We got in the truck, listening to reports coming in on Citywide and we ended up taking the Battery Park Tunnel underneath to come up on the West Street side of the incident. We came up right out of the tunnel. I was looking up to see if I could do a little more initial size up. That is when I saw the second plane hit the building. I just watched it coming in.
I see that the plane hit and I'm really thinking for the safety of the members that we got operating already ...
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110076.PDF

FIREFIGHTER JOSEPH SULLIVAN

Okay. We responded from quarters. The ticket came in at 8:54. We were going on the first alarm to the staging area by the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel. En route to the staging area, we were going down Columbia Street, saw the second plane strike the building and we went from being a, quote, good job or a rough job, or we were going to earn our money today.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110286.PDF

Maciej Swulinski

At this moment hearing a coming sound I raised my head. No! This is not happening. A big passenger jet was right above me. It was a blink of an eye. A fraction of second later the airplane disappeared inside WTC tower. I was standing at the base of the building that was the target of terrorist attack. There was no place take the cover. It was to late to run away. All I could do was just to cover my head with my bare hands and wait for the miracle. Parts of the building and from the airplane were falling on the street around me.
http://www.swulinski.com/9-11/My911.html

Joe Trachtenberg

Witness Joe Trachtenberg saw both attacks from a high-rise block on the other side of Manhattan. He said: "The first tower was smoking hard. Then there was another plane, and before we knew, it went kamikaze and flew straight into the other tower.
"There was a mass explosion, and windows flying. It was horrible."
Daily Star, September 12, 2001

Denise Weiss (audio interview)

Denise Weiss was at her school -- located near the World Trade Center -- when suddenly the students were asked to evacuate. She saw the north tower in flames and an airliner slam into the south tower.
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/afc911bib:@field(DOCID+@lit(afc911000117))

Tom Weber

So I'm sitting there, on the 39th floor, and we're used to plane traffic, the sounds of planes are very familiar, but I heard a much louder sound, a sound closer in proximity than I've ever heard before which caused me to look up in the direction of that sound. I saw a commercial airliner which appeared to be banking to the east just go what appeared to be right through the WTC causing an explosion on one end and an explosion on the other end...
...came back to the window and I saw the second plane, and I never gave the second plane any credibility because there couldn't be another plane flying into the World Trade Center because that's impossible, almost impossible as the first one. And it was flying south. It wasn't as direct a hit as the first plane was. It kind of hit like the edge of the building, but the explosion was way worse than the first one. The first explosion wasn't...as a matther of fact, the first plane didn't have as big an explosion as the second. The second hit and our building shook.
http://www.courttv.com/talk/chat_transcripts/2001/0911eyewitnesses.html

Peter YBarra

"It was the worst thing I've ever seen in my entire life, said Peter Ybarra, a 40-year-old civil servant who saw the second plane crash into the World Trade Center. "Those movies about Pearl Harbor, they were never real to me. I wish God had taken away my eyesight before this happened.
http://www.sfgate.com/today/0912_chron_nyscene.shtml

Tonya Young

...suddenly I heard an airplane.
I turned and saw a plane coming at an angle from the direction of the Statue of Liberty. It was low and a little to the right of where I was standing, but almost directly overhead. I followed it until I saw it go into the second tower.
September 11: An Oral History, Dean E. Murphy

FIREFIGHTER STEPHEN ZASA

Upon that time I heard a plane roar. I had my window down and on my side we saw a plane flying very low come right across us and with a loud, you know, the engines revved up, and I had mentioned to him, I had no idea that it was heading towards that way, and I just said like where is this guy going, you know, he was extremely low, not realizing it was another plane heading towards the World Trade, and we saw it struck the building, we saw a big mushroom of flame, of fire coming up, and it was like disbelief, and he had gotten on the radio and notified the dispatcher another plane had struck the World Trade Center.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110417.PDF

Rick Zottola

We were just about two minutes away from [the] South Tower and about to go up to our office when we heard this roar overhead; we looked up and there it was, flying low over the city.
The second plane impacted the South Tower while we watched and the explosion spat fire out into the air. We watched the whole thing, completely dumbfounded.
Tower Stories: An Oral History Of 9/11, Damon DiMarco

Unnamed SeaStreak captain

SeaStreak, another high-speed ferry operator between the Atlantic Highlands and Manhattan, also found its vessels located close by to provide almost immediate evacuation assistance. By 0840, the catamaran ferry SeaStreak New York had almost completed its run to New York and was heading up the East River. As it passed Pier 16 on the East River, the captain radioed the home office, "that he saw a plane hit the WTC. He continued up to East 34th Street, did the drop off and pick up, and while on the way back, again near Pier 16, he saw the second plane hit the other tower," said Joanne Conroy, marketing director of SeaStreak.
http://www.fireboat.org/press/prof_mariner_jan02_1.asp

Unnamed

Early this morning around 9 am, I heard the sound of a low flying airplane. It was so loud my immediate thought was that it was a terrorist or a plane that would land on our rooftop in Greenwich Village. Seconds later I knew the horrible truth...
http://www.readio.com/archives/0109/11WTC/nyclickers.html

Unnamed

As I'm flying closer, almost opposite the WTC, right next to the Harborside Center in Jersey City, I see this airliner coming down in a steep bank, my first thought was, WTF is this guy doing!??? Why is he diving so steep to take a look at the fire! And it's an airliner! (looked like a 737 to me at the time). I muttered something along the lines "Jeez, this guy is gonna get so fired by his airline, it's not even funny!" The next moment.... it hits the building.... I felt like I was inside a cartoon or a movie, maybe that "Independence Day" flick, at the moment I thought I was seeing things, like this can't be, this isn't real... But I had my camera in hand and snapped virtually a split second later after the impact, I was simply too awestruck when I saw the plane, so it didn't click in me to actually shoot the thing (but if I had a Stinger SAM with me, damn, I wish I did and I would).
http://www.maxho.com/wtc


Wouldn't be hard to plant evidence in the confusion. Especially if the area had been evacuated.

Many of the memorials don't even have a picture :confused:

If it was evacuated, people would have been watching from where it was cordoned off, I am sure they would see people, cranes and trucks etc planting plane parts and what body parts?

So what as I say not everyone would have had family and friends, or relatives that even lived in the US.

whatsinaname
23-02-2012, 11:21 PM
Some of these are just ridiculous. Their families didn't have better pictures? :confused:

http://septemberclues.info/images/VICSIMS/RIDICULOUSLYBADPICS/1325-How.jpg
http://septemberclues.info/images/VICSIMS/RIDICULOUSLYBADPICS/1876-Ric.jpg
http://septemberclues.info/images/VICSIMS/RIDICULOUSLYBADPICS/2847-Joh.jpg
http://septemberclues.info/images/VICSIMS/RIDICULOUSLYBADPICS/2911-Dav.jpg

http://septemberclues.info/vicsimripiculous.htm

:D

Come on now, they're perfectly acceptable photos!:eek:

cont
23-02-2012, 11:22 PM
mishy, at the time of 9/11 I frequented a message forum which was 90% American. One ultra-regular poster from NY said he lost a friend in one of the towers. Later I learned he was a journalist at one of the major outlets in New York.

I think that's the only victim story I heard at the time.

Also what about the semi-famous people lost in the planes (football coach?) - where did they go?

dontdrinkurmilk
23-02-2012, 11:24 PM
mishy, at the time of 9/11 I frequented a message forum which was 90% American. One ultra-regular poster from NY said he lost a friend in one of the towers. Later I learned he was a journalist at one of the major outlets in New York.

I think that's the only victim story I heard at the time.

Also what about the semi-famous people lost in the planes (football coach?) - where did they go?

Do you have a name?

cont
23-02-2012, 11:31 PM
Do you have a name?

No. It's just something I remember hearing at the time.

dontdrinkurmilk
23-02-2012, 11:34 PM
No. It's just something I remember hearing at the time.

Hmmmm, were you not thinking of this?

http://www.wtnh.com/dpp/news/new_haven_cty/unh-football-coach-lost-brother-on-9-11

whatsinaname
23-02-2012, 11:37 PM
mishy, at the time of 9/11 I frequented a message forum which was 90% American. One ultra-regular poster from NY said he lost a friend in one of the towers. Later I learned he was a journalist at one of the major outlets in New York.

I think that's the only victim story I heard at the time.

Also what about the semi-famous people lost in the planes (football coach?) - where did they go?

Nearly every forum i've been on has someone who supposedly lost a friend.

Trouble is: when they're pressed for any details, they either can't remember, dissapear, or go into attack mode!

dontdrinkurmilk
23-02-2012, 11:42 PM
Nearly every forum i've been on has someone who supposedly lost a friend.

Trouble is: when they're pressed for any details, they either can't remember, dissapear, or go into attack mode!

Well it is a personal thing, so if they are genuine they may to be sad to talk about it in any detail. They could just be lying of course.

cont
23-02-2012, 11:44 PM
Hmmmm, were you not thinking of this?

http://www.wtnh.com/dpp/news/new_haven_cty/unh-football-coach-lost-brother-on-9-11

Perhaps. It could be one of those manufactured memories.

At the time I thought the "World Trade Center" was the same thing as the World Trade Organization so I wasn't exactly "all over it".

7forever
23-02-2012, 11:45 PM
I've seen it before & tbh I don't know what to make of it. Could be something in it, could be bs, I'll keep an open mind. Similar to what 7forever bangs on about I think.

Whatever hit the towers (if anything) wasn't a plane, which means the media were complicit in the attacks. Which means no truth will come out on the MSM. Ever.

Oh look, another blatant photoshopped vicsim..:eek:

http://septemberclues.info/images/VICSIMS/FLIPrescorla_richard_small.jpg

http://septemberclues.info/vicsims_photo-analyses.htm

Richard Hall, says it came from southwest, which is wrong because it came from directly west and possibly somewhat north. He fails to mention the other three broadcasts which also aired the drone. His whole flying saucer thing makes it laughable and guarantees no one would ever take it serious.

It has no apparent wings or propeller and is smaller than a chopper. That is some weird object. Hall, says it was flying over 200 mph, which is more speculative nonsense. I found another orb, from the rear of the towers, after T2 exploded, and calculated it was moving around 50 mph, and similar to the drone. I timed how long it took to move across 208 feet. Notice how it rises.LOL

http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/orb-cb_h_GIFSoupcom.gif
http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/very-close-orb_h_GIFSoupcom.gif

dontdrinkurmilk
23-02-2012, 11:48 PM
Hall, says it came from southwest, which is wrong because it came from directly west and possibly somewhat north. He fails to mention the other three broadcasts which also aired the drone. His whole flying saucer thing makes it laughable and guarantees no one would ever take it serious.

It has no apparent wings or propeller and is smaller than a chopper. That is some weird object. Hall says it was flying over 200 mph, which is more speculative nonsense. I had found another orb, from the rear of the towers after T2 exploded and calculated it was moving around 50 mph, and similar to the drone.

It is clear as day a plane hit T2:

check out all these videos.

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/United_Airlines_Flight_175_Crash_Evidence

mishy
24-02-2012, 12:14 AM
What about AJ's and others who boast that there are family members looking for the truth, what about the families who questioned the 9/11 commission and complained about it, are they fake?

Fuck Alex Jones. So obviously controlled.

What about these family members of victims named in this report:

Interesting, but the lack of activity on their memorials is odd. Could easily be actors or even a made up story. I'll look into these people some more.


What about the radar that saw flight 175 turning into NYC at the time just before impact?

Wouldn't be hard to insert a blip onto a radar now would it?

No not too many witnesses I suppose, just these below:

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/United_Airlines_Flight_175_Crash_Evidence

Most of those are for the 2nd plane, the one that was on the telly, which the TV crews conveniently missed the side of the impact. Also a few of the links don't work. There are also reports of people seeing missiles and just seeing the explosions.

This guy for example..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hq8eiNxKFXI

You would think more people would be talking about the first plane considering the noise it must have made

http://blip.tv/september-clues/fly-over-sound-boeing-2520214


If it was evacuated, people would have been watching from where it was cordoned off, I am sure they would see people, cranes and trucks etc planting plane parts and what body parts?

Not if was cordoned off a few blocks away.

So what as I say not everyone would have had family and friends, or relatives that even lived in the US.

What does living in the Us have to do with joining in the debate on a global forum?

7forever
24-02-2012, 12:17 AM
It is clear as day a plane hit T2:

check out all these videos.

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/United_Airlines_Flight_175_Crash_Evidence

How would you convince the average person a drone coming from the west was a plane coming from south?

cont
24-02-2012, 12:25 AM
This isn't the plane.

http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/very-close-orb_h_GIFSoupcom.gif

Nor is this. Check out the ball from this second angle at 10-13 seconds. The ball is at the back of the graphically added plane as it disappears into the tower.

Also at 17 seconds the hole made by the explosion is ball shaped.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=eI8u-I0GWs4

cont
24-02-2012, 12:32 AM
Small hole, then plane shape created by secondary explosions?

http://i40.tinypic.com/ih8don.gif

7forever
24-02-2012, 12:42 AM
This isn't the plane.

http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/very-close-orb_h_GIFSoupcom.gif

Nor is this. Check out the ball from this second angle at 10-13 seconds. The ball is at the back of the graphically added plane as it disappears into the tower.

Also at 17 seconds the hole made by the explosion is ball shaped.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=eI8u-I0GWs4

Thanks, for acknowledging that. I'm not arrogant, if anyone thinks that. I am outspoken, but will admit mistakes if I make them. People don't need to follow me, but start agreeing with the common sense of no planes, but something, a weird drone. Without agreement, no significant progress can be made, unless there are bucks behind it.

7forever
24-02-2012, 12:49 AM
Small hole, then plane shape created by secondary explosions?

http://i40.tinypic.com/ih8don.gif

Watch the northeast corner illuminate and then explode backward toward the impact zone. Nice proof of internal bombs. The small drone may not have even entered because of being so small, but I'm not sure and it ain't that important. It was a triggering device and something for people to eyewitness. It could be, but more research needs to be done. The hole is much smaller than north tower. I see what you're seeing. Blow it up.

http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/north-bomb-t2_h_GIFSoupcom.gif

labouysse
24-02-2012, 03:06 AM
Have you any video even more out of focus?

dontdrinkurmilk
24-02-2012, 09:58 AM
Fuck Alex Jones. So obviously controlled.

Agreed.

Interesting, but the lack of activity on their memorials is odd. Could easily be actors or even a made up story. I'll look into these people some more.

You should as they are genuine family members.


Wouldn't be hard to insert a blip onto a radar now would it?

It would be quite easy? How would that work then?

Most of those are for the 2nd plane, the one that was on the telly, which the TV crews conveniently missed the side of the impact. Also a few of the links don't work. There are also reports of people seeing missiles and just seeing the explosions.

This guy for example..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hq8eiNxKFXI

Howe many people saw missiles vs a plane?

You would think more people would be talking about the first plane considering the noise it must have made

http://blip.tv/september-clues/fly-over-sound-boeing-2520214

That was just examples of the T2 impact BTW.

Not if was cordoned off a few blocks away.

That does not matter, the vehichles or people that planted them would still have to come through the cordoned off areas to get in.

What does living in the Us have to do with joining in the debate on a global forum?

I was reffering to people not being able to get to the memorials, also possibly not adding photos online.

dontdrinkurmilk
24-02-2012, 10:06 AM
How would you convince the average person a drone coming from the west was a plane coming from south?

As far as I was aware:

Flight 175 came in from the southwest, apparently heading for the Empire State Building, but turned right, then left into the South Tower

United Airlines Flight 175 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

the_ohmbudsman
24-02-2012, 12:07 PM
Hey Andrew... You have to admit - that is bloody expensive for a book yes...?

Why did Judy go for a Hardback instead of a Paperback...? That has surely pushed the price up for no reason.

Bigger is better for your eyes than a grubby little paper back with tiny font size! ;)

7forever
24-02-2012, 02:00 PM
Have you any video even more out of focus?

Have you any video of a real boeing 767 that's not a fake image?

dontdrinkurmilk
24-02-2012, 03:06 PM
Have you any video of a real boeing 767 that's not a fake image?

Clear Video of UA 175 - YouTube

Multiple camera angles:

United Airlines Flight 175 Impact - YouTube

Have a look at this and please comment:

9/11 - United 175 CGI Plane Theory Debunked - YouTube

amandareckonwith
24-02-2012, 03:51 PM
http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/12/2011/05/rocket_man_jump.jpg

I was in a bookstore yesterday and noticed they were selling the textbook WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood, B. S., M. S., Ph. D. :)

(To obscure the truth about how the WTC complex was turned into microscopic dust particles without evidence of high heat and Dr. Judy Wood's research which substantiates this by the evidence she presents in her textbook, the "Fakery Fakers" have taken over this thread with their Simple Simon nonsense.) :rolleyes:

7forever
24-02-2012, 04:17 PM
As far as I was aware:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_175

United Airlines Flight 175 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Empire State Building was northwest of the towers. The official flight path has 175 crossing into NJ near the northwest tip and never flew over Newark or was north of the towers, in its final minutes of flight, officially.

At 09:01, two minutes before impact as United Airlines Flight 175 continued its descent into Lower Manhattan, the New York Center alerted another nearby Air Traffic Facility responsible for low-flying aircraft, which was able to monitor the aircraft's path over New Jersey, and then over Staten Island and New York Harbor in its final moments.[13] (Flight 175 came in from the southwest, apparently heading for the Empire State Building, but turned right, then left into the South Tower.)

According to this fantastic fiction, fake 175 would have circled the towers twice.:D The final approach on Wiki is consistent with the drone, leaving the official flight path, failed fiction. The Empire State Building is circled on the left. This simple analysis confirms that both drones were north of the towers in their final seconds before their respective targets exploded.

http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/wtc175path2.jpg
http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/wtccbsnw.jpg
http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/wtcempirenw.jpg

7forever
24-02-2012, 04:22 PM
Clear Video of UA 175 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dn-En2kJsv4)

Multiple camera angles:

United Airlines Flight 175 Impact

Have a look at this and please comment:

9/11 - United 175 CGI Plane Theory DTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e97WCFq2iB4&feature=related)

4 broadcasts filmed the drone coming from the west, three of which were aired live. No plane for the south tower really showed up.

Four flying bombs were captured on film and survived without alteration. The only inconsistency is chopper 4 disappears behind the top of tower 1, while the other three are lower but at the same level. Here they are in this order; [U]NY1, WB11, CBS, and Chopper 4, aka WNBC. Only the CBS bogey did not air live. The Today Show aired the orb but changed camera angles before it could complete its path to explosion.

The final 14 seconds of approach by nist was south to north, not west to east. The drone/orb cannot visually be a chopper or plane and its float path would have crashed into the west side of T2, not southeast corner. The drone literally circled the towers just like Matt Lauer said after he saw it.

http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/kfhbvbdyhshdshsdh_h_GIFSoupcom.gif
http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/wb-orb_h_GIFSoupcom.gif
http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/orb-cbs_h_GIFSoupcom.gif
http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/angle-orb_h_GIFSoupcom.gif
http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/fake-175-flight-path_h_GIFSoupcom.gif

dontdrinkurmilk
24-02-2012, 05:54 PM
4 broadcasts filmed the drone coming from the west, three of which were aired live. No plane for the south tower really showed up.

Four flying bombs were captured on film and survived without alteration. The only inconsistency is chopper 4 disappears behind the top of tower 1, while the other three are lower but at the same level. Here they are in this order; NY1, WB11, CBS, and Chopper 4, aka WNBC. Only the CBS bogey did not air live. The Today Show aired the orb but changed camera angles before it could complete its path to explosion.

The final 14 seconds of approach by nist was south to north, not west to east. The drone/orb cannot visually be a chopper or plane and its float path would have crashed into the west side of T2, not southeast corner. The drone literally circled the towers just like Matt Lauer said after he saw it.

http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/kfhbvbdyhshdshsdh_h_GIFSoupcom.gif
http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/wb-orb_h_GIFSoupcom.gif
http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/orb-cbs_h_GIFSoupcom.gif
http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/angle-orb_h_GIFSoupcom.gif
http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/fake-175-flight-path_h_GIFSoupcom.gif

Not one genuine clip, actually shows Flight 175 travelling anything other than the flight path it actually flew, they are all consistent.

7forever
24-02-2012, 06:12 PM
Not one genuine clip, actually shows Flight 175 travelling anything other than the flight path it actually flew, they are all consistent.

They are totally inconsistent and irreconcilable. Did fake 175 circle the towers twice? Wiki said it was north of towers in its final seconds, meaning that it had to circle twice unless the official flight path is wrong. Is the official flight path wrong or was the drone the thing that came from the north?

dontdrinkurmilk
24-02-2012, 07:00 PM
They are totally inconsistent and irreconcilable. Did fake 175 circle the towers twice? Wiki said it was north of towers in its final seconds, meaning that it had to circle twice unless the official flight path is wrong. Is the official flight path wrong or was the drone the thing that came from the north?

Flight 175 & Flight 11 Official RADES Radar FlightPath - YouTube

Here you go nice and simple for you to understand I hope?

7forever
24-02-2012, 07:31 PM
Flight 175 & Flight 11 Official RADES Radar FlightPath - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kflpihuKVLM)

Here you go nice and simple for you to understand I hope?

You can't explain, so you point me to some video.LOL You posted a link that puts fake 175 north of the towers and fail to explain how that can be, when the official path has it nowhere near the empire building. Are you simply lying, or have no idea what you're talking about? You posted the official flight path, which has it south of the towers, nowhere near flying south of the empire or newark.LOL Are you hoping I won't call you out on your ignorance and/or lies?

dontdrinkurmilk
24-02-2012, 08:53 PM
You can't explain, so you point me to some video.LOL You posted a link that puts fake 175 north of the towers and fail to explain how that can be, when the official path has it nowhere near the empire building. Are you simply lying, or have no idea what you're talking about? You posted the official flight path, which has it south of the towers, nowhere near flying south of the empire or newark.LOL Are you hoping I won't call you out on your ignorance and/or lies?

You should read this short report:

http://www.911myths.com/images/b/b6/Flight_Path_Study_UA175.pdf

I am quite shocked, that you cannot understand the radar data and 10's of videos, have been used to reconstruct the flight path of UA 175 but you just cannot accept it.

labouysse
25-02-2012, 02:37 AM
http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/12/2011/05/rocket_man_jump.jpg

I was in a bookstore yesterday and noticed they were selling the textbook WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood, B. S., M. S., Ph. D. :)

(To obscure the truth about how the WTC complex was turned into microscopic dust particles without evidence of high heat and Dr. Judy Wood's research which substantiates this by the evidence she presents in her textbook, the "Fakery Fakers" have taken over this thread with their Simple Simon nonsense.) :rolleyes:

But the WTC complex wasn't turned to microscopic dust particles.

Look at this;

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/wtc_shattered2.jpg

Note the steel girders etc.

7forever
25-02-2012, 02:55 AM
You should read this short report:

http://www.911myths.com/images/b/b6/Flight_Path_Study_UA175.pdf

I am quite shocked, that you cannot understand the radar data and 10's of videos, have been used to reconstruct the flight path of UA 175 but you just cannot accept it.

That link is incomplete. Why would you accept something that's totally inconsistent with news footage showing numerous different approaches? Sept clues destroyed the flight myth years ago...it's not even debatable.

dontdrinkurmilk
25-02-2012, 03:03 AM
That link is incomplete. Why would you accept something that's totally inconsistent with news footage showing numerous different approaches? Sept clues destroyed the flight myth years ago...it's not even debatable.

Even from that short few pages you can see the Facts, see this RE SC which is complete rubbish, do you not understand that different cameras looking at the same event from different positions, angles, heights etc are going to show different views? Simple stuff.

http://truthaction.org/debunkingseptemberclues.pdf

7forever
25-02-2012, 03:05 AM
Even from that short few pages you can see the Facts, see this RE SC which is complete rubbish, do you not understand that different cameras looking at the same event from different positions, angles, heights etc are going to show different views? Simple stuff.

http://truthaction.org/debunkingseptemberclues.pdf

Prove it.LOL You couldn't prove any of those angles are the same if your life depended on it. Don't send me links...prove it's rubbish.

7forever
25-02-2012, 03:09 AM
Flight 175 & Flight 11 Official RADES Radar FlightPath - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kflpihuKVLM)

Here you go nice and simple for you to understand I hope?

Here you go...a drone from the west that circled the south tower before causing its explosion.

http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/kfhbvbdyhshdshsdh_h_GIFSoupcom.gif

7forever
25-02-2012, 03:26 AM
Even from that short few pages you can see the Facts, see this RE SC which is complete rubbish, do you not understand that different cameras looking at the same event from different positions, angles, heights etc are going to show different views? Simple stuff.

http://truthaction.org/debunkingseptemberclues.pdf

Are you that pompous ass, Anthony Lawson?

http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/bcl_h_GIFSoupcom.gif

dontdrinkurmilk
25-02-2012, 03:39 AM
Prove it.LOL You couldn't prove any of those angles are the same if your life depended on it. Don't send me links...prove it's rubbish.

Look, it is so legible, the flight path is the same, the many cameras filming the incoming plane are from different positions, what is wrong with you? You can't be that stupid surely.

Here you go...a drone from the west that circled the south tower before causing its explosion.

Define ''drone''.

Also that is not a clear enough image alone to establish if that is a plane, but given the other evidence, eye witness accounts, multiple other camera's with clearer images, we can conclude it is a plane, oh not to mention radar also.
http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/kfhbvbdyhshdshsdh_h_GIFSoupcom.gif[/QUOTE]

Are you that pompous ass, Anthony Lawson?

:eek:

http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/bcl_h_GIFSoupcom.gif

7forever
25-02-2012, 02:19 PM
Look, it is so legible, the flight path is the same, the many cameras filming the incoming plane are from different positions, what is wrong with you? You can't be that stupid surely.



Define ''drone''.

[/IMG]


[IMG]http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/bcl_h_GIFSoupcom.gif[/][/QUOTE]

It's not the same flight path. It's coming from the west and had to circle the south tower, which any size plane could never do. NY1 shows the same type of drone that cbs, nbc, and wb11 show from the same direction, west.

7forever
25-02-2012, 04:47 PM
The truth is the lie, and the lie is the truth. No commercial airliner impacted either tower on 911, but small remote controlled drones were used to trigger bombs planted inside the towers. Very obvious fake imagery was aired on TV which the average person had no knowledge or reference with which to understand what they were seeing was failed computer generated imagery that didn't produce a single image that came close to depicting a real boeing 767.

http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/wtcwb11926.jpg
http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/wtcliveabc.jpg
http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/wtcunitedleftwing.jpg

dontdrinkurmilk
25-02-2012, 08:13 PM
http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/bcl_h_GIFSoupcom.gif[/]

It's not the same flight path. It's coming from the west and had to circle the south tower, which any size plane could never do. NY1 shows the same type of drone that cbs, nbc, and wb11 show from the same direction, west.

It is the same flight path, FACT.

The truth is the lie, and the lie is the truth. No commercial airliner impacted either tower on 911, but small remote controlled drones were used to trigger bombs planted inside the towers. Very obvious fake imagery was aired on TV which the average person had no knowledge or reference with which to understand what they were seeing was failed computer generated imagery that didn't produce a single image that came close to depicting a real boeing 767.

[IMG]http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/wtcwb11926.jpg
http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/wtcliveabc.jpg
http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/wtcunitedleftwing.jpg

What makes me laugh here is, you're using a still from a video camera which is obviously not very clear due to the performance if the camera. You then show a close up image of a 767 from a camera picture, presumably a high pixel camera looking at the quality of the image, are you saying the former picture you cite should be looking like the latter?

air_bn
25-02-2012, 08:29 PM
It was the "judy wood effect" that created the fuzzyball images,obviously;)

dontdrinkurmilk
25-02-2012, 08:32 PM
It was the "judy wood effect" that created the fuzzyball images,obviously;)

Oh yeah, I forgot about that :eek:

7forever
26-02-2012, 12:02 AM
It is the same flight path, FACT.



What makes me laugh here is, you're using a still from a video camera which is obviously not very clear due to the performance if the camera. You then show a close up image of a 767 from a camera picture, presumably a high pixel camera looking at the quality of the image, are you saying the former picture you cite should be looking like the latter?

Saying something and proving something are two different things. So far, you have said they are the same without offering any proof because you know you cannot prove the area west of the towers was south. The footage is the footage and nothing you can say will change that it provided fake imagery that is obvious to anyone who wanted to see it.

7forever
26-02-2012, 12:04 AM
It was the "judy wood effect" that created the fuzzyball images,obviously;)

Nah, it was seen in 4 broadcasts that showed a ball coming from the west before circling the south tower.

dontdrinkurmilk
26-02-2012, 12:14 AM
Saying something and proving something are two different things. So far, you have said they are the same without offering any proof because you know you cannot prove the area west of the towers was south. The footage is the footage and nothing you can say will change that it provided fake imagery that is obvious to anyone who wanted to see it.

Is there a reason why there is a crystal clear image close up of a 767, right next to a distant blurred image of a 767? I think you know why, to try and give the illusion that, that is what we should be expecting to see in the video still, which is not going to be the case.

dontdrinkurmilk
26-02-2012, 01:47 PM
Fuck Alex Jones. So obviously controlled.



Interesting, but the lack of activity on their memorials is odd. Could easily be actors or even a made up story. I'll look into these people some more.



Wouldn't be hard to insert a blip onto a radar now would it?



Most of those are for the 2nd plane, the one that was on the telly, which the TV crews conveniently missed the side of the impact. Also a few of the links don't work. There are also reports of people seeing missiles and just seeing the explosions.

This guy for example..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hq8eiNxKFXI

You would think more people would be talking about the first plane considering the noise it must have made

http://blip.tv/september-clues/fly-over-sound-boeing-2520214




Not if was cordoned off a few blocks away.



What does living in the Us have to do with joining in the debate on a global forum?

Any updates Mishy?

amandareckonwith
26-02-2012, 04:12 PM
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z13/AmandaReconwith/WARNINGWARNING.jpg
http://www.moviewavs.com/0084356043/MP3S/TV_Shows/Lost_In_Space/lswarn.mp3

The textbook, WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr, Judy Wood, B.S., M.S., Ph. D., is not about a conspiracy theory or a theory at all. It is a 540 page textbook about factual evidence, empirical evidence that reveals the truth in a way that is undeniable to anyone who reads it. Dr. Wood's textbook has not been refuted by anyone, nor can it be. Those that choose to focus on hearsay, speculation, conspiracy theories, or unqualified opinions while ignoring irrefutable factual evidence by avoiding it is what keeps a cover-up in place. Diverting the public to arguing between the two false choices of "9/11 Truthers" verses "The Official 9/11 Conspiracy Theory" while ignoring the facts is classic perception management designed to hide and obscure the evidence. Whenever I witness the psychological aspects of group-think in action, (i.e. James Fetzer, Richard Gage, et al.) or when personal attacks are made against the messenger presenting this reality, I hear the voice of Robot B-9, a General Utility Non-Theorizing Environmental Control Robot (GUNTECR), repeating over and over, "WARNING!, WARNING!".

General Martin E. Dempsey

dontdrinkurmilk
26-02-2012, 04:18 PM
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z13/AmandaReconwith/WARNINGWARNING.jpg
http://www.moviewavs.com/0084356043/MP3S/TV_Shows/Lost_In_Space/lswarn.mp3

The textbook, WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr, Judy Wood, B.S., M.S., Ph. D., is not about a conspiracy theory or a theory at all. It is a 540 page textbook about factual evidence, empirical evidence that reveals the truth in a way that is undeniable to anyone who reads it. Dr. Wood's textbook has not been refuted by anyone, nor can it be. Those that choose to focus on hearsay, speculation, conspiracy theories, or unqualified opinions while ignoring irrefutable factual evidence by avoiding it is what keeps a cover-up in place. Diverting the public to arguing between the two false choices of "9/11 Truthers" verses "The Official 9/11 Conspiracy Theory" while ignoring the facts is classic perception management designed to hide and obscure the evidence. Whenever I witness the psychological aspects of group-think in action, (i.e. James Fetzer, Richard Gage, et al.) or when personal attacks are made against the messenger presenting this reality, I hear the voice of Robot B-9, a General Utility Non-Theorizing Environmental Control Robot (GUNTECR), repeating over and over, "WARNING!, WARNING!".

General Martin E. Dempsey

Are you human? Hello? Do you respond to us members?

mishy
26-02-2012, 04:31 PM
Any updates Mishy?

Yes


What about these family members of victims named in this report:

Firstly, you didn't provide a link for the article, just copy and pasted it. But I took the first alleged victims name from your post, a guy named 'Todd Ouida'.

At first glance Google finds a bit about him.

First link..

http://www.mybuddytodd.org/

Some memorial set up in his name. Only 3 pictures there and a few links, one of which invites you to his Birthday event on June the 5th....2011. Good to see it being kept up to date :rolleyes:

There's also a video with his 'Dad' being interviewed with some clips of his wedding...With only one comment. Where's his wifes comment, his dad's, his best mans? No one?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3PVsXHQqAw


Turns out he 'worked' for Cantor Fitzgerald who apparently lost 658 employees on 9/11.

Something not quite right about them.

http://letsrollforums.com/9-11-triplets-separated-t22106.html

http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=430


Here's his 9/11 Legacy memorial page..

http://www.legacy.com/guestbook/guestbook.aspx?n=todd-ouida&pid=98376


Some odd comments in there to say the least.

I'm not convinced he existed. But if you are, go tell his 'family' that someone is disrespecting his name on a 9/11 message board. I'd be interested to hear what they have to say.

As for Radars, Do you really think they would be hard to manipulate from the 9/11 control room? Or even made up after the event?

As for plane evidence,Do you really think it would be that hard to plant random small pieces of plane debris?

And as for TV fakery on 9/11..

http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=386

http://www.septclues.com/SIMCITY/TWO_STREET_VIEWS.gif

dontdrinkurmilk
26-02-2012, 04:41 PM
Yes



Firstly, you didn't provide a link for the article, just copy and pasted it. But I took the first alleged victims name from your post, a guy named 'Todd Ouida'.

At first glance Google finds a bit about him.

First link..

http://www.mybuddytodd.org/

Some memorial set up in his name. Only 3 pictures there and a few links, one of which invites you to his Birthday event on June the 5th....2011. Good to see it being kept up to date :rolleyes:

Oh my, he must not be dead then? :eek:

There's also a video with his 'Dad' being interviewed with some clips of his wedding...With only one comment. Where's his wifes comment, his dad's, his best mans? No one?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3PVsXHQqAw

Again he must not be dead or have ever existed, if his family cannot post a comment, that's stone wall proof.

Turns out he 'worked' for Cantor Fitzgerald who apparently lost 658 employees on 9/11.

Something not quite right about them.

http://letsrollforums.com/9-11-triplets-separated-t22106.html

http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=430

What's not quite right? In your own words.


Here's his 9/11 Legacy memorial page..

http://www.legacy.com/guestbook/guestbook.aspx?n=todd-ouida&pid=98376


Some odd comments in there to say the least.

I'm not convinced he existed. But if you are, go tell his 'family' that someone is disrespecting his name on a 9/11 message board. I'd be interested to hear what they have to say.

What odd comments?

As for Radars, Do you really think they would be hard to manipulate from the 9/11 control room? Or even made up after the event?

As for plane evidence,Do you really think it would be that hard to plant random small pieces of plane debris?

And as for TV fakery on 9/11..

http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=386

http://www.septclues.com/SIMCITY/TWO_STREET_VIEWS.gif

They did not need to plant anything as it was all real.

Wow so that small difference means what to you exactly? Do you not understand that objects or people can appear different in a different frame in the same video?

mishy
26-02-2012, 04:59 PM
Oh my, he must not be dead then? :eek:



Again he must not be dead or have ever existed, if his family cannot post a comment, that's stone wall proof.

How do you know they are his family?



What's not quite right? In your own words.

Can you not click links?




What odd comments?

Can you not click links?



They did not need to plant anything as it was all real.

Proof?

Wow so that small difference means what to you exactly? Do you not understand that objects or people can appear different in a different frame in the same video?

Are you taking the piss? Both shots have a different skyline :rolleyes:

But then, you believe in cartoon physics. You'd probably believe in fairy's if a nice man wearing a suit on the BBC said they existed.

dontdrinkurmilk
26-02-2012, 05:16 PM
How do you know they are his family?





Can you not click links?






Can you not click links?

Yes, Can you not read things and come up with a conclusion? I want your conclusion.



Proof?

The numerous videos I haev already posted showing a plane smash into T2, along with eye witness testimony, radar etc....


Are you taking the piss? Both shots have a different skyline :rolleyes:

But then, you believe in cartoon physics. You'd probably believe in fairy's if a nice man wearing a suit on the BBC said they existed.[/QUOTE]

Are you serious? Image stills from videos that are moving, can produce anomolies like that.

mishy
26-02-2012, 05:52 PM
Yes, Can you not read things and come up with a conclusion? I want your conclusion.

My conclusion after reading that is that they were heavily involved in the 9/11 hoax. Just like my conclusion that you are either A) Deluded B) Part of the hoax cover up or C) Still brainwashed by the MSM.

The numerous videos I haev already posted showing a plane smash into T2

The numerous videos you have posted are proven fakes.

along with eye witness testimony, radar etc....

You wouldn't mistake a commercial airliner for anything else, many people did. As for the radar, as I've said before, the perps could have easily inserted a blip.


Are you serious? Image stills from videos that are moving, can produce anomolies like that.

Anomalies like buildings being in totally different positions and different heights?

earthicastar
26-02-2012, 06:41 PM
To the A&E 9/11 counter intel... this is Vaporizing.. NOT melting or exploding

Things in motion tend to stay in motion... this STEEL structure did NOT fall over, come straight down, it did NOT melt, it did NOT blow up... it 'Disassociated'

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s96/earthica/attack%20on%20america/vaporizedcolumns.jpg

rosie789
26-02-2012, 07:18 PM
To the A&E 9/11 counter intel... this is Vaporizing.. NOT melting or exploding

Things in motion tend to stay in motion... this STEEL structure did NOT fall over, come straight down, it did NOT melt, it did NOT blow up... it 'Disassociated'

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s96/earthica/attack%20on%20america/vaporizedcolumns.jpg

Actually if you watch videos closely you see that it wobbles about before decending rapidly leaving a trail of concrete dust behind it:

Second tower collapse, spire, Main & Ballou 17.avi - YouTube

dontdrinkurmilk
26-02-2012, 09:23 PM
My conclusion after reading that is that they were heavily involved in the 9/11 hoax. Just like my conclusion that you are either A) Deluded B) Part of the hoax cover up or C) Still brainwashed by the MSM.

A,B,C all wrong :D.

Who exactly was involved?

[QUOTE]The numerous videos you have posted are proven fakes.


Proven in your little head, maybe.

You wouldn't mistake a commercial airliner for anything else, many people did. As for the radar, as I've said before, the perps could have easily inserted a blip.


Oh really, so your average joe looking from a distance is going to know? many people would have only looked once they heard the plane impact therefore not see a plane, lets not forget the plane was travelling quickly also at low altitude.


Anomalies like buildings being in totally different positions and different heights?

very little difference in frames, can you understand that the same objects can look different from one frame to another, based on shaking, movement of the camera, light etc? Do you accept that?

EDIT:

Please watch this short clip.

9/11 TV FAKERY GHOST PLANE OWNED ! - YouTube

dontdrinkurmilk
26-02-2012, 09:27 PM
Actually if you watch videos closely you see that it wobbles about before decending rapidly leaving a trail of concrete dust behind it:

Second tower collapse, spire, Main & Ballou 17.avi - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51mUua8veUk)

Exactly Rosie! That video shows what happens, as a pose to two well selected stills to give an impression.

It collapsed simple as that, it did not ''turn to dust''.

7forever
26-02-2012, 10:12 PM
Is there a reason why there is a crystal clear image close up of a 767, right next to a distant blurred image of a 767? I think you know why, to try and give the illusion that, that is what we should be expecting to see in the video still, which is not going to be the case.

There's a reason why there's no real image of a 767, and it's because the folks who created the fake footage and photographs didn't produce almost any that was not a laughable fake. I think you know why, but don't even try to give the illusion that any of the fake imagery or drones could have been been flight 175.

7forever
26-02-2012, 10:17 PM
It is the same flight path, FACT.



What makes me laugh here is, you're using a still from a video camera which is obviously not very clear due to the performance if the camera. You then show a close up image of a 767 from a camera picture, presumably a high pixel camera looking at the quality of the image, are you saying the former picture you cite should be looking like the latter?

What makes you silly, is you've done nothing to prove there were any planes because you have nothing but fake evidence, that I would shred if you even started trying to prove the lie of planes. I made myself clear in all my posts. No plane showed up in three live broadcasts and that cannot be challenged. If you can prove the area west of the towers is south, then you will have proven the impossible.

7forever
26-02-2012, 10:24 PM
As far as I was aware:



United Airlines Flight 175 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_175)

How could anyone think it was headed for the empire state building when it crashed into the back of tower 2?:confused: The empire is north of the towers. That makes zero sense for the official myth, which fits it nicely. Some witnesses reported it flying north to south in its final approach which fits the drone quite well.

7forever
26-02-2012, 10:33 PM
Small hole, then plane shape created by secondary explosions?

http://i40.tinypic.com/ih8don.gif

Even if one accepts that a plane hit the north tower, then the small south tower hole confirms something much smaller impacted it. This proves the witnesses were right and the bogey seen in 4 broadcasts were accurately depicted.

http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/wtcsouthtowerzoomhole.jpg
http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/wtcnorthtowerhole.jpg

7forever
27-02-2012, 02:40 AM
2nd hit Jen S, DVD - YouTube
Jennifer Spell, in her own words: "Just about five minutes after I got outside and was shooting, the second plane circle around and it flew out over New Jersey and then it came in, it just."

Some denialist suggested Spell meant something different than seeing something circle in the final seconds. She was filming for five minutes and then saw something in her camera view, facing northwest. She never described anything at high altitude, nor did most any witness. They described something flying low and circling the towers, which could only be something, not a plane.

The final minutes according to myth 911, 175 flew over Staten Island and New York Bay, therefore never circling anything but the entire state of NJ. It simply flew its mythical path, but never circled the towers in any way, which disagrees with many witnesses and the broadcasts showing the drone, which did circle. Planes cannot circle buildings and crash into the back of them, but apparently a drone can and did on 911.

Jennifer and friend totally debunked her video by confirming the impossibility of any plane circling the towers in its final seconds before explosion. Of course, there is fake footage supporting this, making sure there was cgi covering the drone's path. She may have meant it was flying south over Jersey before turning east to behind the towers, but it's not that relevant. She saw nothing until seeing something over west by the Jersey side, which could not have been fake 175 because it was supposed to be flying over the bay, south of the towers. One plane cannot be flying east over the hudson and north over the bay at the same time and those impossibilities are a reality for sleuths and real truth in 911 research.

http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/wtcsoutheastorb.jpg
http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/wtcfinalseconds.jpg
http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/wtcanimation.jpg

labouysse
27-02-2012, 02:43 AM
Big impact, big explosion.

WTC Impacts - WTC2 Hezarkhani HD - YouTube

dontdrinkurmilk
27-02-2012, 11:15 PM
I respond to valid remarks and questions. No valid remarks or questions, no response. Capeesh?

By the way, I just received a letter today stating that my credit score is 818 and that this score ranks higher than 92 percent of U. S. consumers. Maybe if you read WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood, B.S., M.S.,Ph.D. it would increase your credit score too.


:D:D

air_bn
27-02-2012, 11:26 PM
I respond to valid remarks and questions. No valid remarks or questions, no response. Capeesh?

By the way, I just received a letter today stating that my credit score is 818 and that this score ranks higher than 92 percent of U. S. consumers. Maybe if you read WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood, B.S., M.S.,Ph.D. it would increase your credit score too.

:D:D

OMG it is a advertising bot, or has no idea how he/she comes across with that last "message":D

amandareckonwith
27-02-2012, 11:39 PM
Dr. Greg Jenkins Exposed During Ambush Interview of Dr. Judy Wood - YouTube

I am very grateful to Dr. Greg Jenkins for conducting his ambush interview of Dr. Judy Wood, because his agenda actually highlighted the importance of Dr. Wood's work. The amount of effort being put forth to attempt to discredit Dr. Wood and convince people to not look at the overwhelming sum of evidence she has gathered is truly remarkable. I find it very interesting that Dr. Jenkins, who works/worked for NSA, showed up with full lighting and camera crews after a talk given by Dr. Fetzer, who had insisted Dr. Wood attend his talk. No one else knew Dr. Wood would be there. Just as she was leaving, around 12am, Jenkins spontaneously confronted Dr. Wood and asked her to do an interview on the spot. Why didn't Dr. Jenkins contact Dr. Wood ahead of time to get advanced permission for the interview? Why didn't Dr. Jenkins attend the conference, but only showed up at the very end of it for the specific purpose of asking Dr. Wood to do this spontaneous interview? Why did Dr. Jenkins show up with full lighting and camera crews, yet he only brought one black and white photo of the thousands of full color photos, videos, documents, and graphs Dr. Wood has gathered, only to later insert the full-color copy of the image into the edited video recording of the interview?

I find it admirable that Dr. Wood was right all along about the fact that the majority of the WTC buildings were transformed to fine dust, especially considering that she has been trying to wake the public up to that fact for over 4 years now. Others are still catching up, as today it is a commonly known fact that the WTC buildings were primarily turned to dust on 9/11. I wonder if Dr. Jenkins has corrected his false claims that the buildings were not turned to dust, or if he still believes the nonsense he was trying to promote throughout the interview... As Dr. Wood often says, you first need to determine WHAT happened, before you determine HOW it happened. If you skip the first part and assume you know what happened, further discussion tends to be rather meaningless and unscientific. Dr. Wood identified that the buildings were transformed to dust, and for some strange reason, Dr. Jenkins really wanted to avoid discussing that topic.

Dr. Judy Wood held strong in her scientific position all these years, and thank goodness she has. Her observations were correct, right from the start. It was this fortitude of hers which has forced Richard Gage (and others) into finally acknowledging the fact that the majority of the WTC buildings turned to dust in mid air. However, that puts Richard Gage and Dr. Steven Jones in a very difficult position, because thermite does not turn buildings into powder in mid air, nor do explosives of any kind... :)

Here is the transcript from the interview, which allows for a more detailed analysis of the dialogue: http://drjudywood.com/articles/transcript/Jenkins_transcript.html

General Martin E. Dempsey

dontdrinkurmilk
27-02-2012, 11:51 PM
OMG it is a advertising bot, or has no idea how he/she comes across with that last "message":D

exactly :D

the apprentice
29-02-2012, 02:49 AM
My take on things goes like this.

The towers were blown from top and bottom together, making it easier to mask the dettonations and the only way they could fall faster than freefall speed.

There are or were several sub levels evemually creating a sizeable sump for the main debris to fall into.

If you look at the initial run pictures you will see that the main columns were left intact and the corncrete gone leaving a huge cavern.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_World_Trade_Center_bombing

Whenever there is compression involved in any explosions there is never enough material to fill in the craters back in afterwards, this roll played out on 9/11.

This is why one sees huge piles of aggregated on the aprons of military runways to fill in the holes quickly after large ordnances are used.

If you study footage you can see dust emmerging from ground level which was the initial hollowing out mode below ground to prepare the sump for the main building to compress into.

The wiring of the dets was part and parcel which delivered the signals with any extras being placed during the evacuation of the buildings in 93.

To weaken key superstructures there is slow expansion demolition materials that split the strongest structures, I think this was also adopted, making smaller charges needed.

Just saying, please excuse if already put forward.

rosie789
29-02-2012, 10:32 AM
My take on things goes like this.

The towers were blown from top and bottom together, making it easier to mask the dettonations and the only way they could fall faster than freefall speed.

Are you joking? Doesn't really come across on the internet. Hehe.

Firstly the towers did not fall with freefall acceleration (I suppose you mean 'freefall' as in with air resistance).

Erm... even if every single floor was disintergrated, the top of the tower would not fall faster than 'free fall speed'.

Please explain how these all these detonations were placed to go off at exactly the right time without anyone noticing.

What? Are you suggesting the towers fell together? How many witnesses say or videos show this? What evidence suggests that they did?

the apprentice
29-02-2012, 11:58 AM
Are you joking? Doesn't really come across on the internet. Hehe.

Firstly the towers did not fall with freefall acceleration (I suppose you mean 'freefall' as in with air resistance).

Erm... even if every single floor was disintergrated, the top of the tower would not fall faster than 'free fall speed'.

Please explain how these all these detonations were placed to go off at exactly the right time without anyone noticing.

What? Are you suggesting the towers fell together? How many witnesses say or videos show this? What evidence suggests that they did?

Hi Rosie

I will run through it stage by stage in better detail, these are my out of the box observations and existing scenarios soplease be kind :)

First go back to 93 and see the hole left by the truck bomb also check out the damage pattern drawing to see where the six sub levels took the compression wave that created the cavern there afterwards.

Then check out the laws of explosion and compression that compact material through excelleration or positive kinetic energy, trapped energy in this instance, which would take the path of least resistance.

An example of this can be seen clearly on many of the televised subteranian nuclear tests, the land rises at first then settles back down leaving a sizeable indentation,,,, I other words there is a push in both directions, Up & Down, leaving a cavern below ground to which gravity fills from above.

In each Towers case there would be a greater cavern below each tower due to there being air gaps between each sub level for each building to begin falling into, any gap created beneth the building would created the initial speed to help the building crush itself from above, sort of like a person jumping off of the ground and on your lift the ground beneath you suddenly dissapears and on your downwards stroke you land say two feet below where you stood only moments ago.

I think this can also been seen happening when one of the towers starts to topple over then rights itself as the building below the point of the topple dissapears below it very quickly to pull the topple correct again, otherwise it would have fallen over away from its footprint.

Dettonations not being noticed.

Shaped and directed charges were used to great effect here also remember these were hermaticaly sealed buildings, No Windows, so a chain reaction could easily be used to cover any charges going off.
They would start from the centre working their way towards the extremities each one directed inwards thus not breaking the outer permiter of each building until the floor above was on top of it and so on.

However there is live footage somewhere of fire crew saying it sounded like a demo, boom boom boom indicating with his hand in the group being filmed, this guy is a trained observer so would notice this kind of thing, where as the ordinary man or women on the street probably would'nt.

The main columns on the mainframe of the building were concentrated at the core and the basement/sub levels, the sub levelsbeing the main targets here, possibly a small nuclear or similar device was used.

Something pretty large was used for the entire lobby to have its glass blown outwards a distance just prior to the towers falling, which the head janitor I forget his name now said the whole building lifted also lifting him off the ground in the process.
There was mention that the pressure wave from the said aircraft created a blast wave that travelled down the elevator shafts, which is bunk because the greater part of that energy was dissapated outside seen hybthe huge fire balls outside the buildings.

All the neccessary hardware was placed in situ in93when the buidings were closed for repairs, check out which company did those repairs and controlled every proceeding until the job was done and where these people are situated today.

Hope that helps

amandareckonwith
29-02-2012, 01:14 PM
My take on things goes like this. The towers were blown from top and bottom together, making it easier to mask the dettonations (detonations) and the only way they could fall faster than freefall (free-fall)speed. There are or were several sub levels evemually (eventually) creating a sizeable (sizable) sump for the main debris to fall into. If you look at the initial run pictures you will see that the main columns were left intact and the corncrete (concrete) gone leaving a huge cavern. Whenever there is compression involved in any explosions there is never enough material to fill in the craters back in afterwards, this roll played out on 9/11. This is why one sees huge piles of aggregated on the aprons of military runways to fill in the holes quickly after large ordnances are used. If you study footage you can see dust emmerging (emerging) from ground level which was the initial hollowing out mode below ground to prepare the sump for the main building to compress into. The wiring of the dets was part and parcel which delivered the signals with any extras being placed during the evacuation of the buildings in 93. To weaken key superstructures there is slow expansion demolition materials that split the strongest structures, I think this was also adopted, making smaller charges needed. Just saying, please excuse if already put forward.

http://images.ctv.ca/archives/CTVNews/img2/20110712/450_harry_potter_review_deathly_hallows_110711.jpg

A hasty spell of complex words,
a round about movement of the magic wand,
and lightning fast jerk- your job is all done.


The apprentice has it all wrong. The World Trade Center Towers and its contents (including people) were turned into microscopic dust particles with a Harry Potter spell. And if you don't believe this, then I suggest reading WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood, B. S., M. S., Ph.D. to discover what did do it. By the way, this textbook is the subject of discussion and not what Simple Simon says. :)

dontdrinkurmilk
02-03-2012, 09:23 PM
Hi Rosie

I will run through it stage by stage in better detail, these are my out of the box observations and existing scenarios soplease be kind :)

First go back to 93 and see the hole left by the truck bomb also check out the damage pattern drawing to see where the six sub levels took the compression wave that created the cavern there afterwards.

Then check out the laws of explosion and compression that compact material through excelleration or positive kinetic energy, trapped energy in this instance, which would take the path of least resistance.

An example of this can be seen clearly on many of the televised subteranian nuclear tests, the land rises at first then settles back down leaving a sizeable indentation,,,, I other words there is a push in both directions, Up & Down, leaving a cavern below ground to which gravity fills from above.

In each Towers case there would be a greater cavern below each tower due to there being air gaps between each sub level for each building to begin falling into, any gap created beneth the building would created the initial speed to help the building crush itself from above, sort of like a person jumping off of the ground and on your lift the ground beneath you suddenly dissapears and on your downwards stroke you land say two feet below where you stood only moments ago.

I think this can also been seen happening when one of the towers starts to topple over then rights itself as the building below the point of the topple dissapears below it very quickly to pull the topple correct again, otherwise it would have fallen over away from its footprint.


The tower would not have toppled over the side, due to it's centre of gravity. There was no lateral force acting on the top section, only gravity.

Dettonations not being noticed.

Shaped and directed charges were used to great effect here also remember these were hermaticaly sealed buildings, No Windows, so a chain reaction could easily be used to cover any charges going off.
They would start from the centre working their way towards the extremities each one directed inwards thus not breaking the outer permiter of each building until the floor above was on top of it and so on.

However there is live footage somewhere of fire crew saying it sounded like a demo, boom boom boom indicating with his hand in the group being filmed, this guy is a trained observer so would notice this kind of thing, where as the ordinary man or women on the street probably would'nt.

They were describing the collapse, how each floor ''popped out'' as in the air escaped from each floor as it collapsed, which is legible on all video footage of the collapses.

The main columns on the mainframe of the building were concentrated at the core and the basement/sub levels, the sub levelsbeing the main targets here, possibly a small nuclear or similar device was used.

Any evidence of this?

Something pretty large was used for the entire lobby to have its glass blown outwards a distance just prior to the towers falling, which the head janitor I forget his name now said the whole building lifted also lifting him off the ground in the process.
There was mention that the pressure wave from the said aircraft created a blast wave that travelled down the elevator shafts, which is bunk because the greater part of that energy was dissapated outside seen hybthe huge fire balls outside the buildings.


Air would have been sucked up through the elevators to the fires, as there was a gaping hole in each building this allowed air to be sucked up from the lobby.

All the neccessary hardware was placed in situ in93when the buidings were closed for repairs, check out which company did those repairs and controlled every proceeding until the job was done and where these people are situated today.

Hope that helps

Perhaps you can tell me? And more to the point why this company is so relevant.

the apprentice
02-03-2012, 10:05 PM
The tower would not have toppled over the side, due to it's centre of gravity. There was no lateral force acting on the top section, only gravity.



They were describing the collapse, how each floor ''popped out'' as in the air escaped from each floor as it collapsed, which is legible on all video footage of the collapses.



Any evidence of this?




Air would have been sucked up through the elevators to the fires, as there was a gaping hole in each building this allowed air to be sucked up from the lobby.

Perhaps you can tell me? And more to the point why this company is so relevant.

The tower that toppled was heading over until the floors below moved from below it righting itself, the weak point had already happened so you would think it would have carried on following the weakest point.

As the section started over any explosions would have put the fires out like they do burning well heads, there was a huge blow right at this point, steady collapse would not create this surely.

Also the collapse time would have been slowed down due to the sealed nature of the building acting like a damper yet the towers were timed as if nothing was between each floor.

I have listened to the fire crew interview and one guy did say each floor was popping out.

No evidence on the nuclear angle but the basement must have been taken out first for the debris to dissapear like that, I know six sub levels is not 100 plus but the mainframe alone if piled up neatly would be quite a height on its own.

Alan Watt mentioned the company who did the 93 repairs were related to the Bushes, the same as the security later.

On the air rising through the lift shafts, how could the air get past the cars and why was there more smoke than fire which indicates lack of oxygen burn.
For copious flows of air to rise there would have to be many floors open on every floor all the way up, the buildings were hermatically sealed, no windows for security.

I haven't read the book mentioned here, how did she say the towers went?

dontdrinkurmilk
02-03-2012, 10:20 PM
The tower that toppled was heading over until the floors below moved from below it righting itself, the weak point had already happened so you would think it would have carried on following the weakest point.


No because although its started to collapse where the plane hit, the opposite corner would have also began to collapse hence why it fell like it did.

As the section started over any explosions would have put the fires out like they do burning well heads, there was a huge blow right at this point, steady collapse would not create this surely.

Also the collapse time would have been slowed down due to the sealed nature of the building acting like a damper yet the towers were timed as if nothing was between each floor.

There was air between each floor and furniture etc. Nothing that would stop the mass of the above floor and floors above that.

I have listened to the fire crew interview and one guy did say each floor was popping out.

Yes.

No evidence on the nuclear angle but the basement must have been taken out first for the debris to dissapear like that, I know six sub levels is not 100 plus but the mainframe alone if piled up neatly would be quite a height on its own.

Yep.

Alan Watt mentioned the company who did the 93 repairs were related to the Bushes, the same as the security later.

About that myth, You might want to watch this very short clip.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?gl=US&hl=en-GB&client=mv-rim&v=sh8hErn2UZU

On the air rising through the lift shafts, how could the air get past the cars and why was there more smoke than fire which indicates lack of oxygen burn.
For copious flows of air to rise there would have to be many floors open on every floor all the way up, the buildings were hermatically sealed, no windows for security.

Are you saying air cannot travel past a car in a lift shaft? No windows?

I haven't read the book mentioned here, how did she say the towers went?

:D Directed energy weapons.

the apprentice
02-03-2012, 10:42 PM
No because although its started to collapse where the plane hit, the opposite corner would have also began to collapse hence why it fell like it did.



There was air between each floor and furniture etc. Nothing that would stop the mass of the above floor and floors above that.



Yes.



Yep.



About that myth, You might want to watch this very short clip.



Are you saying air cannot travel past a car in a lift shaft? No windows?



U:D Directed energy weapons.

The air trapped between each floor would compress and act as a cusioning effect slowing things down surely, it would however create the popping that the fire crew mentioned. ahha.

Of course, the air would have to be able to get past the cars in the shaft otherwise pressures would build up on top and below as it was moving, how much air I don't know.

Energy weapons eh, hmmm, if they had these weapons they would need no others, because to destroy something like the size of the towers a few blocks in size an enemy headquarters would be toast in seconds, load Bs I say.

By the way that short clip never showed my end?

dontdrinkurmilk
02-03-2012, 10:47 PM
The air trapped between each floor would compress and act as a cusioning effect slowing things down surely, it would however create the popping that the fire crew mentioned. ahha.

Of course, the air would have to be able to get past the cars in the shaft otherwise pressures would build up on top and below as it was moving, how much air I don't know.

Energy weapons eh, hmmm, if they had these weapons they would need no others, because to destroy something like the size of the towers a few blocks in size an enemy headquarters would be toast in seconds, load Bs I say.

By the way that short clip never showed my end?

Check my post again, sorry I added it a few minutes after posting as my laptop is not on form tonight :mad:.

Yes I think the DEW theory is complete BS, but she sells her book and some people buy it!

Yes the air basically exited the windows as each floor collapsed, just like dropping a square metre of wood onto another below, the air that was beneath it has to escape and does, laterally of course.

the apprentice
02-03-2012, 11:26 PM
Check my post again, sorry I added it a few minutes after posting as my laptop is not on form tonight :mad:.

Yes I think the DEW theory is complete BS, but she sells her book and some people buy it!

Yes the air basically exited the windows as each floor collapsed, just like dropping a square metre of wood onto another below, the air that was beneath it has to escape and does, laterally of course.

Yep I see it now, when I said no windows I mean't no opening windows, Doh.

The tower that toppled over had enough floors above that point to create the initial push I suppose.

So we come to the other tower that fell level, was the fire enough to have weakened this level or was a cruise missle used and also a few charges in or around the same level just to get things moving downwards.

Not that strong buildings then.

But how building 7 fell that has just got to be a demo or do you know other?

One other thing that sticks out is what 7F shows with the smaller entry wound, many of those outer piles are very neatly cut off arn't they, not many bent inwards and the perfect square at the very middle, very similar to the pentagon damage, same missile maybe?

dontdrinkurmilk
02-03-2012, 11:31 PM
Yep I see it now, when I said no windows I mean't no opening windows, Doh.

The tower that toppled over had enough floors above that point to create the initial push I suppose.

So we come to the other tower that fell level, was the fire enough to have weakened this level or was a cruise missle used and also a few charges in or around the same level just to get things moving downwards.

Not that strong buildings then.

But how building 7 fell that has just got to be a demo or do you know other?

One other thing that sticks out is what 7F shows with the smaller entry wound, many of those outer piles are very neatly cut off arn't they, not many bent inwards and the perfect square at the very middle, very similar to the pentagon damage, same missile maybe?

I suppose WTC 7 is a different debate.

Cruise missile? Have you seen one strike the towers? As far as the evidence suggests it was planes. Yes the remaining core and perimeter columns were dealing with more loads, which is fine. However when they became weakened due to fire, they no longer could support that load, collapse initiation begins.

the apprentice
02-03-2012, 11:51 PM
I suppose WTC 7 is a different debate.

Cruise missile? Have you seen one strike the towers? As far as the evidence suggests it was planes. Yes the remaining core and perimeter columns were dealing with more loads, which is fine. However when they became weakened due to fire, they no longer could support that load, collapse initiation begins.

If not a cruise a smaller craft, one thing that doesn't fit right is why didn't they scramble the fighters, they would have been able to identify the types of aircraft or fliers for sure.

I went up to look at the Lockerbie damage afterwards and the Pensylvania hole was no where near the same kind of hole.

So many versions of miss-info here, all versions could be true and they must have known something was coming and set up the rest, accumulator.

That building 7 is still part and parcel in all of this and needed to be taken out/pulled to bring in a new system, just imagine how much information was lost in there.

dontdrinkurmilk
03-03-2012, 12:20 AM
If not a cruise a smaller craft, one thing that doesn't fit right is why didn't they scramble the fighters, they would have been able to identify the types of aircraft or fliers for sure.

They did scramble fighters, just too late.

I went up to look at the Lockerbie damage afterwards and the Pensylvania hole was no where near the same kind of hole.


Quite different crashes really.

So many versions of miss-info here, all versions could be true and they must have known something was coming and set up the rest, accumulator.




That building 7 is still part and parcel in all of this and needed to be taken out/pulled to bring in a new system, just imagine how much information was lost in there.

What info was lost?

labouysse
03-03-2012, 01:44 AM
I went up to look at the Lockerbie damage afterwards and the Pensylvania hole was no where near the same kind of hole.



Really - you actually went up to Lockerbie in 1988 or soon afterwards?

Why would a hole made by a plane blown up in mid air and one that crashed at full speed into the ground be similar?

the apprentice
03-03-2012, 07:58 AM
They did scramble fighters, just too late.



Quite different crashes really.





What info was lost?

Wasn't the FBI/CIA hall of records stored in huilding 7?

the apprentice
03-03-2012, 08:36 AM
Really - you actually went up to Lockerbie in 1988 or soon afterwards?

Why would a hole made by a plane blown up in mid air and one that crashed at full speed into the ground be similar?

Yes a few of us went to Lockerbie, the main groove in the ground was quite extensive and much bigger than the film footage seen in Pen.
I know a guy who was in the RAF Regiment who was on the search team for finding bodies etc, who found a suited guy still sitting in his seat strapped in almost without any marks on him.

The two accidents were different but the result of metal hitting the ground the same.

The lockerbie incident came down at speed from ceiling height, on local MSM the time of explosion was said to be roughly above Hawes in the Yorkshire Dales on a steep tradjectory, that's a good 100 miles from explosion to ground zero.

The Us flight the same into the ground so why not so much of the plane found or that's what the footage showed, did the plane bury itself out of sight.

dontdrinkurmilk
03-03-2012, 11:02 PM
Wasn't the FBI/CIA hall of records stored in huilding 7?

:confused: I am not sure, perhaps you could elucidate.....

Yes a few of us went to Lockerbie, the main groove in the ground was quite extensive and much bigger than the film footage seen in Pen.
I know a guy who was in the RAF Regiment who was on the search team for finding bodies etc, who found a suited guy still sitting in his seat strapped in almost without any marks on him.

The two accidents were different but the result of metal hitting the ground the same.

Flight 93 hit the ground in one piece. The two impacts were quite different.


The lockerbie incident came down at speed from ceiling height, on local MSM the time of explosion was said to be roughly above Hawes in the Yorkshire Dales on a steep tradjectory, that's a good 100 miles from explosion to ground zero.

The Us flight the same into the ground so why not so much of the plane found or that's what the footage showed, did the plane bury itself out of sight.

It did bury itself for the most part, due to the angle and speed of impact.

the apprentice
03-03-2012, 11:12 PM
:confused: I am not sure, perhaps you could elucidate.....





Flight 93 hit the ground in one piece. The two impacts were quite different.



It did bury itself for the most part, due to the angle and speed of impact.

I remember the guy I know who was on the search team say the parts of the 747 were comparable to both flight.

A 747 is roughly twice the size and weight of the 757 and the speeds and angles the same, the debris obviously more on the 747 due to it's passenger baggage and the 757 with only a dozen or so aboard far less, so there are some pictures to go off of.

Thanks for clear and polite info :)

dontdrinkurmilk
03-03-2012, 11:52 PM
I remember the guy I know who was on the search team say the parts of the 747 were comparable to both flight.

A 747 is roughly twice the size and weight of the 757 and the speeds and angles the same, the debris obviously more on the 747 due to it's passenger baggage and the 757 with only a dozen or so aboard far less, so there are some pictures to go off of.

Thanks for clear and polite info :)

Yes the 747 is bigger, the point I was making was the speed and angle were different and the fact the 747 was not intact upon impact makes a difference, also the ground was different in both cases.

Investigators believe that within three seconds of the explosion, the cockpit, fuselage, and No. 3 engine were falling separately. The fuselage continued moving forward and down until it reached 19,000 ft (5,800 m), at which point its dive became almost vertical.[18]

Pan Am Flight 103 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As you see, it is apparent that the plane broke up before impact.

the apprentice
04-03-2012, 11:39 AM
Yes the 747 is bigger, the point I was making was the speed and angle were different and the fact the 747 was not intact upon impact makes a difference, also the ground was different in both cases.



Pan Am Flight 103 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_Flight_103)

As you see, it is apparent that the plane broke up before impact.

When you see a lengthy groove carved into the ground as we did you automatically know that what made it wasn't travelling vertically and it was horizontal and fast, the earth it moved was both impressive and devastating an engine I think it was.
I'm looking at things logicaly really, something that size and weight traveling at mach. 87 Doesn't suddenly stop travelling forward, the smaller pieces may be slowed by air breaking but a wing say that is almost the size of a 757 fuselage, that would keep up at least a greater forward motion or terminal velocity until impact.

I believe the investigators believe some parts were almost vertical on landing because of the nature of their intactness on the ground.

The debris of the 747 was found in an eleven mile stretch indicating a speedy forward motion.

Flight 93 must have been flying straight down to dissapear like it did.

Clears up a few things for me, cheers.

dontdrinkurmilk
04-03-2012, 02:07 PM
When you see a lengthy groove carved into the ground as we did you automatically know that what made it wasn't travelling vertically and it was horizontal and fast, the earth it moved was both impressive and devastating an engine I think it was.
I'm looking at things logicaly really, something that size and weight traveling at mach. 87 Doesn't suddenly stop travelling forward, the smaller pieces may be slowed by air breaking but a wing say that is almost the size of a 757 fuselage, that would keep up at least a greater forward motion or terminal velocity until impact.

I believe the investigators believe some parts were almost vertical on landing because of the nature of their intactness on the ground.

The debris of the 747 was found in an eleven mile stretch indicating a speedy forward motion.

Flight 93 must have been flying straight down to dissapear like it did.

Clears up a few things for me, cheers.

No problem.

Flight 93 did travel fast and crashed upside down. The ground it hit was relatively soft soil, so the aircraft displaced the soil when it penetrated and then the soil fell in on top of the plane somewhat, therefore you couldn't see much of the plane at all.

Of course as the plane met the bedrock below the soil, it come to an abrupt stop and fragmented further. If you drop a rock in dry sand from a small height, you will see it go below the sand and bury itself, kind of like what flight 93 did.

amandareckonwith
04-03-2012, 06:14 PM
Could this be why Mr. Jones has never supported Dr. Judy Wood's research and textbook? However, in my opinion, I believe that "the Zionists did it" is a ruse because I do not believe that the Joint Chiefs of Staff are impotent ignorant fools.

http://truthernews.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/alex-jones-is-stratfor1.jpg

Alex Jones Cancels Speaking Tour 3 Days After Exposure As Possible STRATFOR Double Agent
On February 12, 2012, David Chase Taylor of Truther.org broke the story that Alex Jones was likely an intelligence tool for STRATFOR, a private Zionist intelligence agency located in Austin, Texas. As detailed in the original article (see below), STRATFOR admits to being an intelligence gathering center and therefore it stands to reason that Alex Jones and his affiliates of Inforwars and PrisonPlanet have likely been gathering intelligence, data and info on patriotic Americans since 1996, coincidentally the exact same year that STRATFOR was founded.
http://truthernews.wordpress.com/2012/02/16/alex-jones-cancels-speaking-tour-after-exposure-as-stratfor-double-agent/

It wasn't poor construction, jet fuel, demolition charges of any type, missiles or planes, mini-nukes, or super-duper-micro-mini-nano-thermite that turned two quarter mile high buildings with a combined weight of over a million tons into microscopic dust particles in mid-air taking less than 10 seconds each. There were over 100 floors in each tower. Try clapping yours hands 100 times in 10 seconds. To fully understand Dr. Judy Wood's research you must read her 540 page textbook.

The truth does not depend on who supports it. Truth is not a club or a matter of “opinion” or "belief". Neither is truth a political or economic objective. Truth doesn’t have sides. The truth is singular and the truth is unifying. By reading Dr. Wood's research and collection of evidence as compiled in her textbook the truth is known, so there is no need to "Re-investigate 9/11". If you want unity, then seek the truth by reading her textbook. If you were assigned to do a book report, would you read the book or rely on rumors, conjecture, and uninformed opinions from other people? This isn't about beliefs, it is about evidence.

David Icke Books - Exposing The Dreamworld We Believe To Be Real
http://www.davidickebooks.co.uk/index.php?act=viewProd&productId=283

ex sheep
04-03-2012, 08:30 PM
This topic is Dr. Judy Wood's Book: Where Did The Towers Go?

Anyone who goes off topic from now on WILL recieve notices to the effect
No more.

the apprentice
04-03-2012, 10:43 PM
An unseen weapon, but no evidence, alice in wonderland stuff and scary stuff if true, why would they place dozens of military bases around Iran and not use this weapon to vapourise the nuclear plants in Iran or any military superstructures without wasting men and money.

amandareckonwith
05-03-2012, 12:10 AM
An unseen weapon, but no evidence, alice in wonderland stuff and scary stuff if true, why would they place dozens of military bases around Iran and not use this weapon to vapourise the nuclear plants in Iran or any military superstructures without wasting men and money.

There is plenty of evidence. Read her textbook. If you missed what I previously stated, I said: It wasn't poor construction, jet fuel, demolition charges of any type, missiles or planes, mini-nukes, or super-duper-micro-mini-nano-thermite that turned two quarter mile high buildings with a combined weight of over a million tons into microscopic dust particles in mid-air taking less than 10 seconds each. There were over 100 floors in each tower. Try clapping yours hands 100 times in 10 seconds. To fully understand Dr. Judy Wood's research you must read her 540 page textbook.

The truth does not depend on who supports it. Truth is not a club or a matter of “opinion” or "belief". Neither is truth a political or economic objective. Truth doesn’t have sides. The truth is singular and the truth is unifying. By reading Dr. Wood's research and collection of evidence as compiled in her textbook the truth is known, so there is no need to "Re-investigate 9/11". If you want unity, then seek the truth by reading her textbook. If you were assigned to do a book report, would you read the book or rely on rumors, conjecture, and uninformed opinions from other people? This isn't about beliefs, it is about evidence."

"This above all: to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man."

musicmaker
08-03-2012, 11:24 PM
Could this be why Mr. Jones has never supported Dr. Judy Wood's research and textbook? However, in my opinion, I believe that "the Zionists did it" is a ruse because I do not believe that the Joint Chiefs of Staff are impotent ignorant fools.

http://truthernews.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/alex-jones-is-stratfor1.jpg

Alex Jones Cancels Speaking Tour 3 Days After Exposure As Possible STRATFOR Double Agent
On February 12, 2012, David Chase Taylor of Truther.org broke the story that Alex Jones was likely an intelligence tool for STRATFOR, a private Zionist intelligence agency located in Austin, Texas. As detailed in the original article (see below), STRATFOR admits to being an intelligence gathering center and therefore it stands to reason that Alex Jones and his affiliates of Inforwars and PrisonPlanet have likely been gathering intelligence, data and info on patriotic Americans since 1996, coincidentally the exact same year that STRATFOR was founded.
http://truthernews.wordpress.com/2012/02/16/alex-jones-cancels-speaking-tour-after-exposure-as-stratfor-double-agent/

It wasn't poor construction, jet fuel, demolition charges of any type, missiles or planes, mini-nukes, or super-duper-micro-mini-nano-thermite that turned two quarter mile high buildings with a combined weight of over a million tons into microscopic dust particles in mid-air taking less than 10 seconds each. There were over 100 floors in each tower. Try clapping yours hands 100 times in 10 seconds. To fully understand Dr. Judy Wood's research you must read her 540 page textbook.

The truth does not depend on who supports it. Truth is not a club or a matter of “opinion” or "belief". Neither is truth a political or economic objective. Truth doesn’t have sides. The truth is singular and the truth is unifying. By reading Dr. Wood's research and collection of evidence as compiled in her textbook the truth is known, so there is no need to "Re-investigate 9/11". If you want unity, then seek the truth by reading her textbook. If you were assigned to do a book report, would you read the book or rely on rumors, conjecture, and uninformed opinions from other people? This isn't about beliefs, it is about evidence.

David Icke Books - Exposing The Dreamworld We Believe To Be Real
http://www.davidickebooks.co.uk/index.php?act=viewProd&productId=283

I seriously doubt Alex jones is an intelligence tool considering what he discusses on his show. Some people will have difficulty accepting Judy's theory because they are unaware of the state of technology. The point is he knows it was an inside job.

amandareckonwith
09-03-2012, 01:44 PM
I seriously doubt Alex Jones is an intelligence tool considering what he discusses on his show. Some people will have difficulty accepting Judy's theory because they are unaware of the state of technology. The point is he knows it was an inside job.

I noticed that you address Dr. Judy Wood, B.S.,M.S., Ph.d. as "Judy". Are you an old family friend or close relative of her? Dr. Judy Wood does not have a theory. She presents overwhelming and irrefutable evidence in her 540 page textbook. What should be done about those covering up Dr. Judy Wood's research and collection of evidence like Alex Jones? Should they face a firing squad or spend life in prison?

musicmaker
09-03-2012, 09:28 PM
I noticed that you address Dr. Judy Wood, B.S.,M.S., Ph.d. as "Judy". Are you an old family friend or close relative of her? Dr. Judy Wood does not have a theory. She presents overwhelming and irrefutable evidence in her 540 page textbook. What should be done about those covering up Dr. Judy Wood's research and collection of evidence like Alex Jones? Should they face a firing squad or spend life in prison?

Easy fella Judy is just a person the same as everyone else. I doubt she would want everyone calling her Dr. Judy Wood, B.S.,M.S., Ph.d.

I don't think Alex Jones is covering up her research. If he doesn't believe it, it's his choice but he's not pushing the official theory. The evidence she puts forward is very contraversial and very difficult for alot of people to come to terms with. In my opinion this is on the same scale as trying to convince people the world is round.

If her evidence is correct and I believe it is the people who are deliberately covering it up are complicit in the murder of 3000 people and should be sentanced in a criminal court and will most likely receive the death penalty.

amandareckonwith
10-03-2012, 01:30 AM
Easy fella Judy is just a person the same as everyone else. I doubt she would want everyone calling her Dr. Judy Wood, B.S.,M.S., Ph.d.

I don't think Alex Jones is covering up her research. If he doesn't believe it, it's his choice but he's not pushing the official theory. The evidence she puts forward is very contraversial (controversial) and very difficult for alot (a lot) of people to come to terms with. In my opinion this is on the same scale as trying to convince people the world is round.

If her evidence is correct and I believe it is the people who are deliberately covering it up are complicit in the murder of 3000 people and should be sentanced (sentenced) in a criminal court and will most likely receive the death penalty.

If you don't believe Alex Jones is covering up Dr. Judy Wood's research then post something positive and supportive in their forum and see how long it takes for you to be banned. How do you address your physician? I don't address mine with his first name. That is disrespectful. The evidence is not too complicated or difficult to understand. All you have to do is read Dr. Judy Wood's textbook. The problem is people who don't think for themselves and arrive at conclusions based on opinion and consensus and not evidence.

labouysse
10-03-2012, 02:59 AM
If her evidence is correct and I believe it is the people who are deliberately covering it up are complicit in the murder of 3000 people and should be sentanced in a criminal court and will most likely receive the death penalty.

What is her evidence?

All we ever get from Amanda is "buy her book" spam.

Seriously - what is her evidence?

musicmaker
10-03-2012, 11:51 AM
What is her evidence?

All we ever get from Amanda is "buy her book" spam.

Seriously - what is her evidence?

Seriously, move along

If you don't believe Alex Jones is covering up Dr. Judy Wood's research then post something positive and supportive in their forum and see how long it takes for you to be banned. How do you address your physician? I don't address mine with his first name. That is disrespectful. The evidence is not too complicated or difficult to understand. All you have to do is read Dr. Judy Wood's textbook. The problem is people who don't think for themselves and arrive at conclusions based on opinion and consensus and not evidence.

I've not tried posting on his site so can't comment but I listen to Alex Jones nearly everyday and there is no way he some kind of intelligence tool, it's just not possible. I have heard him briefly discuss Judy's work with Jesse Ventura and he was skeptical. This is because he thought she was trying to divide the community. I would prefer that he was onboard with Judy's work of course but what he does with his show more than makes up for it. That piece you posted on him is just a smear campaign, by posting that you are doing them a favour.

I'm not disrespectful to Judy by not referring to her as Dr Wood all the time she is not my physician. I have watched many interviews and she is a very down to earth lady. I really don't think she would hold it against me considering the support I have given to her work in this forum :p

amandareckonwith
11-03-2012, 02:27 PM
Seriously, move along

I've not tried posting on his site so can't comment but I listen to Alex Jones nearly everyday and there is no way he some kind of intelligence tool, it's just not possible. I have heard him briefly discuss Judy's work with Jesse Ventura and he was skeptical. This is because he thought she was trying to divide the community. I would prefer that he was onboard with Judy's work of course but what he does with his show more than makes up for it. That piece you posted on him is just a smear campaign, by posting that you are doing them a favour.

I'm not disrespectful to Judy by not referring to her as Dr Wood all the time she is not my physician. I have watched many interviews and she is a very down to earth lady. I really don't think she would hold it against me considering the support I have given to her work in this forum :p

I have direct personal experience with Alex that conflicts with your "impression". If you call in to his show and mention Dr. Judy Wood you will be disconnected. Just because I've read and support the research and evidence she presents in her textbook it does not give me license to be disrespectful. Do posters refer to professional disinformation agents like Dr. Steven Jones as "Steve"? Again, this is perception management.

Try to create a page for Dr. Judy Wood in Wikipedia and see what happens...

Wikipedia search "Dr. Judy Wood"
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=%22Dr.+Judy+Wood%22&fulltext=Search

But there is a page for Steve, a professional 9/11 disinformation agent...

Steve
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_E._Jones

amandareckonwith
11-03-2012, 02:40 PM
What is her evidence?

All we ever get from Amanda is "buy her book" spam.

Seriously - what is her evidence?

The subject of this thread is Dr. Judy Wood's Book: Where Did The Towers Go?

It is not spam to inform people that they must read her book and discover the evidence on their own and not rely on the uninformed "opinions" or 'beliefs" of other people because this IS the the subject. However, your remark and accusation of spam is OFF TOPIC AND DISRUPTIVE TO PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATION. Read WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? and empower yourself with the evidence. Once again I say, "It wasn't poor construction, jet fuel, demolition charges of any type, missiles or planes, mini-nukes, or super-duper-micro-mini-nano-thermite that turned two quarter mile high buildings with a combined weight of over a million tons into microscopic dust particles in mid-air taking less than 10 seconds each. There were over 100 floors in each tower. Try clapping your hands 100 times in 10 seconds.

The truth does not depend on who supports it. Truth is not a club or a matter of “opinion” or "belief". Neither is truth a political or economic objective. Truth doesn’t have sides. The truth is singular and the truth is unifying. By reading Dr. Wood's research and collection of evidence as compiled in her textbook the truth is known, so there is no need to "Re-investigate 9/11". If you want unity, then seek the truth by reading her textbook. If you were assigned to do a book report, would you read the book or rely on rumors, conjecture, and uninformed opinions from other people? This isn't about beliefs, it is about evidence.

Now those that have read her textbook know the truth. Those covering it up should be held accountable. After all, it is the cover up that has enabled what has transpired since 9/11, not what happened on 9/11. So the cover up of 9/11 has been a far worse crime than 9/11 itself. Remember, the truth is known and is knowable. What should be done about those covering it up? Should they face a firing squad or spend life in prison?"

atlantabizgal
11-03-2012, 05:37 PM
"The truth does not depend on who supports it. Truth is not a club or a matter of “opinion” or "belief". Neither is truth a political or economic objective. Truth doesn’t have sides. The truth is singular and the truth is unifying."

I love this, do you mind if I use it as a signature? Should it be credited to you or someone else?

amandareckonwith
11-03-2012, 06:45 PM
"The truth does not depend on who supports it. Truth is not a club or a matter of “opinion” or "belief". Neither is truth a political or economic objective. Truth doesn’t have sides. The truth is singular and the truth is unifying."

I love this, do you mind if I use it as a signature? Should it be credited to you or someone else?

This would make an excellent signature and I do not object to the use of it. I wrote those words but need no credit for it because it is a universal truth and belongs to everyone. The truth is unifying. Please read WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? and empower yourself with the truth.

"Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth."
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

indolering
11-03-2012, 07:02 PM
This would make an excellent signature and I do not object to the use of it. I wrote those words but need no credit for it because it is a universal truth and belongs to everyone. The truth is unifying. Please read WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? and empower yourself with the truth.

"Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth."
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

You're quite a character, amanda, in a good way.:) I like your direct approach and your confidence in the subject. I guess you tend to blow away the 'competition' but I can understand it; you've read the book, and Ms Wood's evidence therein I assume (I haven't read it) demolishes all the theories of collapse except directed energy. My intuition tells me she is correct. One of these days the truth will be learnt by all.

May I ask where you're from? If that's you in your avatar my guess would be India. If it's too personal, I understand. Thanks for being a voice for a courageous researcher.:cool:

amandareckonwith
12-03-2012, 12:50 AM
You're quite a character, amanda, in a good way.:) I like your direct approach and your confidence in the subject. I guess you tend to blow away the 'competition' but I can understand it; you've read the book, and Ms Wood's evidence therein I assume (I haven't read it) demolishes all the theories of collapse except directed energy. My intuition tells me she is correct. One of these days the truth will be learnt by all.

May I ask where you're from? If that's you in your avatar my guess would be India. If it's too personal, I understand. Thanks for being a voice for a courageous researcher.:cool:

Dr. Wood presents evidence and only evidence. The evidence is conclusive so there is no need for a “theory.” Dr. Wood has conducted a forensic investigation. Dr. Wood has conducted the only comprehensive forensic investigation in the public domain (i.e. not classified). Dr. Wood is a well-qualified forensic scientist and deserves our highest respect.

Do you really want to know what happened on 9/11? If so, why haven’t you read Dr. Wood’s book yet?

I am not from India. I am from the Pisces-Cetus Supercluster Complex.

dontdrinkurmilk
12-03-2012, 09:59 AM
Dr. Wood presents evidence and only evidence. The evidence is conclusive so there is no need for a “theory.” Dr. Wood has conducted a forensic investigation. Dr. Wood has conducted the only comprehensive forensic investigation in the public domain (i.e. not classified). Dr. Wood is a well-qualified forensic scientist and deserves our highest respect.

Do you really want to know what happened on 9/11? If so, why haven’t you read Dr. Wood’s book yet?

I am not from India. I am from the Pisces-Cetus Supercluster Complex.

Where is that? :eek:

montmorency
12-03-2012, 01:05 PM
I must admit I haven't read the book yet, but I found her very credible in that interview with Theo Chalmers which is linked from her site.

Unfortunately, some of the other videos she has linked there don't seem to quite support her case. e.g. she talked at various points about there being no evidence for residual great heat long after the incident (and no evidence for molten metal), but there is video there showing fires flaring up when wreckage is disturbed by clearup workers, and a caption saying that the last fire went out (or was put out) some time in December. However, maybe that is all explained in the book.


Then there are some videos, or parts of videos, that don't seem quite relevant, like references to cold fusion. Interesting, but I don't see the direct relevance.

amandareckonwith
12-03-2012, 09:03 PM
I must admit I haven't read the book yet, but I found her very credible in that interview with Theo Chalmers which is linked from her site.

Unfortunately, some of the other videos she has linked there don't seem to quite support her case. e.g. she talked at various points about there being no evidence for residual great heat long after the incident (and no evidence for molten metal), but there is video there showing fires flaring up when wreckage is disturbed by clearup workers, and a caption saying that the last fire went out (or was put out) some time in December. However, maybe that is all explained in the book.

Then there are some videos, or parts of videos, that don't seem quite relevant, like references to cold fusion. Interesting, but I don't see the direct relevance.

You are confused because you have not read Dr. Judy Wood's textbook. Everything that glows is not hot. If you pick up a Firefly does it burn your fingers?

amandareckonwith
12-03-2012, 09:06 PM
Where is that? :eek:

Read WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? and I will tell you. :)

amandareckonwith
12-03-2012, 09:11 PM
Alex Jones Show Censors "Dr. Judy Wood" and "Red and Blue List" Discussion May 21, 2010

Jason Bermas was guest host. A caller named "Jeremy" mentioned the name, "Dr. Judy Wood" and was disconnected. Another caller mentions "Red and Blue List" and was cut off too. Over the break, Alex calls in from home to do damage control and goes berserk. In his rant, he cites "space beams" and refers to those who discuss Dr. Wood's work as "haters." - Listen to Alex incorrectly describe what one of the callers was calling about. What should be done about those covering it up? Should they face a firing squad or spend life in prison?

http://www.checktheevidence.com/audio/911/Jason%20Bermas%20censors%20Discussion%20of%20Dr%20 Judy%20Wood%20and%20Red%20and%20Blue%20Lists%20-%20Alex%20Jones%20Show%20-%2021%20May%202010.mp3

montmorency
12-03-2012, 11:29 PM
You are confused because you have not read Dr. Judy Wood's textbook. Everything that glows is not hot. If you pick up a Firefly does it burn your fingers?

Hmmm.... the people on this video:
9/11: WTC high temperatures & molten steel - YouTube

...are not talking about things like fireflies, but "fires", "flames", and "red hot steel" (as well as molten steel). Would firemen really not recognise these things?
Actual temperatures are mentioned. Are people simply making this up?
The satellite images shown appear to show high temperatures in certain areas.
Have these been faked?

I'm not attacking Judy Wood. Her basic premise could still be correct, but the videos she has chosen to showcase do not always seem to back up some of the detail she talked about in the interview with Leo Chalmers, for example.

montmorency
12-03-2012, 11:59 PM
Video 11, the edited highlights of "Fire from Water": as I said, extremely interesting, but ...

It was made in 1999, by which time even the keenest advocates and researchers were still at a highly developmental stage. Would this technology (even if applicable) have really reached the necessary level by September 2001 to be relevant? As for: "Cold Fusion, transmutation - it 's real, folks. Or maybe you know better than these scientists?", I think that comment is unworthy of Judy Wood if indeed she is responsible for it. It's a blatant appeal to authority / authoritarian science, exactly the kind of thing mainstream science does when it's trying to stifle opposition.


I actually find the Hutchison demos more convincing and applicable (assuming they are not faked), but again, could that have been developed into something usable at the WTC, and indeed would it necessarily "scale up", by September 2001?

Admittedly, it seems clear that the military were taking an interest in this stuff in 1999, and with all the resources (taxpayer dollars) they had to spend, I suppose it's possible that research could have been sufficiently accelerated.
I have to remain somewhat skeptical though.

amandareckonwith
13-03-2012, 12:47 AM
Hmmm.... the people on this video:
9/11: WTC high temperatures & molten steel - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zww9-AaIgrw)

...are not talking about things like fireflies, but "fires", "flames", and "red hot steel" (as well as molten steel). Would firemen really not recognise these things?
Actual temperatures are mentioned. Are people simply making this up?
The satellite images shown appear to show high temperatures in certain areas.
Have these been faked?

I'm not attacking Judy Wood. Her basic premise could still be correct, but the videos she has chosen to showcase do not always seem to back up some of the detail she talked about in the interview with Leo Chalmers, for example.

I don't wish to sound arrogant, but I can spend my time more wisely than debate with people who have not read WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood. If the temperatures were as hot as publicly claimed the water the firemen are using would turn to steam and cook them alive. If the glowing metal being held in the jaws of hydraulic equipment were as hot as claimed the equipment would seize up from the heat. As I said before, "Everything that glows is not hot." Water and dirt were used to stop the process. If you really want to know the answers to your questions just read her textbook. You don't have to base your beliefs on the conjecture of other unqualified people. Empower yourself with the evidence as collected by Dr. Judy Wood instead of debating a subject you have no knowledge of. That is my best advise.

montmorency
13-03-2012, 02:38 AM
I had not seen that interview with Dr Greg Jenkins (2007), when I saw the interview with Theo Chalmers (late 2011).

Oh dear oh dear oh dear. On the Jenkins interview, Dr Judy Wood performs terribly. The most charitable thing I can think of to say about it is that maybe she was exhausted and/or going down with a cold (sounds a bit like it), in which case she should have re-scheduled the interview. But if that was really the best she could do at that time, it was not impressive.

In the interview with Chalmers she came over much better. Perhaps she had learned some more media skills by then, and had a bit more experience of this kind of thing. On the other hand, she was only facing a rather credulous TV presenter, and not a fellow PhD.


Now Jenkins is a physicist, and normally I would tend to think that a structural engineer should have a much better idea of what is going on when a building collapses, but she wasn't able to answer his most simple questions straightforwardly. First she makes a big play of it being "dustification", not evaporation, but when he gets her to talk through what would happen when a piece of metal is exposed to intense energy, she says it's evaporation (probably since she realises that there is no previous evidence of metal crumbling to dust when subject to intense energy). It's actually embarrassing.

I was initially quite well disposed to her, and would tend to favour an engineer over a pure scientist on this sort of thing, but now I feel let down.

Yes Amanda, I will get hold of the book (would hate to waste your time) and see if it makes any more sense.


I have to say though, that the scientific method (which applies equally to engineering and any discipline where theory and logic are involved), the right approach to any theory, is not to look for ways of proving it, but for ways of disproving it. You look at it critically, and invite others to do the same, It doesn't necessarily mean it will be totally disproved. It might be that the critics find holes in certain aspects of the theory, and the theorist goes back and refines it, and the process starts again. That's how honest, non-pathological science should work. (Doesn't mean it always happens that way because scientists, etc, are human like anyone else).

But people who come on here and scream at anyone who question Dr Wood's findings are not actually doing her much of a service. An honest theorist welcomes searching questions and fair criticism.



For the record, I don't accept the official version. I don't have a book to sell or a blog to plug or any pet theories of my own. If anything, I'd tend to favour some sort of controlled demolition (maybe with some sort of advanced military conventional explosive that has so far remained secret). However, if someone really can disprove this as a possibility, then I'd fall back to the next most likely explanation, that it really was the planes and the fires that did it.

Even if it was real planes flown by real "hijackers", it doesn't rule out the possibility of an "inside job". They could have been real zealots who were set up without realising it. They could have been zealots who were set up and did actually realise it, but were happy to go ahead with it because they would kill Americans on behalf of Allah, and never mind how their part fitted into the grand scheme of things.


Once you accept the enormity of the possibility that it was a false flag operation (and we know there have been such things in the past), and you know the kind of people who were in charge of the White House at the time, and the people not far behind them, and we can all see what has happened subsequently with two major wars and a move towards fascism in the USA and in other countries, then the chances of it being an inside job look far more likely than any other explanation. Sad to say.
Once you accept that, then the fine details of how it was accomplished are almost irrelevant. Maybe some day the case will break wide open, just like Watergate did. Maybe it will hinge around something relatively "small" like why weren't certain key people actually doing the job they were paid for at such a critical time, or why did NORAD apparently fail so dismally.

I don't think you have to posit science-fiction "star wars" weapons to break this case. It will probably crack with old-fashioned professional detective work.

amandareckonwith
13-03-2012, 01:06 PM
If anything, I'd tend to favour some sort of controlled demolition (maybe with some sort of advanced military conventional explosive that has so far remained secret). However, if someone really can disprove this as a possibility, then I'd fall back to the next most likely explanation, that it really was the planes and the fires that did it.


Diverting the public to arguing between the two false choices of "9/11 Truthers" verses "The Official 9/11 Conspiracy Theory" while ignoring the facts is classic perception management designed to hide and obscure the evidence.

It wasn't poor construction, jet fuel, demolition charges of any type, missiles or planes, mini-nukes, or super-duper-micro-mini-nano-thermite that turned two quarter mile high buildings with a combined weight of over a million tons into microscopic dust particles in mid-air taking less than 10 seconds each. There were over 100 floors in each tower. Try clapping your hands 100 times in 10 seconds. :)

amandareckonwith
13-03-2012, 02:56 PM
http://youtu.be/xD9UVquklZU

Dr. Judy Wood on Veritas Radio | 9/11: The New Investigation (Full Interview)
http://veritasradio.blogspot.com/2011/09/dr-judy-wood-on-veritas-radio-911-new.html


Jesse Ventura understood WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood, B.S., M.S., Ph. D. but got attacked by "9/11 Truthers" for talking about it.

Reading Dr. Judy Wood's book, Where Did the Towers Go?, continues to awaken minds of note among truth seekers while mainstream media looks the other way and many in the "truth movement" bash it for its differing conclusions.

On this tenth anniversary of 9/11, Dr. Wood returns to Veritas to discuss the book's reception thus far, and her hopes for the future.

"I'd like to empower the reader to understand what happened. I want them to trust themselves, their own judgment, rather than what they've heard." Of course, one has to read the book. Those that do often return to buy another five or so, she says.

During this discussion we hear a recording of Governor Jesse Ventura lauding Dr. Wood's work to a skeptical Alex Jones. "It was some sort of microwave weapon. It wasn't a controlled demolition." We hear a recording of self-proclaimed 40-year hurricane expert Geraldo Rivera say, "Too bad there wasn't a hurricane on 9/11."

Ah, but there was a hurricane on 9/11. The public was never warned. Nor were pilots.

On 9/11/2001, a category-three Hurricane Erin stood menacingly off the shore of Long Island and Cape Cod for four days, Woods explains. Just after the towers disintegrated, it made a 90-degree turn away from the continent.

Free energy weaponry apparently requires a highly-charged, controlled atmosphere.

Wood laments that the truth movement has been derailed by distracting misinformation alluding to controlled demolition, radiation, bombs, thermite, molten metals, and more.

She says that surviving recordings reveal silence during the demise of the buildings. "The towers did not burn up, nor did they slam to the ground. They turned to dust in mid-air."

She mentions that there is no evidence any steel, or other tower remains, was shipped off to China.

Toasted cars blocks away, spontaneous combustion, papers flying while solids "dustified..." Wood's 800-pages of findings beg to be read. And bring on the skeptics.

"Just look at my book. There is no denying the evidence of directed, free-energy technology. This technology is not a secret anymore. Think of what knowing this will change."

So far no one has disputed any of the evidence presented in her book.

atlantabizgal
14-03-2012, 04:27 AM
This would make an excellent signature and I do not object to the use of it. I wrote those words but need no credit for it because it is a universal truth and belongs to everyone. The truth is unifying. Please read WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? and empower yourself with the truth.

"Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth."
Mohandas Karamchand GandhiThank you very much. I haven't read the book but I have read enough to be convinced that a plane didn't crash the towers.

montmorency
14-03-2012, 02:48 PM
Diverting the public to arguing between the two false choices of "9/11 Truthers" verses "The Official 9/11 Conspiracy Theory" while ignoring the facts is classic perception management designed to hide and obscure the evidence.


Very possibly, but not all of us have fallen into this trap, and I am open to all possible explanations (that excludes the official one, which isn't possible on so many grounds), including (as we say in England) the "cock-up theory" (I'm thinking of the NORAD failure principally, but also possibly among the "intelligence community". I don't at all see it as a choice between two alternatives. And even if it did involve a high energy weapon, this could also be used as a form of controlled demolition (supposing such a weapon existed).

However, if I may say so, convinced supporters of the Dr Judy Wood explanation seem to have a dualism of their own. Anyone who questions her explanation is accused of attacking her and/or being a disinformation agent. Well, I would question her, Dr Steven Jones, Dr Greg Jenkins, or any other "expert" equally searchingly. All I want to do is find out the truth. I don't have any axe to grind. I am not a member of any "truth" organisation or anything like it or opposing it. I am not paid by anyone to say anything or think anything.

Despite being disappointed by her 2007 interview with Dr Greg Jenkins (she seems to do better when she is well-prepared - I think she should demand a rematch with Dr Greg Jenkins on agreed terms) I still have an open mind about her theories, and I quite like her approach of only looking at the evidence, provided one looks honestly at the evidence. Scientists (and engineers, detectives, investigators of any kind) are only human, and can become "married" to their theories, and are vulnerable to confirmation-bias; that's why they need questioning from impartial third parties.

Dr Judy Wood, when questioned about the exact nature of the weapon, or any details about it, seems to ward off such questions by saying she's only going to concentrate on what actually happened, based on the evidence as she sees it. Well, ok up to a point, but in the overall investigation, just say that one has accepted her argument that the evidence on the ground and in the videos points to some form of of energy weapon having been used, surely the next steps are, for example:

- Where was the weapon, or where were the weapons, placed?
- How were they powered?
- How were they operated?
- From where were they operated and by whom?
- How were they installed?

Does no one have any interest in questions such as those?




Try clapping your hands 100 times in 10 seconds. :)

How exactly is that relevant?

dave52
14-03-2012, 03:16 PM
- Where was the weapon, or where were the weapons, placed?

On a space platform.

- How were they powered?

Some exotic source, torsion fields?

- How were they operated?

An operative in a black military project.

- From where were they operated and by whom?

An Air Force base by an operative in a black military project.

- How were they installed?

A secret space project.

musicmaker
15-03-2012, 12:24 AM
I am not from India. I am from the Pisces-Cetus Supercluster Complex.

DUDE! I knew I'd seen you somewhere!

Just kidding we are on the same side. :p

labouysse
15-03-2012, 02:26 AM
On a space platform.



Some exotic source, torsion fields?



An operative in a black military project.



An Air Force base by an operative in a black military project.



A secret space project.

Hey Dave - you've managed a post without blaming the Jews / Israel / Zionists.

Had a sudden conversion or summat?

graflok
15-03-2012, 05:57 AM
I am from the Pisces-Cetus Supercluster Complex.

Me too. ;)

amandareckonwith
21-03-2012, 11:33 AM
I thought the following comment was insightful...

The evidence speaks if you let it/Dr wood is right,very sane and has no axe to grind, March 18, 2012 By Kenneth D. Watson "Ken"

I did NOT nor want to believe Dr Wood as I write this.
Something repels me from her analysis, for what she is essentially implying as indeed much more directly are many others who may have issues with her work or aspects of it IS that a network or group of highly-placed and very influential people out there (whoever they may be) fell so low and to such a level of treachery,perfidy, malice and sheer bare-faced evil that together they devised a fiendishly wicked plot and equally as sickening, deceitful and morally wicked, an on-going cover up so as to persuade the American public to support a general war on terror,a loss of their own civil rights and freedoms and 2 specific wars(so far) aimed at a false and malicious retribution,all this in addition to the mass murder of predominantly American citizens,including children, and high treason.
Let us make no bones about it.Dr Wood stays resolutely with the science and ONLY WITH THE SCIENCE for sure but if the science is correct and the burden of proof discharged,or is even enough to prove that the official explanation could not have happened( and that terrorists used explosives is entirely untenable )then the charges above are total,unarguable,UNIMPEACHABLE and absolute.

9/11 was for me as for most of the world a deeply shocking event.To witness people allegedly celebrating what they saw as the comeuppance of the US Empire was equally as repulsive and like the vast majority I accepted that this was a terrorist attack but did not believe that an invasion of Afghanistan was warranted and protested the lack of real proof that Hussein in Iraq had any involvement whatsoever.This has since been accepted as the case with a public apology from the then US Secretary of State who himself was misled into presenting false evidence to the UN.

Several years passed until I read Prof Griffins "the New Pearl Harbour" wherein he makes a convincing case amongst much else that fire does not bring down sky-scrapers and never has.With the discovery of thermite material in the dust I consequently became slightly convinced through a lack of scientific background that a new explosive material had brought down the towers, having discounted the idea that fire and collision damage combined had been the cause-ignoring Tower 7- as indeed the NIST Report does, showing the structures to be highly redundant and deliberately constructed to withstand such a crisis.
But I needed to have a scientist with specific relevant skills and experience to help explain 9/11 to me and indeed was looking around and asking for some time until I heard of Judy Wood.Before however looking more closely at the book itself I want to address 2 specific related issues.Firstly ,Dr Wood and Richard Gage et al agree that the official explanation of pancake collapse is deeply and hopelessly flawed but disagree on the true cause.Wouldn't it be so helpful,sensible and more likely to bear fruit if the positive aspects of their agreement were emphasized and there was an understanding to disagree and to debate politely on the rest?Secondly, some people claim with some good reason that another investigation would just be another cover up and cite the HSCA into President Kennedys assassination as their example.Yet what else is there? Does anyone imagine that somehow criminal investigations will suddenly be opened into any of this?With President Obama having made numerous statements aimed at quenching the science and retaining the official fiction the very best that anyone can hope for beyond the court proceedings launched by Dr Wood- and where is this just now?-all that is left is another inquiry,this time one which is fully independent,properly financed and which has full powers of subpoena.
Possibly I have jumped the gun in this review by the comments above and should have written first that I find the science Dr Wood offers and the evidence she clearly lays out established proof that a new directed energy weapon pulverized the towers effectively turning them into dust in mid-air.There have been attempts to debunk Dr Wood claiming her seismic data is wrong,that toasted cars had been towed to FDR Drive and that she has underestimated the damage to the bathtub.Let us say there were something in any of these 3 claims, and she admits that the towing is possible though the evidence of nearby Seaport explosions is purposefully omitted in the criticism.Her case,however, so much much wider than any of this, demonstrates a preponderance of evidence not simply that fire could not have brought down the towers and certainly not in the accepted time-frames but that the cause of this disaster was the employment of a highly classified top-secret new weapon- the new Hiroshima- which turned the towers into dust by molecular disassociation.Indeed the weight of evidence is so vast, wide-ranging and so clear-cut that the criticisms above are mere pin-pricks/cysts on an elephants backside in her overall assembly of the facts.Furthermore, it is very clear that Dr Wood whose training and experience in damage- cause observation increase further still the power of her understanding when wedded to her wholly relevant formidable scientific academic background wrote this book fueled and driven by the DICTATES of conscience and that it is born from a deep scientific integrity so intrinsic to her very nature that she has felt it necessary to risk all,including ridicule from the intellectually lazy or dishonest, to get it out to a public which has been deliberately and wickedly kept in ignorance.This book is a massive work in every sense but still very readable by the non-scientist and is CERTAINLY the most important book of the last 100 years if not longer.Everything Prof Larsen claims in his powerful review is true and more.
Dr Wood has opened up 9/11 for us, FOLLOWING THE EVIDENCE AND LETTING THE DICE ROLL WHERE THEY MAY,without prisoners or hostages with brutal honesty and deep sensitivity,and is an inspired teacher......
Yes her conclusions are appalling,and make us recoil at every level from the foul disease which made this plot bud and which has sought ever since to cover it up.
Two final comments on other doubts about the book......
Firstly, some concern has been expressed about the chapter dealing with Hurricane Erin.Dr Wood reaches no final conclusions here and is completely open that a cold front was sweeping eastwards across the mainland towards New York.What however is striking is both the lack of weather information released to the American people about this huge hurricane running parallel to the US Eastern seaboard for several days,that it was so near to New York on 9/11 being visible in aerial photographs taken from there that day and the very abruptness and timing of the u turn it made and it is fitting and correct that this should be included in the book and adds to it.Secondly,similar concern has been expressed about the chapter "jumpers".If it does nothing else- and it does- this chapter brings home with an enormous jolt the reality of this tragedy and the very wickedness of what happened to ordinary people trapped in this building.Dr Wood, a trained observer,shows here from their behaviour and from the frequency of the jumping that something highly unusual beyond the appalling horrors of fire and smoke was going on within the building and that people were blown or swept out with enormous force and that no one carried anything and that others were disrobing.The criticism of her chapter seems to imply that its quite natural to jump from a burning building.In fact it's the very very last thing anyone would do and the suggestion that a queue of people desperate for oxygen pushed people some substantial distances from the towers sides entirely facile.

A TRUE SCIENTIST OF THE GALILEO TRADITION.....
An extraordinary work,a massive achievement, a profound demonstration of courage.....
Thank you Judy Wood.
Amazon.com: Kenneth D. Watson "ken"'s review of Where Did the Towers Go? Evidence of Direc...@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31uQpi24-3L.@@AMEPARAM@@31uQpi24-3L

dave52
25-03-2012, 08:37 AM
Actually, it's the next book I intend to buy. I want to give Judy a chance - she's said a lot of interesting things, I want to read it.

dontdrinkurmilk
25-03-2012, 10:37 AM
Actually, it's the next book I intend to buy. I want to give Judy a chance - she's said a lot of interesting things, I want to read it.

:D Such as?

rodin
02-04-2012, 06:32 AM
I found the inspiration for Wood's space beam nonsense

http://www.youtube.com/v/gLNa_YUPXes&fs=1&source=uds&autoplay=1

amandareckonwith
02-04-2012, 02:29 PM
I found the inspiration for Wood's space beam nonsense

http://www.youtube.com/v/gLNa_YUPXes&fs=1&source=uds&autoplay=1

You have obviously not read WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? because Dr. Judy Wood does not refer to nor mention "space beam nonsense".

#1 in Books > Politics & Social Sciences > Current Events > September 11
#1 in Books > Professional & Technical > Professional Science > Physics > Electromagnetism > Magnetism

Maybe you will find this Amazon review helpful:

I am delighted to finally see Dr. Judy Wood's book about the disintegration of New York's World Trade Center Twin Towers on September 11, 2001, appear in print. It has been a long time coming but well worth the wait.

Based in large part on her website and on the research she's been doing for over eight years, "Where Did the Towers Go?" is an exhaustive study of what happened to those two, quarter mile high, 110-storey skyscrapers on that horrible day and how they literally disappeared to dust. A structural engineering firm involved in building the Trade Center estimated there should have been almost 1.2 million tons of rubble. But, because we see mostly dust and unburned paper on the ground and a minimum of debris in the basements, Dr. Wood asks, "Where did it all go?"

With over 500 excellent color photographs, many charts and graphs, and solid calculations from an expert in mechanical and materials engineering, Professor Wood challenges the official story of 9/11 with compelling evidence that cannot be denied. Her study should convince anyone still skeptical of any alternative explanation as to what happened to the Towers that day that the generally accepted media and government explanation is utter nonsense.

Step by step, Dr. Wood takes us for an in-depth look at what really happened. She suggests that we have been brainwashed from the very beginning moments of the tragedy into believing the story we were being told on television. She shows us that we did not see what we thought we saw. In fact, she shows us clearly that we have been carefully deceived.

Dr. Wood starts by examining the free-fall speed at which the buildings began to plummet, but also graphically explains that very little of the huge structures actually ended up hitting the ground. In fact, the seismic data and the very limited ground penetration and destruction proves an overwhelming amount of material of the Towers was quickly turned to a very fine dust that spread both horizontally outward and vertically upward to form large plumes that finally settled on the streets of lower Manhattan and out into the rivers. One by one, Wood dismisses the official explanation as well as some of the alternate explanations from various 9/11 truth movements.

For me, the lack of a debris pile is the most convincing evidence that the Towers did not topple but were disintegrated on the spot in about 10 seconds each. It does not appear to be action of pulverization but more of what Dr. Wood calls "dustification".

She invents new and clever terms to describe what we saw that day and now see in the recorded photos. She does this in order to erase any pre-conceived ideas of what happened, telling us that the human mind always looks for answers by relating what it experiences to events it has observed before and to what is familiar to it. When the brain sees something totally new, it attempts to explain the phenomenon using what is in its memory. For this particular event, we must guard against that tendency, and descriptions using a new vocabulary help us do that. We begin to see what we thought we saw and what we were told to believe we saw in a different way. Only then can we begin to glimpse the truth of what took place.

Addressed in the book are many unpleasant subjects that most of us do not want to remember. We start to see the people who jumped to their deaths from a new angle. We see vertical circular holes in adjacent World Trade Center buildings that we were never shown before. We see cars blocks away that were "toasted" or flipped over. We see large steel beams and columns bent, twisted, thinned and rusted in peculiar ways that heat cannot cause. We see weird fires and fuming dirt on the ground for blocks...fuming that continues for months. We see WTC Building 7 completely destroyed after 5 pm that afternoon, never having been shown to be hit by an airplane. We see steel turned to "jelly", metal peeled, fusion of dissimilar materials, strange rounded holes in glass, and thinning and extremely rapid aging of materials in just a matter of hours. And, we read the recorded and documented testimony of dozens of first responders such as firefighters and emergency rescue workers that the debris from two 500,000+ ton Towers was almost non-existent.

Dr. Wood goes on in the latter chapters of the book to acquaint us with something she calls the "Tesla-Hutchison Effect" and its similarities to what happened in Manhattan on 9/11. She makes a good case for the use of a directed energy weapon based on that method. It involves setting up what's called a field effect by the interference of different types of energies concentrated on a particular target. There really is nothing new here: genius inventor Nikola Tesla demonstrated such effect a hundred years ago.

As with Judy Wood, I, too, thought it was very strange that the Towers "came down" on 9/11, but I couldn't put my finger on what could have really caused their demise. Now, with the release of this groundbreaking volume of work I am beginning to see the truth. I am beginning to see what I did not see before or what I was not permitted to see because of the power of immediate and incessant suggestion by the media and the government.

I highly recommend purchasing and reading "Where Did the Towers Go?" if you dare to get a glimpse of what really happened on a day that shaped the current history of our world for at least the first decade of the 21st century.
Amazon.com: Alan S. Glassman "pleromata"'s review of Where Did the Towers Go? Evidence of Direc...@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31agZuaqScL.@@AMEPARAM@@31agZuaqScL

amandareckonwith
15-04-2012, 07:12 PM
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z13/AmandaReconwith/TheShellGame.jpg

denton
16-04-2012, 11:26 AM
I think I found where Wood gets her evidence from:

Independence Day - Destruction - YouTube


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Da_FGYnLZjA&feature=youtube_gdata_player#t=03m010s

amandareckonwith
16-04-2012, 02:04 PM
I think I found where Wood gets her evidence from:

You have obviously not read WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? because Dr. Judy Wood does not refer to nor mention "space beam nonsense".

I noticed that you addressed Dr. Judy Wood as Wood. Are you a long time personal friend of Dr. Judy Wood? You might find the following Amazon book review helpful:

Dr. Wood, equaling the bravery and scientific inquisitiveness of Galileo, has meticulously researched and presented to us a re-creation of what actually happened on that historical day of September 11, 2001. What she's discovered truly contains implications that are beyond the mere evidence itself. Extremely disturbing questions suddenly become apparent, if one can allow them to form. The answers to these questions are quite disturbing.

For example, if you subscribe to the idea that the event on September 11, 2001 was a very carefully planned operation before it was activated, then, as Dr. Wood herself says, wouldn't the cover-up of how it was done and by whom have to be devised to last for years, decades, ultimately forever? And wouldn't a cover-up by its very nature require people acting as agents of deception inserted under every possible rock which could be potentially turned over by those who are turning over rocks and looking? We have been told by a former head of the C.I.A. that they "...own everyone of significance in the media," and Lenin is said to have stated, "If there is going to be an opposition, we will lead it."

As most people know, there are two official stories. Arabic people hijacked planes and flew them into the towers, and the official alternative version that most of the "9/11 truth patriots" demand that inquiring minds MUST believe. Anyone that challenges their version will face the equivalent of Galileo's Inquisition.

Dr. Wood has maintained her trust in science and the validity of examining the actual evidence and not getting seduced by postulations and claims that are not based on scientific facts. Over the years, she's suffered like Ulysses, while he was tied to the mast as his ship sailed past the Sirens. She's endured these attacks where most of us would have collapsed. Her courage is the material of legends.

This book is the documentation by a scientist of the only forensic inquiry of that event and it answers the questions: what really happened?; what is the definition of evidence?; and what evidence was recoverable at the crime scene? No one other than Dr. Wood with her PROVABLE crime scene evidence has actually challenged any of the government studies in court--one of her challenges traveling all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. All the "truth patriots" have not even tried the first, most obvious course, a court challenge. Why? Nevertheless, we are told by the Lenin side that they have the real evidence, and it has been verified in peer reviewed journals. If they truly have evidence, if they are truly trying to uncover and expose the perpetrators of that attack, why haven't they taken their evidence to court? There is no excuse for not doing that fundamental action.

When you read this book, you might be caught in a double-bind. You can stay in the harbor and worship your 9/11 truth idols, many of whom have mercilessly attacked Dr. Wood and her real evidence, or you can choose to let go of the dock and let the tide of truth take you to Dr. Wood's newly charted territory. There's no shame in recognizing that you were wrong about the self-named "truth movement." Anger is the appropriate response, just as you would be angry if your wife or husband was found to be having an affair. Nearly all of us were blinded by the official government story until several years after that day of infamy. Thanks to Dr. Wood's book, you will immediately see who the agents of deceit are. In fact, their attacks against her are secondary proof that her evidence is accurate and truthful.

As professor Larsen has tells us in his foreword, this IS the most important book of the 21st century. After reading it, you can't help but come to the conclusion that there are persons unknown, but that can be known, that are in control of awesome tools that can create either science fiction-like destruction or unimaginable benefits for humanity. On September 11, 2001 their version of that technology was debuted, and not for us but for the Russians, Chinese, and other foreigners in high military, business, and political positions. As Dr. Wood rightly says, it's: "The New Hiroshima."

Today, the world is facing an escalation of danger on all fronts which appear to be engineered by the same persons that created the World Trade Center attacks. Only a person living under a rock would not be aware of the unprecedented disaster that life on this planet is facing and that is clearly unopposed, which if unstopped, will likely lead to an Armageddon-like event, possibly WWIII. Unacknowledged by government officials, chemtrails cover most planetary skies. Why and for what purpose? The Georgia Guidestones announce that the human population needs to be slimmed down to 500 million souls. Is that a warning to all of us? The weather appears to be completely under human control, manufacturing the global weather instability that the Al Gores and Greenpeaces want us to believe we are causing. Wouldn't this lie help increase the implementation of a police state in every country? The global financial system has clearly been engineered to the point now where it is teetering on collapse. Who benefits from this? Last year, we nearly had a bioweapon released against the planet which would have given the U.N. signatory countries, nearly all, the right to force unknown substances into our bodies against our wills. Are you willing to resist this? The North American Union is still moving ahead. Is that the will of the people? Airport travelers are now treated like entrants to a prison. Are you willing to submit to this violation of your body just to fly somewhere? The ramping up of the encirclement of Russia and China is dangerously progressing unabated. Where and when will they draw the line? I won't go on. Our politicians are either incredibly ignorant about all of this or they know fully well about it and are aiding and abetting in our destruction. Either way, we're on our own.

What can you do? Buy and read this book and tell everyone you know to do the same. It is absolutely essential that as many persons as possible know this information. The clock is ticking. There's no time to lose.

denton
16-04-2012, 02:22 PM
I've read enough on Wood's (very poorly-implemented) website to convince me there's no chance I'm prepared to waste £45 on her book. I have paperweights already.

marky78
16-04-2012, 06:40 PM
what little I've seen of her I'd say she doesn't know her arse from here elbow regarding the simplest of things.

noobcybot
16-04-2012, 06:50 PM
I dont know why there is so much vitriol going her way.

Before she came on the scene i had never seen the wilted girders that appear to dissolve. The strage corrosion on the car materials near ground zero. The massess of contaminated Earth driven out of the area in trucks. I would never have heard about the surrounding buildings that had to be taken down months after because of structral erosion.

I think she brings some excellent info forward.

amandareckonwith
17-04-2012, 01:18 PM
I've read enough on Wood's (very poorly-implemented) website to convince me there's no chance I'm prepared to waste £45 on her book. I have paperweights already.

what little I've seen of her I'd say she doesn't know her arse from here elbow regarding the simplest of things.

The empirical evidence Dr. Judy Wood presents in WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? and the truth it reveals is not subject to uninformed opinion or consensus. However, you are entitled to believe and think as you wish or you could empower yourself with the evidence Dr. Judy Wood presents with the only forensic investigation into the destruction of the World Trade Center complex on September Eleventh, 2001, in the public domain. You could even jump off the top of a skyscraper four tenths of a kilometer high if you held the opinion that you would survive. Do you think your opinion would save your life?

If you are unemployed and £45 is a great deal of money for you, search the WorlCat Listing and put in a request for a copy to be sent to your local library through the Interlibrary loan program. However, because copies are usually checked out, you may have to wait a very long time.

WorldCat Listing
http://www.worldcat.org/title/where-did-the-towers-go-evidence-of-directed-free-energy-technology-on-911/oclc/704874500

Denton, again I noticed that you addressed Dr. Judy Wood, B.S., M.S., Ph.D. as Wood. Are you a long time personal friend of Dr. Judy Wood? You might find the following Amazon book review helpful:

We purchased the book two months ago, and have been reading and reading and reading... We agree: Dr. Judy Wood Wins!!! Even if you are one who has spent hours studying at DrJudyWood(dot)com, and have heard lots of Dr. Wood's lectures and interviews, you are going to be amazed at how much more there is to learn in this book.

This book presents a case that is beyond damning. It's a text book, professional, and hard to put down.

It's also a journey of discovery. Dr. Wood can't tell us Exactly what the weapon used that day was. But she can take us on an extensive tour of the evidence. She leads us into the correct ballpark, wherein, we can grasp the basics of the science that lies behind the bizarre phenomena which we see. And then, once the dots start connecting in our minds, and we do a bit of research, we can pretty much figure out what the game being played is, and who may be playing it.

Taking a good look at Dr. Wood's lawsuits is more than recommended.
Learning about the defendants is absolutely essential.

We all know we were lied to that day.
We all saw those buildings turn to dust.
Dr. Wood reveals to us the deepest, darkest secret of that day. The one that we, at all costs, are not supposed to learn. And that's the connection to Nikola Tesla, and Free-Energy Technology.

Dr. Wood peels away the layers of dis-info and psyop in a way that is candid, personal, and endearing. You will laugh, and cry, but most of all, you will learn, "through the eyes of a child, with wonder and amazement."

Thank you Judy Wood for this Work you have done. You have done us all a great service in getting this Book, and your Lawsuits, (and website(s)) on the Public Record.

Dr. Judy Wood deserves our support. We are beyond thankful to be able to write a review for such a book. The fact that this book exists, in these times, is an amazing accomplishment in itself. We are so lucky to have amongst us this brave woman, who does not give up, who got this book published.

Do yourself a favor, if you are able to, and buy this book. And by all means, if you haven't already, study the evidence at her voluminous website as well: DrJudyWood.com. Dr. Wood provides us with a wealth of information, via pictorial (and other revealing) evidence, that you will not see many other places. And most definitely, you will not likely be seeing these types of images out there with any sort of good explanation attached to them. (That's what Dr. Judy Wood is here for. :)

Libraries, (if there are lucky, in these times), have allotment funds for the purchasing of books, that we, the patrons, may request. If you are able, please request that your libraries obtain this book, or perhaps, you may be in a position to do some donating. We can talk to our local booksellers, as well. Per our experience, the reactions have been quite impressive. This book, with it's outrageous cover, is quite the eye-catching teaching piece, very effective in capturing people's attention. It's amazing how many have never even seen this 'reality'-defying picture.

It's up to us, once we 'get it', to see to it that many more see this for what it is. And help them to understand the reverse potential of this secreted-away technology, and why we should all be interested in, and caring about, this issue, which affects us all.

With Greatest Respects,
Matthew Goddard and Tenasee Love

~ Wondering if that very brave 'insider' will ever come on out and talk to us all. Will you step up, use your heart, and talk to us about this technology? The cat's already way out of the bag... Dr. Judy Wood has gone and coaxed it out here into the bright light of today. Where are you, brave blower of whistles? We, and those who disappeared on that day, and since, are waiting.

denton
17-04-2012, 01:23 PM
Wood's website is laughable. Her book is something I don't wish to waste money on. If her information is so valuable she wouldn't be trying to rip people off at $50 a pop. I wouldn't even want my local library to waste good shelf space on a copy of it. She presents nothing but pictures, speculative assumption and misinterpretation.

amandareckonwith
17-04-2012, 02:41 PM
Dr. Judy Wood's website is laughable. Her book is something I don't wish to waste money on. If her information is so valuable she wouldn't be trying to rip people off at $50 a pop. I wouldn't even want my local library to waste good shelf space on a copy of it. She presents nothing but pictures, speculative assumption and misinterpretation.

So if you cannot dispute the evidence as put forth in WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood, B.S., M.S., Ph. D., a common technique used to cover-up 9/11 is to make unwarranted and disparaging attacks against the scientist that presents the evidence.This is how a cover-up operation is orchestrated. Thank you for giving an excellent demonstration.

Actually $39.95 US is a deal considering that other bookseller are currently pricing the textbook for between $102.19 to $116.72!
http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0615412564/ref=dp_olp_0?ie=UTF8&redirect=true&condition=all

You can purchase Where Did The Towers Go? By Dr. Judy Wood, B.S., M.S., Ph. D. from the David Icke website for £25.00. They are now accepting PayPal.
http://www.davidickebooks.co.uk/index.php?act=viewProd&productId=283

Maybe you will find the following review helpful:

This is not a book of poetry, yet it has some beautiful prose, it is not a novel yet it tell a complete story, it is not a photography book yet the pictures will grab you, it is not just a text book yet its data is empirical, it is not the Bible yet it will be one of the most important books you will read.
I, like many people, have been caught up in "the story of 911". What I have found has been a lot of half truths and out and out lies. Our way of life, our perceptions of ourselves and the world has been changed, and far too many people here and around the world have been physically, psychologically, and morally destroyed because of the big lie.
This moment in time has chosen Ms Woods to open our eyes and expose us to the truth. Far too many people even after being awaken by this knowledge will be content to go back to sleep and concern themselves with the next sporting event or American Idol winner. This book however, will not let you be comfortable in your slumber, the words and pictures will demand that you be a person of conscious and not accept what has been spoon fed to you.

If the book is not available here do a web search for Judy Wood and you can purchase it from her site.

denton
17-04-2012, 05:39 PM
Wood has presented no irrefutable evidence to support her claims, that I have seen. Spamming very one-sided reviews is not going to change my mind. How about you post one of the one-star reviews of her book..?

She should be paying people to waste their time on her drivel. Toasted cars and dustification is just nonsense. No more, no less. The toasted cars in particular have been disproved, debunked and generally shown-up as the fanciful garbage they are.

noobcybot
17-04-2012, 05:44 PM
Wood has presented no irrefutable evidence to support her claims, that I have seen. Spamming very one-sided reviews is not going to change my mind. How about you post one of the one-star reviews of her book..?

She should be paying people to waste their time on her drivel. Toasted cars and dustification is just nonsense. No more, no less. The toasted cars in particular have been disproved, debunked and generally shown-up as the fanciful garbage they are.

Source?

denton
17-04-2012, 06:23 PM
Source?

It's been posted on this forum, possibly even earlier in this thread. The cars weren't toasted, they'd been moved, and Wood still hasn't rectified her incredibly misleading website.

noobcybot
17-04-2012, 06:30 PM
It's been posted on this forum, possibly even earlier in this thread. The cars weren't toasted, they'd been moved, and Wood still hasn't rectified her incredibly misleading website.

Has anyone debunked the wilting girders that appear to turn into dust?

denton
17-04-2012, 07:05 PM
Has anyone debunked the wilting girders that appear to turn into dust?

If you mean the ones that didn't turn into dust at all but collapsed into a plume of dust, then the answer is 'yes'. I can't believe people seriously believe that one.

denton
17-04-2012, 07:11 PM
Here's a more realistic review:

nonsense. Please don't waste your money. March 22, 2012 By L. Carr This book implies that the WTC was destroyed by directed energy weapons used by some unknown shadowy forces, and that a conspiracy exists to hide this fact. The author claims to have "science" to support this viewpoint. I contend that not only is that a ridiculous proposition, but it's an insult to the thousands of people who have worked to solve both the civil and criminal cases arising from the disaster, as well as all the people who worked, sometimes under dangerous conditions, to establish what actually happened that day.

If a directed energy weapon such as a laser hit something like the WTC, the result would be an instant massive explosion, not "dustification". I saw the planes hit the towers. I've seen large lasers in action. The towers were hit by planes piloted by terrorists and weakened by fires from thousands of gallons of jet fuel, as well as the initial crashes. The buildings were mostly made of concrete, and when concrete is dropped a thousand feet it shatters into...dust and rubble. The same dust and rubble that spread all over lower Manhattan. Those buildings were full of plastic and paper objects, which caught fire and smoldered for weeks under that same rubble. There is no mystery here, just a disaster, the result of many small decisions and circumstances that combined catastrophically, as is the case in most disasters.

There were no "directed energy weapons", no aliens, no conspiracies, except perhaps to try to make more of a mystery out of one of the greatest tragedies of the 20th century for the financial benefit of some quack authors, documentarians, and commentators.

The author of this work is a quack, a charlatan, or a deluded fool. Her book is paranoid fantasy.

noobcybot
17-04-2012, 07:25 PM
If you mean the ones that didn't turn into dust at all but collapsed into a plume of dust, then the answer is 'yes'. I can't believe people seriously believe that one.

Well have you seen the footage?

denton
17-04-2012, 07:40 PM
Well have you seen the footage?

Yup. Just a collapsing structure which was covered in dust and disappears amidst said dust upon rapid collapse. No big mystery. No space beams.

amandareckonwith
19-04-2012, 06:21 PM
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z13/AmandaReconwith/WhereDidTheirCredibilityGo.jpg

Some people say that death is the great equalizer but I believe fate is.

James Fetzer - Top Left

Richard Gage - Bottom Left

Kevin Barrett - Bottom Middle

David Ray Griffin - Bottom Right

Steven Jones - Top Right

denton
19-04-2012, 08:44 PM
Wood is a fraud.

indolering
19-04-2012, 08:58 PM
Wood is a fraud.

The official story is a fraud. If you believe it, you have my sympathies....

denton
19-04-2012, 09:01 PM
The official story is a fraud. If you believe it, you have my sympathies....

Silly me for looking at things critically with an open mind. I should've known the buildings were 'dustified' (a meaningless term) by lasers from space...it's so obvious. Wood hasn't even addressed the glaring flaws in her own 'research'. Why on earth would I choose to believe this kook over anything else, let alone the official story?

noobcybot
19-04-2012, 09:23 PM
Silly me for looking at things critically with an open mind. I should've known the buildings were 'dustified' (a meaningless term) by lasers from space...it's so obvious. Wood hasn't even addressed the glaring flaws in her own 'research'. Why on earth would I choose to believe this kook over anything else, let alone the official story?

Alright then, seen as we already know Wood's version of events. What exactly is your take on the days events?

denton
19-04-2012, 09:31 PM
Alright then, seen as we already know Wood's version of events. What exactly is your take on the days events?

Some 'planes hit some buildings. Buildings collapsed. Wood makes frivolous, baseless leaps into fantasy. Buildings weren't 'dustified'. They collapsed.

noobcybot
19-04-2012, 09:45 PM
Some 'planes hit some buildings. Buildings collapsed. Wood makes frivolous, baseless leaps into fantasy. Buildings weren't 'dustified'. They collapsed.

You do know this is conspiracy website dont you?

denton
19-04-2012, 09:49 PM
You do know this is conspiracy website dont you?

So...I'm not gonna find that cherry cupcake recipe..? You say that like it means anything other than conspiracies can't be discussed or considered. Wood doesn't substantiate her outlandish claims.

noobcybot
19-04-2012, 10:14 PM
So...I'm not gonna find that cherry cupcake recipe..? You say that like it means anything other than conspiracies can't be discussed or considered. Wood doesn't substantiate her outlandish claims.

Go on then. You substantiate YOUR claims.

amandareckonwith
20-04-2012, 11:34 AM
Being a student of Dr. Judy Wood who has read her textbook and clearly understands the evidence she presents in WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? Two words in the article below stuck out like a sore thumb. One was used in the first sentence (hurricane) and the other was used in the last sentence (nuclear). This news story is a good example of how the media was actively involved in the 9/11 cover-up from the very beginning.

People likened it to a bomb, to midnight, to a hurricane (Erin) and, finally, afterward, when the air was choked with soot and smoke (dustification), to hell.

After the first building collapsed, there was an eerie silence. Everyone was crouching. The streets were gray with soot. (dustification) It was very silent in lower Manhattan. It was like what people say is nuclear (magnetic-electrogravitic-nuclear reactions) winter.

It Was An Escape From Hell
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2001-09-12/news/0109120097_1_north-tower-trade-center-heineman#mod-blogs

amandareckonwith
20-04-2012, 11:44 AM
Dr. Judy Wood is a fraud.


If Dr. Judy Wood, B.S.,M.S., Ph. D. is a fraud, then why is David Icke selling her textbook? :rolleyes:
http://www.davidickebooks.co.uk/index.php?act=viewProd&productId=283

denton
20-04-2012, 12:13 PM
If Dr. Judy Wood, B.S.,M.S., Ph. D. is a fraud, then why is David Icke selling her textbook? :rolleyes:
http://www.davidickebooks.co.uk/index.php?act=viewProd&productId=283

Profit? Wood has yet to amend her 'evidence' with regards to the debunked 'toasted cars', let alone the other parts of her hypothesis which she pulled out of thin air. No toasted cars, no 'dustification'. If she's ignorant of these things, she's a poor researcher, if she's aware of them she's a liar.

porridge
20-04-2012, 04:03 PM
Profit? Wood has yet to amend her 'evidence' with regards to the debunked 'toasted cars', let alone the other parts of her hypothesis which she pulled out of thin air. No toasted cars, no 'dustification'. If she's ignorant of these things, she's a poor researcher, if she's aware of them she's a liar.

Please post a link to this debunking, I hunted but cant find nothing convincing to prove the cars were typical fires.

marky78
20-04-2012, 06:01 PM
I noticed Judy was mystified by the missing door handles on the burnt cars, something she no doubt puts her hands on everyday and yet she failed to realise they are plastic.

and strip the paint off a car and it can easily rust over in a day especially if the cars were doused with water.

denton
20-04-2012, 10:18 PM
Plenty info here:

http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/pseudosc/911NutPhysics0.HTM

noobcybot
20-04-2012, 10:41 PM
Plenty info here:

http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/pseudosc/911NutPhysics0.HTM

When I mentioned the half melted car. I meant this type of half melted car...

http://drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/Image9.jpg

Absent from your "debunking". As were the interviews with fire personnel that stated no fires were present in the respective areas.

denton
20-04-2012, 11:10 PM
When I mentioned the half melted car. I meant this type of half melted car...

http://drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/Image9.jpg

Absent from your "debunking". As were the interviews with fire personnel that stated no fires were present in the respective areas.

I don't see a 'half-melted' car. I see a car which has most likely suffered damage from falling debris and has been on fire. There's really no mystery.

marky78
20-04-2012, 11:20 PM
Plenty info here:

http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/pseudosc/911NutPhysics0.HTM

well that well and truly pissed on her corn flakes.

marky78
20-04-2012, 11:21 PM
When I mentioned the half melted car. I meant this type of half melted car...

http://drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/Image9.jpg

Absent from your "debunking". As were the interviews with fire personnel that stated no fires were present in the respective areas.

I see debri and fire damage, not 'melted' in anyway.

denton
20-04-2012, 11:23 PM
well that well and truly pissed on her corn flakes.

No offence meant, but are you being sarcastic or serious? Undertones are hard to gauge through text. If the latter, then thank you for not disagreeing for the sake of it, as I believe you and I have different opinions on other aspects of the whole scenario. If the former... O_o

NB: ignore this post, I've just seen your subsequent post.

dave52
21-04-2012, 08:37 AM
Here is the Judy Wood section from Ace Baker's Psy-Opera movie. He also touches on mini-nukes. Worth a look.

http://youtu.be/a3nwzX0A2GU

wispy
21-04-2012, 09:19 AM
When I mentioned the half melted car. I meant this type of half melted car...

http://drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/Image9.jpg

Absent from your "debunking". As were the interviews with fire personnel that stated no fires were present in the respective areas.

Can I just check?

Is it Judy Wood who's putting this forward as a 'melted car' or is it you?

If Judy Wood, she should know the difference between fire damag and 'melted' seeing as she's meant to be a scientist.

No way is this car 'melted'. Maybe some of the plastic components, but the car cabin has burnt out and the paint peeled.

porridge
21-04-2012, 09:34 AM
Plenty info here:

http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/pseudosc/911NutPhysics0.HTM

Okay cheers Denton, although a lot of what they say is true, it doesn't explain the burnt cars for me & I dont call that a debunking atall.

To debunk you would have to show other examples of similar scenarios of partially burnt cars, surely this is an easy task?

Surely there are photos out there of partially burnt cars that have been extinguished by firemen?

This is half the trouble with these so called debunkers, their debunking is just as vague has some of the truther theory's.

Check this JREF forum (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=208961&page=2) for example. Scroll through the thread & look at the cars these guys post as proof, which are all totally burnt through. Nothing like what Judy Wood is pointing out.

Burnt cars (https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=partially+burnt+cars&hl=en&prmd=imvns&source=lnms&tbm=isch&ei=JnCST6vQCMj48QOixdHODA&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=2&ved=0CCgQ_AUoAQ&biw=916&bih=411&sei=KHCST_6nB5Pd8QOE35nODA)

See anything that looks similar to WTC cars?

wispy
21-04-2012, 10:25 AM
Okay cheers Denton, although a lot of what they say is true, it doesn't explain the burnt cars for me & I dont call that a debunking atall.

To debunk you would have to show other examples of similar scenarios of partially burnt cars, surely this is an easy task?

Surely there are photos out there of partially burnt cars that have been extinguished by firemen?

This is half the trouble with these so called debunkers, their debunking is just as vague has some of the truther theory's.

Check this JREF forum (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=208961&page=2) for example. Scroll through the thread & look at the cars these guys post as proof, which are all totally burnt through. Nothing like what Judy Wood is pointing out.

Burnt cars (https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=partially+burnt+cars&hl=en&prmd=imvns&source=lnms&tbm=isch&ei=JnCST6vQCMj48QOixdHODA&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=2&ved=0CCgQ_AUoAQ&biw=916&bih=411&sei=KHCST_6nB5Pd8QOE35nODA)

See anything that looks similar to WTC cars?

Do you want it similar or exactly the same so as to match the debunk standard.

I think these are similar enough.

Bearing in mind many of the cars and vehicles on 911 were hit by falling debris, and some of those dragged to where they were photographed:

http://izismile.com/2009/03/02/luxury_cars_are_being_burnt_in_germany_16_pics.htm l

http://images.brisbanetimes.com.au/file/2011/08/09/2545592/london17.jpg

http://en.fotolia.com/id/1237116?&utm_source=54083&utm_medium=affiliation&utm_content=54083

http://en.fotolia.com/id/35831750?&utm_source=54083&utm_medium=affiliation&utm_content=54083

http://izismile.com/2009/02/03/horrible_burned_cars_9_photos.html

http://cosmicpenguin.com/911/wtc/burnedcars/

porridge
21-04-2012, 10:36 AM
Do you want it similar or exactly the same so as to match the debunk standard.

I think these are similar enough.

Bearing in mind many of the cars and vehicles on 911 were hit by falling debris, and some of those dragged to where they were photographed:

http://izismile.com/2009/03/02/luxury_cars_are_being_burnt_in_germany_16_pics.htm l

http://images.brisbanetimes.com.au/file/2011/08/09/2545592/london17.jpg

http://en.fotolia.com/id/1237116?&utm_source=54083&utm_medium=affiliation&utm_content=54083

http://en.fotolia.com/id/35831750?&utm_source=54083&utm_medium=affiliation&utm_content=54083

http://izismile.com/2009/02/03/horrible_burned_cars_9_photos.html

http://cosmicpenguin.com/911/wtc/burnedcars/

Not great examples:p

This one was good:

http://cosmicpenguin.com/911/wtc/burnedcars/Car_Fire_091.JPG

Oh look its from the WTC:eek:

noobcybot
21-04-2012, 11:53 AM
Can I just check?

Is it Judy Wood who's putting this forward as a 'melted car' or is it you?

If Judy Wood, she should know the difference between fire damag and 'melted' seeing as she's meant to be a scientist.

No way is this car 'melted'. Maybe some of the plastic components, but the car cabin has burnt out and the paint peeled.

Go and read her book or at least go through her website before entering this debate ( with me at least) please.

wispy
21-04-2012, 12:30 PM
Not great examples:p

This one was good:

http://cosmicpenguin.com/911/wtc/burnedcars/Car_Fire_091.JPG

Oh look its from the WTC:eek:

So did the Millville Fire Department send teams to New York on 9/11 and is that picture really from WTC?

From what I can gather from their website, no they didn't and no it isn't.

So any photo of similar looking burn't out cars aint going to debunk Judy Wood's claims it in your eyes.

They have to face left in the picture, be white and blue with NY Police dept logos and have a caved in roof and front section burnt out. I get it now.

wispy
21-04-2012, 12:45 PM
Go and read her book or at least go through her website before entering this debate ( with me at least) please.

And I thought I had asked a simple question which could have had a simple answer such as 'it's Judy Wood' or 'it's me'. I guess it was too hard.

noobcybot
21-04-2012, 01:34 PM
And I thought I had asked a simple question which could have had a simple answer such as 'it's Judy Wood' or 'it's me'. I guess it was too hard.

Whats with the attitude?

wispy
21-04-2012, 02:04 PM
Whats with the attitude?

No attitude. Just an observation.

porridge
21-04-2012, 05:01 PM
So did the Millville Fire Department send teams to New York on 9/11 and is that picture really from WTC?

From what I can gather from their website, no they didn't and no it isn't.

So any photo of similar looking burn't out cars aint going to debunk Judy Wood's claims it in your eyes.

They have to face left in the picture, be white and blue with NY Police dept logos and have a caved in roof and front section burnt out. I get it now.

I was going by the photo "cosmicpenguin.com/911/wtc/burnedcars/Car_Fire_091.JPG" thanks for the correction. And this car does display exactly the same symptoms as the WTC cars admitted.

porridge
21-04-2012, 05:11 PM
They have to face left in the picture, be white and blue with NY Police dept logos and have a caved in roof and front section burnt out. I get it now.

But Wispy I was just demonstrating how crap the so called debunkers are from the JREF & all these websites, they make just as much stupid observations as the woman they are trying to debunk.

wispy
21-04-2012, 07:10 PM
But Wispy I was just demonstrating how crap the so called debunkers are from the JREF & all these websites, they make just as much stupid observations as the woman they are trying to debunk.

It could be just a matter of how partisan you want to be about it.

For instance by the same token, with the standard of facts displayed in for example SC as linked to by some, I'm bemused by how 'truthers' fail to see how much of the information displayed is plain wrong and misleading.

wispy
21-04-2012, 07:12 PM
I was going by the photo "cosmicpenguin.com/911/wtc/burnedcars/Car_Fire_091.JPG" thanks for the correction. And this car does display exactly the same symptoms as the WTC cars admitted.

No worries.

I think it goes to show there was nothing unusual in the wrecked cars at WTC.

amandareckonwith
22-04-2012, 12:48 PM
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z13/AmandaReconwith/911VancouverHearings.jpg

Jim Fetzer says that he promotes the research and evidence that Dr. Judy Wood presents in WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? out of one corner of his mouth and out of the other corner he hosts a conference to present disinformation by "debating" opinions, speculations and theories but never discuss the actual evidence Dr. Judy Wood presents. Anyone who reads her textbook knows what he is up to. It's about creating doubt and starting fights and distracting people AWAY FROM THE TRUTH.

Tom Vanden Brook and Ray Locker of USA TODAY were recent targets of a Pentagon misinformation campaign for presenting the truth like the ongoing campaign against Dr. Judy Wood. Using federal funds for misinformation campaigns violates federal law prohibiting the production of propaganda for domestic consumption. It's apparent where "Jabba the Hut Fetzer" gets his marching orders from.

"Mmmmmm. Uga. Spasteelia a bunkadunka. Race a spuce adoobla!"
-Jabba the Hut, Star Wars (Translation: "Welcome! Let the race begin!")


Misinformation campaign targets USA TODAY reporter, editor
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2012-04-19/vanden-brook-locker-propaganda/54419654/1

911 Vancouver Hearings
http://www.911vancouverhearings.com/

denton
22-04-2012, 01:04 PM
Plenty info here:

http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/pseudosc/911NutPhysics0.HTM

Wood has been proven wrong.

noobcybot
22-04-2012, 02:50 PM
Wood has been proven wrong.

Yeah, you have already posted that link and it is just one guys opinions against Woods. As others have already pointed out, how can you criticise Wood for speculation then have that one webpage be what you go on?

denton
22-04-2012, 03:13 PM
Yeah, you have already posted that link and it is just one guys opinions against Woods. As others have already pointed out, how can you criticise Wood for speculation then have that one webpage be what you go on?

It's one website which addresses many of her faults. Much like September Clues does, only using facts. If you want to believe fanciful nonsense about toasted cars while ignoring the simple facts of the matter, that is your choice. No toasted cars. No dustification. Just common sense and logical explanations.

noobcybot
22-04-2012, 03:37 PM
It's one website which addresses many of her faults. Much like September Clues does, only using facts. If you want to believe fanciful nonsense about toasted cars while ignoring the simple facts of the matter, that is your choice. No toasted cars. No dustification. Just common sense and logical explanations.


But I want to know what your motivation to keep posting it is. You say "that is your choice" so why do you keep posting it?

denton
22-04-2012, 03:43 PM
But I want to know what your motivation to keep posting it is. You say "that is your choice" so why do you keep posting it?

Because quite frankly I'm tired of hearing how this fraudulent woman is supposedly in possession of some kind of invaluable truth. Her research is flimsy at best, and leading at worst. She's been shown to be incorrect on several things, not least her toasted car farce, and the fact that anyone with a functioning brain can't see the simple facts behind what she implies are mysterious events is exasperating. People who persist in pushing Wood's lies and nonsense without first engaging their brains and applying common sense and logical deduction deserve little other than sympathy for their having been so unbelievably duped by that charlatan.

andrewjohnson
22-04-2012, 08:50 PM
No worries.

I think it goes to show there was nothing unusual in the wrecked cars at WTC.

No worries. I think it goes to show there is something VERY unusual in the amount of energy expended to try and "debunk" what is blatantly obvious. In turn it becomes obvious there really is an agenda where people are employed, wittingly or unwittingly (mainly using silly handles) to drone on and on and on and fail to distract people away from studying all the evidence now available.

http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=339&Itemid=60

amandareckonwith
23-04-2012, 01:16 PM
No worries. I think it goes to show there is something VERY unusual in the amount of energy expended to try and "debunk" what is blatantly obvious. In turn it becomes obvious there really is an agenda where people are employed, wittingly or unwittingly (mainly using silly handles) to drone on and on and on and fail to distract people away from studying all the evidence now available.

http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=339&Itemid=60

And the irony here Andrew is that the posters who denigrate Dr. Judy Wood by calling her a fraud and accuse her of only being motivated by money are more than likely under contract to do this activity! I seriously do not believe that they are all suffering from some type of psychosis that makes them obsessed with defaming Dr. Judy Wood and the truth that is revealed from the evidence she presents in her textbook. The evidence speaks for itself. :rolleyes:

denton
23-04-2012, 02:46 PM
And the irony here Andrew is that the posters who denigrate Dr. Judy Wood by calling her a fraud and accuse her of only being motivated by money are more than likely under contract to do this activity! I seriously do not believe that they are all suffering from some type of psychosis that makes them obsessed with defaming Dr. Judy Wood and the truth that is revealed from the evidence she presents in her textbook. The evidence speaks for itself. :rolleyes:

Wood is a misleading charlatan. No-one's paying me to say that. I do it from the goodness of my heart. No toasted cars. No dustification.

bryan
23-04-2012, 11:08 PM
You gotta wonder why Amanda Rectum Nyth, who is pushing a comic book about space beam weaponry destroying the towers, has an avatar of Osama Bin Laden with a short hair cut and suit.

Just seems a bit odd eh ... Dave52 ? Did Osama own the space platform too, which he operated from a cave in the mountains .. ??

ROTFLMAO !!! :D

Why don't you contribute something useful like explaining to the debunkers why you believe there's an almost zero probability that fires brought down WTC7?

noobcybot
23-04-2012, 11:28 PM
I have posted exstensivly as to pre-programming in media AND especially the relevance of Super Mario Brothers in relation to the conspiracy at large

Which is why I find this so strange.

9/11 foreshadowed in Super Mario Bros. The Movie - YouTube

http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3f778d413b95.jpg

denton
24-04-2012, 12:09 AM
I have posted exstensivly as to pre-programming in media AND especially the relevance of Super Mario Brothers in relation to the conspiracy at large

Which is why I find this so strange.

9/11 foreshadowed in Super Mario Bros. The Movie - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKLw_Fm3tqg)

http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3f778d413b95.jpg

Those bottom four images are what the Wood woman claims is 'dustification'. She's either grossly mistaken or willingly misleading. The images show a part of the structure collapsing. The video shows this. There's no mystery, and no dustification. It's a dust-covered structure collapsing in a plume of dust, but it is not being 'dustified', unless that means "collapsing in a cloud of dust".

dave52
24-04-2012, 06:15 AM
the Wood woman

Enough with the rudeness towards her please. From her bio - Judy D. Wood is a former professor of mechanical engineering with research interests in experimental stress analysis, structural mechanics, optical methods, deformation analysis, and the materials characterization of biomaterials and composite materials.

So she is qualified to ask these questions. Have you watched the Ace Baker interviews with her that I linked earlier. Some really interesting info there, particularly the pyroclastic flow stuff. It proves beyond doubt that the towers were reduced to fine dust that billowed due to great pressures.

I really don't think it was a "natural collapse". Can you explain the rapid and massive expansion of the dust clouds?

lexdyksic
24-04-2012, 06:39 AM
I agree, the book's expensive. It's a nice book though.
Nonetheless, what about Judy Wood's theory (or lack thereof)? I've been looking at this since 2001 and, frankly, the closest I've gotten is a mini-nuke. She thinks it's a scalar weapon. I don't know enough about either one (other than what I've read) to have a good opinion.
What I do know is that, as she points out, they didn't exactly "fall", they evaporated. The "spire" that just turns to dust is incredible. I've done quite a bit of work with metal and I've never seen anything capable of that. She does a very good job of pointing out the anomalies. The burnt cars with the unburnt paper nearby, etc.. I can't get that "spire" out of my mind. It can't happen, but there it is.
For something to sublimate (pass from solid to gas) without becoming liquid requires a tremendous amount of heat. Of course, if you buy her weapon theory, maybe it's something else. If it is it's out of my frame of reference. Anybody know anything about these "weapons"?

denton
24-04-2012, 07:46 AM
I agree, the book's expensive. It's a nice book though.
Nonetheless, what about Judy Wood's theory (or lack thereof)? I've been looking at this since 2001 and, frankly, the closest I've gotten is a mini-nuke. She thinks it's a scalar weapon. I don't know enough about either one (other than what I've read) to have a good opinion.
What I do know is that, as she points out, they didn't exactly "fall", they evaporated. The "spire" that just turns to dust is incredible. I've done quite a bit of work with metal and I've never seen anything capable of that. She does a very good job of pointing out the anomalies. The burnt cars with the unburnt paper nearby, etc.. I can't get that "spire" out of my mind. It can't happen, but there it is.
For something to sublimate (pass from solid to gas) without becoming liquid requires a tremendous amount of heat. Of course, if you buy her weapon theory, maybe it's something else. If it is it's out of my frame of reference. Anybody know anything about these "weapons"?

The spire didn't turn to dust. It collapsed. Rapidly. Dust that was on it didn't follow the collapse but instead hung in the air due to its lower density. That's all there is to it. Likewise Wood's 'toasted car' nonsense: that's been quite thoroughly disproven. The fact sub information remains on her site suggests she's either incredibly lax or she's wilfully attempting to mislead people. Neither bolsters her credibility. Wood is either incompetent or plain dishonest.

dave52
24-04-2012, 03:42 PM
Wood is either incompetent or plain dishonest.

Right, great, thanks.

I ask again...

Can you explain the rapid and massive expansion of the dust clouds?

dontdrinkurmilk
24-04-2012, 03:51 PM
Right, great, thanks.

I ask again...

Dave, whats with your problem in understanding the amount of 'dust' produced?

gypsum wailboard would have caused a lot of dust that emenated from the collapse, also concrete amongst other things. also all of the air which is being forced from the towers at the time of collapse, is going to increase the distance the dust travels. Remember around 95% of the towers was air.

denton
24-04-2012, 04:03 PM
I really don't think it was a "natural collapse". Can you explain the rapid and massive expansion of the dust clouds?

I think if you look closely you might just be able to make out a couple of 1300ft buildings collapsing. That makes a lot of dust. All you need is the slightest breeze for any large quantity of dust to hang in the air and dissipate slowly over a large area. No mini-nukes, and no space lasers or whatever that Wood woman spuriously claims. I fail to see why this causes such confusion. One person with (allegedly) a doctorate claims space beams and some people lap it all up. God knows how many equally or more qualified professionals say collisions and fire did it, and THEY must be lying...really. :confused::rolleyes:

noobcybot
24-04-2012, 04:06 PM
Those bottom four images are what the Wood woman claims is 'dustification'. She's either grossly mistaken or willingly misleading. The images show a part of the structure collapsing. The video shows this. There's no mystery, and no dustification. It's a dust-covered structure collapsing in a plume of dust, but it is not being 'dustified', unless that means "collapsing in a cloud of dust".

Yeah so what about the whereby the towers disintegrate?

denton
24-04-2012, 04:53 PM
Yeah so what about the whereby the towers disintegrate?

Define 'disintegrate'. Do you mean in the sense alleged in Wood's explanation?

noobcybot
24-04-2012, 05:03 PM
Define 'disintegrate'. Do you mean in the sense alleged in Wood's explanation?

Apologies, I made a typing error.

You know where I put that video in comparison to the photgraph. What do you think about that?

denton
24-04-2012, 05:08 PM
Apologies, I made a typing error.

You know where I put that video in comparison to the photgraph. What do you think about that?

The video from the Super Mario Brothers movie?

noobcybot
24-04-2012, 05:44 PM
The video from the Super Mario Brothers movie?

The same.

denton
24-04-2012, 05:53 PM
The same.

I've seen it, or most of it, but a good few years ago. Didn't like what I saw. Films based on videogames rarely translate well. Mortal Kombat, Street Fighter, Alone in the Dark, House of the Dead, Bloodrayne, Max Payne, Tomb Raider, Resident Evil... None made particularly good films, and some were downright abysmal. Super Mario Brothers was one of them.

noobcybot
24-04-2012, 05:58 PM
I've seen it, or most of it, but a good few years ago. Didn't like what I saw. Films based on videogames rarely translate well. Mortal Kombat, Street Fighter, Alone in the Dark, House of the Dead, Bloodrayne, Max Payne, Tomb Raider, Resident Evil... None made particularly good films, and some were downright abysmal. Super Mario Brothers was one of them.

No, I meant what did you think of it in relation to towers being destroyed.

denton
24-04-2012, 06:06 PM
No, I meant what did you think of it in relation to towers being destroyed.

Coincidental but utterly and absolutely irrelevant.

amandareckonwith
26-04-2012, 03:03 PM
Those bottom four images are what the Wood woman claims is 'dustification'. She's either grossly mistaken or willingly misleading. The images show a part of the structure collapsing. The video shows this. There's no mystery, and no dustification. It's a dust-covered structure collapsing in a plume of dust, but it is not being 'dustified', unless that means "collapsing in a cloud of dust".

How does dust collect on a vertical structure?:rolleyes:

amandareckonwith
26-04-2012, 03:51 PM
I have posted exstensivly as to pre-programming in media AND especially the relevance of Super Mario Brothers in relation to the conspiracy at large

Which is why I find this so strange.

9/11 foreshadowed in Super Mario Bros. The Movie - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKLw_Fm3tqg)

http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3f778d413b95.jpg

You are very astute noobcybot. Here is another example.

The Lone Gunmen Pilot - 9/11 Predictive Programming

The pilot episode for the FOX series "The Lone Gunmen" Which first aired on March 4, 2001. The plot envisioned the US Government hijacking a plane and crashing it into the World Trade Center. The psychological operation cover-up of the use of a Directed Energy Weapon to "dustify" the World Trade Center complex began well before this act of treason and mass murder was committed.

http://youtu.be/z3WW6eoLcLI

Coincidentally, I received a letter from News Corporation (Murdoch Family Trust and K. Rupert Murdoch) who own Fox recently. These are the first two paragraphs of the letter:

April 18, 2012

Dear Stockholder:

On April 18,2012, News Corporation (the "Company") announced that its Board of Directors (the "Board") determined that the number of shares of Class B common stock, par value $0.01 per share ("Class B Common Stock"), held by Non-U.S. Stockholders (as defined later in this notice) is approximately 36% of the Company's outstanding Class B Common Stock. Under applicable U.S. federal law, no broadcast station licensee may be owned by a corporation if more than 25% of that corporation's stock is owned or voted by Non-U.S. Stockholders (the "Foreign Ownership Threshold"). The Company is the parent of broadcast stations\ licensees in connection with its ownership and operation of 27 U.S. television stations.

In order to comply with U.S. federal law, and in accordance with Article IV, Section 5 of the Company's Restated Certificate of Incorporation, the Board today announced the immediate suspension of voting rights of 50% of the class B Common Stock of the Company held by Non-U,s, Stockholders. (i.e. Murdoch Family Trust and K. Rupert Murdoch)

P.S My avatar was created by the U. S. Federal Bureau of Investigation. :D

denton
26-04-2012, 04:25 PM
How does dust collect on a vertical structure?:rolleyes:

Ask your TV screen. The third picture in the series of four shows the spire as it's collapsing. It wasn't 'dustified'.

noobcybot
26-04-2012, 04:55 PM
You are very astute noobcybot. Here is another example.

The Lone Gunmen Pilot - 9/11 Predictive Programming

The pilot episode for the FOX series "The Lone Gunmen" Which first aired on March 4, 2001. The plot envisioned the US Government hijacking a plane and crashing it into the World Trade Center. The psychological operation cover-up of the use of a Directed Energy Weapon to "dustify" the World Trade Center complex began well before this act of treason and mass murder was committed.

http://youtu.be/z3WW6eoLcLI

Coincidentally, I received a letter from News Corporation (Murdoch Family Trust and K. Rupert Murdoch) who own Fox recently. These are the first two paragraphs of the letter:

April 18, 2012

Dear Stockholder:

On April 18,2012, News Corporation (the "Company") announced that its Board of Directors (the "Board") determined that the number of shares of Class B common stock, par value $0.01 per share ("Class B Common Stock"), held by Non-U.S. Stockholders (as defined later in this notice) is approximately 36% of the Company's outstanding Class B Common Stock. Under applicable U.S. federal law, no broadcast station licensee may be owned by a corporation if more than 25% of that corporation's stock is owned or voted by Non-U.S. Stockholders (the "Foreign Ownership Threshold"). The Company is the parent of broadcast stations\ licensees in connection with its ownership and operation of 27 U.S. television stations.

In order to comply with U.S. federal law, and in accordance with Article IV, Section 5 of the Company's Restated Certificate of Incorporation, the Board today announced the immediate suspension of voting rights of 50% of the class B Common Stock of the Company held by Non-U,s, Stockholders. (i.e. Murdoch Family Trust and K. Rupert Murdoch)

P.S My avatar was created by the U. S. Federal Bureau of Investigation. :D

Is that for real? FFS thats shocking. I had heard it mentioned before but never got around to watching it, I didnt know the whole plot revolved around it.

As for he share situation what does that mean in laymens terms? Will those shares be sold and then delisted or does it just mean you dont have voting rights?

amandareckonwith
26-04-2012, 05:28 PM
Is that for real? FFS thats shocking. I had heard it mentioned before but never got around to watching it, I didnt know the whole plot revolved around it.

As for he share situation what does that mean in laymens terms? Will those shares be sold and then delisted or does it just mean you dont have voting rights?

It means people like Murdoch will lose all or some of their voting rights.

Murdoch admits hacking cover-up
http://www.smh.com.au/world/murdoch-admits-hacking-coverup-20120426-1xnyc.html

amandareckonwith
26-04-2012, 05:57 PM
Ask your TV screen. The third picture in the series of four shows the spire as it's collapsing. It wasn't 'dustified'.

Some people have tried to argue that these remains of the core had dust on them that shook loose just before the columns dropped to the ground. If so, how did the dust get there? How long did it take for the dust to get there? And how did it stay there?

If this much dust had been there before the destruction, it would have taken up a significant volume of the building. It is very difficult to imagine that the remnants of the core were still covered in a thick layer of loose dust in the instants following the total disintegration of the building around them.

Or, if the dust had come from the destruction of the building, how could it settle so quickly and yet be fine enough to stay aloft? The tallest column in the "spire" does not appear even to have a horizontal surface for the dust to accumulate on. This theory of dust seems most highly improbable, if not impossible. :rolleyes:

Consider the importance of this matter. These core columns stood rigidly and without support after the total destruction of the building around them. If they had fallen over, they would have destroyed buildings over several city blocks. These columns stood well above the 47-story WTC7 and extended half again that building's height, to a level of about 71 stories.

If this remaining group of core columns had been positioned horizontally rather than vertically, it would be approximately the length of three American football fields. Yet, there is no evidence that these core columns landed on or damaged any buildings in this "fall zone". Where did they go? :confused: What could have happened to them other than that they turned to dust?

I would like to elaborate further but I must leave to go create a spire for my gazebo. I'm so happy that Spring is here. I mowed the yard yesterday and it looks so nice. I mowed my neighbors yard too. There is nothing better than the smell of freshly cut grass. :D

denton
26-04-2012, 06:26 PM
Some people have tried to argue that these remains of the core had dust on them that shook loose just before the columns dropped to the ground. If so, how did the dust get there? How long did it take for the dust to get there? And how did it stay there?

If this much dust had been there before the destruction, it would have taken up a significant volume of the building. It is very difficult to imagine that the remnants of the core were still covered in a thick layer of loose dust in the instants following the total disintegration of the building around them.

Or, if the dust had come from the destruction of the building, how could it settle so quickly and yet be fine enough to stay aloft? The tallest column in the "spire" does not appear even to have a horizontal surface for the dust to accumulate on. This theory of dust seems most highly improbable, if not impossible. :rolleyes:

Consider the importance of this matter. These core columns stood rigidly and without support after the total destruction of the building around them. If they had fallen over, they would have destroyed buildings over several city blocks. These columns stood well above the 47-story WTC7 and extended half again that building's height, to a level of about 71 stories.

If this remaining group of core columns had been positioned horizontally rather than vertically, it would be approximately the length of three American football fields. Yet, there is no evidence that these core columns landed on or damaged any buildings in this "fall zone". Where did they go? :confused: What could have happened to them other than that they turned to dust?

I would like to elaborate further but I must leave to go create a spire for my gazebo. I'm so happy that Spring is here. I mowed the yard yesterday and it looks so nice. I mowed my neighbors yard too. There is nothing better than the smell of freshly cut grass. :D

I'm assuming you're on a wind-up. The video those stills are from shows the spire slipping downwards, leaving behind a cloud of dust. It's absolutely possible, absolutely plausible, and the fact you'd sooner believe that imaginary space lasers turned the towers to dust would suggest that you're wilfully ignoring simple facts. The spire was covered in dust from the collapse. It in turn collapsed, so quickly that the dust appeared to hang in the air. No mystery.

dontdrinkurmilk
26-04-2012, 07:33 PM
Some people have tried to argue that these remains of the core had dust on them that shook loose just before the columns dropped to the ground. If so, how did the dust get there? How long did it take for the dust to get there? And how did it stay there?

If this much dust had been there before the destruction, it would have taken up a significant volume of the building. It is very difficult to imagine that the remnants of the core were still covered in a thick layer of loose dust in the instants following the total disintegration of the building around them.

Or, if the dust had come from the destruction of the building, how could it settle so quickly and yet be fine enough to stay aloft? The tallest column in the "spire" does not appear even to have a horizontal surface for the dust to accumulate on. This theory of dust seems most highly improbable, if not impossible. :rolleyes:

Consider the importance of this matter. These core columns stood rigidly and without support after the total destruction of the building around them. If they had fallen over, they would have destroyed buildings over several city blocks. These columns stood well above the 47-story WTC7 and extended half again that building's height, to a level of about 71 stories.

If this remaining group of core columns had been positioned horizontally rather than vertically, it would be approximately the length of three American football fields. Yet, there is no evidence that these core columns landed on or damaged any buildings in this "fall zone". Where did they go? :confused: What could have happened to them other than that they turned to dust?

I would like to elaborate further but I must leave to go create a spire for my gazebo. I'm so happy that Spring is here. I mowed the yard yesterday and it looks so nice. I mowed my neighbors yard too. There is nothing better than the smell of freshly cut grass. :D

From that footage and the distance the remnents of the core look sharp, we can't however make assertions from said footage alone, I think its logical to assume that the dust and debris from the collapse, would have landed on these columns, hence the reason it looks like they vanish, because the dust blocks are voew of them collapsing. What is your suggestion then? If they did not collapse what happened?

As for the collapse, these columns don't look that tall to me, they more than likely collapsed into the remaining debris field.

stannrodd
27-04-2012, 02:45 AM
How does dust collect on a vertical structure?:rolleyes:

Gravity ... perhaps :rolleyes: doh !

The assumption (line of shit = pushing liquid manure) .. is that there is no horizontal component to the spire .. that is utter ferking shite man ... open your effin eyes ..:p

http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj16/stannrodd/d5.jpg

utah
27-04-2012, 04:55 AM
Don't people realize that both sides of this debate are trying to base conlusions on phoney photos?

I've gotta side with the Wood debunkers- She has got be delusional or deliberate disinfo!

My opinion is that Directed Energy weapons are an interesting sci-fi story meant to distract everyone from the fakery used to cover up how the demilition really took place.

Just another circus sideshow to distract all the truth-seekers!

stannrodd
27-04-2012, 05:21 AM
The main point Utah, is that THE Looney Wood invents the theory with bullshit and sells books on the back of a tragedy.

Her crap has been completely debunked .. but she still sells books. That is really sick. Wankers like amandareckonwith are obviously part of the sales team and this forum by allowing the obvious pushing of shit by "virtual advertising" are as guilty as the Looney.

Simple stuff really .. here's an example.

The core columns which were stripped and left naked when collapse occurred should have fallen over and damaged adjacent buildings. This might be true if the columns were one singular piece of metal which was somehow isolated at it's base and then fell over like a tree being chopped down.

The columns in the core were not one single piece though and they weren't chopped at their base like a tree. They were made of lots of sections which were welded and bolted on top of each other. The forces of collapse caused the columns to collapse straight down, FACT.

Physics was obviously something Judy avoided because it proves her crap to be CRAP.

Check out this photo of the core during collapse...

http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj16/stannrodd/corecloseupbest.jpg

The overwhelming forces are acting vertically .. there is no fulcrum .. collapse is straight down. You can actually see the column sections breaking and buckling .. this not a phoney photo ..

QED

skanny
27-04-2012, 10:29 AM
have to say im not a follower of this but i have to add this into the mix, just for the sake of balance and to point out to people who claim DEW research is so secret no member of the public could know of it, or that it even exists.


the invisible machine - electro-magnetic warfare.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4515534125267138757


DEW's are very real.

you can all thank me later. :cool:

amandareckonwith
27-04-2012, 11:59 AM
denton-dontdrinkurmilk-utah-stannrodd:

What is your motivation for perpetuating the 9/11 cover-up? The cover-up is a far worse crime than using a Directed Energy Weapon to "dustify" the World Trade Center complex as well as commit mass murder for fascist interests. Your actions remind me of a chicken farm where there are 7 hens to a cage and they all attack one, perhaps hoping to make more room in the cage. :rolleyes:

When I was a child I wondered how the German people could commit unspeakable atrocities for the Nazi regime. Since 9/11 it has become apparent how easy a task that can be.

My suggestion for individuals who act out because of low self esteem is to use pentadecalactone on a daily basis.

I finished crafting and painting the spire for my gazebo yesterday and today I plan on installing it. After my three hour work out at the gym I also plan on making pumpkin pudding with cinnamon, ginger, and Jamaican allspice. I should make a blackberry pie because I bought nine 170 gram containers for $1.00 each yesterday but I would rather eat them fresh. This morning I opened a bag of Kona coffee I bought recently and added chocolate almond milk to the cup of coffee I made. Yummy flavor!

See you later, I need to eat breakfast, take a shower, and get to the gym. Until then, here is some information you can study:

Great Review of Johnson/Wood Talk on 9/11 and DEW
I was reading this blogger's excellent discussion of the document, Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars, when I saw another blog piece, in the archives, of a talk Andrew Johnson and Dr. Judy Wood gave about her book, Where Did the Towers Go? I was pleased to see it's a very favorable review of the talk, written with intelligence, detail, and humor. It captures the rational, humble, and non-confrontational style of both speakers--including their handling of an obstreperous heckler and his come-uppance from his partner of the evening!
http://mazeinamirror.blogspot.com/2012/01/great-review-of-johnsonwood-talk-on-911.html

dontdrinkurmilk
27-04-2012, 03:54 PM
From that footage and the distance the remnents of the core look sharp, we can't however make assertions from said footage alone, I think its logical to assume that the dust and debris from the collapse, would have landed on these columns, hence the reason it looks like they vanish, because the dust blocks are voew of them collapsing. What is your suggestion then? If they did not collapse what happened?

As for the collapse, these columns don't look that tall to me, they more than likely collapsed into the remaining debris field.

Please directly respond.

denton-dontdrinkurmilk-utah-stannrodd:

What is your motivation for perpetuating the 9/11 cover-up? The cover-up is a far worse crime than using a Directed Energy Weapon to "dustify" the World Trade Center complex as well as commit mass murder for fascist interests. Your actions remind me of a chicken farm where there are 7 hens to a cage and they all attack one, perhaps hoping to make more room in the cage. :rolleyes:

When I was a child I wondered how the German people could commit unspeakable atrocities for the Nazi regime. Since 9/11 it has become apparent how easy a task that can be.

My suggestion for individuals who act out because of low self esteem is to use pentadecalactone on a daily basis.

I finished crafting and painting the spire for my gazebo yesterday and today I plan on installing it. After my three hour work out at the gym I also plan on making pumpkin pudding with cinnamon, ginger, and Jamaican allspice. I should make a blackberry pie because I bought nine 170 gram containers for $1.00 each yesterday but I would rather eat them fresh. This morning I opened a bag of Kona coffee I bought recently and added chocolate almond milk to the cup of coffee I made. Yummy flavor!

See you later, I need to eat breakfast, take a shower, and get to the gym. Until then, here is some information you can study:

Great Review of Johnson/Wood Talk on 9/11 and DEW
I was reading this blogger's excellent discussion of the document, Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars, when I saw another blog piece, in the archives, of a talk Andrew Johnson and Dr. Judy Wood gave about her book, Where Did the Towers Go? I was pleased to see it's a very favorable review of the talk, written with intelligence, detail, and humor. It captures the rational, humble, and non-confrontational style of both speakers--including their handling of an obstreperous heckler and his come-uppance from his partner of the evening!
http://mazeinamirror.blogspot.com/2012/01/great-review-of-johnsonwood-talk-on-911.html

I'm not perpetuating any coverup, however you will always continue to advertise judy's obvious distortions and outrageous theories, as you like to accept theories without scritiny from what I see.

denton
27-04-2012, 04:29 PM
Wood hasn't even addressed the plain errors in her assertions about 'toasted cars'. Her 'research' into that one is still on her website. That she can misrepresent information so wildly makes me wonder where she bought her qualifications from.

No toasted cars. No 'dustification'. No big mystery.

noobcybot
27-04-2012, 05:03 PM
No toasted cars. No 'dustification'. No big mystery.

So you keep saying. Others think differently. We arent prepared to accept everything was as it seemed. I for one believe an occult mega ritual was taking place. So it is hardly a stretch for me to believe an energy weapon was in use especially as various media sources hinted at it beforehand. You keep calling sci-fi and fantasy but I know for a fact that the PTB go out of their way to make people think reality is an impossible fantasy.

denton
27-04-2012, 05:25 PM
So you keep saying. Others think differently. We arent prepared to accept everything was as it seemed. I for one believe an occult mega ritual was taking place. So it is hardly a stretch for me to believe an energy weapon was in use especially as various media sources hinted at it beforehand. You keep calling sci-fi and fantasy but I know for a fact that the PTB go out of their way to make people think reality is an impossible fantasy.

The simple fact is that the Wood woman's own 'evidence' has been proven wrong. Her toasted cars nonsense has been shown to contain huge, gaping flaws. She seems to have a very poor grasp on...well, on reality. She's just wrong, plain and simple. That spire didn't turn to dust; it simply collapsed. You can SEE it collapse in the video. You can SEE the spire in the stills, as it collapses. That this charlatan woman is now trying to flog her gibbering nonsense for $50 a pop underlines how sincere she really isn't.

I don't mind if you think it was the faeries at the bottom of the garden that 'did it', but for goodness' sake find some actual facts to support your ideas, instead of the speculative ramblings of a fraud like Wood.

utah
27-04-2012, 05:38 PM
The main point Utah, is that THE Looney Wood invents the theory with bullshit and sells books on the back of a tragedy.

Her crap has been completely debunked .. but she still sells books. That is really sick. Wankers like amandareckonwith are obviously part of the sales team and this forum by allowing the obvious pushing of shit by "virtual advertising" are as guilty as the Looney.

Simple stuff really .. here's an example.

The core columns which were stripped and left naked when collapse occurred should have fallen over and damaged adjacent buildings. This might be true if the columns were one singular piece of metal which was somehow isolated at it's base and then fell over like a tree being chopped down.

The columns in the core were not one single piece though and they weren't chopped at their base like a tree. They were made of lots of sections which were welded and bolted on top of each other. The forces of collapse caused the columns to collapse straight down, FACT.

Physics was obviously something Judy avoided because it proves her crap to be CRAP.

Check out this photo of the core during collapse...

http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj16/stannrodd/corecloseupbest.jpg

The overwhelming forces are acting vertically .. there is no fulcrum .. collapse is straight down. You can actually see the column sections breaking and buckling .. this not a phoney photo ..

QED

Photo source please...

noobcybot
27-04-2012, 05:39 PM
Facts....

I dont have any, just like you have no facts to show an energy weapon was not used but I least I am honest about that and keep an open mind. At least that allows me to look at a bigger picture. Without the bigger picture you arent going to be able to make sense of the situation, you wont have the framework. Which is exactly why 80% of the population call you crazy when you say "all is not as it seems".

For example if you read Icke and know that all physical reality is essentially formed of dense vibrations then you will know that occult rituals require a certain resonance to allow something to manifest.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_h9jM93aGqfs/SUaojArhgTI/AAAAAAAABe4/Gpm99Jg17C4/s400/WTC-Tuning-Fork-Windows.jpg

http://montalk.net/notes/images/egyptian_carving.jpg

utah
27-04-2012, 05:50 PM
The "DEW theory" meme was an integral part of the 9/11 "Hollywood made-for-TV movie" both supported and simultaneously debunked ad nasuem by endless phoney images...

And interesting theory, but ultimately having no basis in reality, making it a non-sensical diversion into 9/11 fairy land...

denton
27-04-2012, 05:53 PM
The "DEW theory" meme was an integral part of the 9/11 "Hollywood made-for-TV movie" both supported and simultaneously debunked ad nasuem by endless phoney images...

And interesting theory, but ultimately having no basis in reality, making it a non-sensical diversion into 9/11 fairy land...

I...agree. In part.

denton
27-04-2012, 05:59 PM
Facts....

I dont have any, just like you have no facts to show an energy weapon was not used but I least I am honest about that and keep an open mind. At least that allows me to look at a bigger picture. Without the bigger picture you arent going to be able to make sense of the situation, you wont have the framework. Which is exactly why 80% of the population call you crazy when you say "all is not as it seems".

For example if you read Icke and know that all physical reality is essentially formed of dense vibrations then you will know that occult rituals require a certain resonance to allow something to manifest.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_h9jM93aGqfs/SUaojArhgTI/AAAAAAAABe4/Gpm99Jg17C4/s400/WTC-Tuning-Fork-Windows.jpg

http://montalk.net/notes/images/egyptian_carving.jpg

But there ARE facts to show the collapse was something other than the Death Star.

noobcybot
27-04-2012, 06:03 PM
But there ARE facts to show the collapse was something other than the Death Star.

Show me.

denton
27-04-2012, 06:21 PM
Show me.

Maybe some other time. If you want to believe that 'tuning fork', ritual hogwash, that's your prerogative. May as well believe the twin towers were eaten by giant intergalactic honey bees. The bottom line on Wood is that she's either knowingly or unknowingly misleading people and whichever it is, that's disgusting, frankly.

noobcybot
27-04-2012, 06:28 PM
Maybe some other time. If you want to believe that 'tuning fork', ritual hogwash, that's your prerogative. May as well believe the twin towers were eaten by giant intergalactic honey bees. The bottom line on Wood is that she's either knowingly or unknowingly misleading people and whichever it is, that's disgusting, frankly.

Well you Clearly know nothing if you believe the mega ritual idea is tantamount to saying the towers were eaten by intergalatic honey bees. So why would anyone bother taking any notice of your ideas concearning this event?

You have said your piece, many times by now. You have no arguments other than to say "there is no mystery nothing strange happened that day" and "Woods is a charletan" so fine, leave it at that and dont come back to the thread unless you have something new or interesting or at least compelling to say.

denton
27-04-2012, 06:41 PM
Well you Clearly know nothing if you believe the mega ritual idea is tantamount to saying the towers were eaten by intergalatic honey bees. So why would anyone bother taking any notice of your ideas concearning this event?

You have said your piece, many times by now. You have no arguments other than to say "there is no mystery nothing strange happened that day" and "Woods is a charletan" so fine, leave it at that and dont come back to the thread unless you have something new or interesting or at least compelling to say.

I've told you: parts of her 'research' are quite clearly incorrect (and have been proven as such). If you're trying to tell me the twin towers collapsed because part of the facade vaguely resembled some tuning forks, I simply can't take that seriously. Wood has zero argument. She seems barely aware of simple logic. How she became a doctor, I shudder to think. Perhaps her doctorate was stuffed in a fortune cookie.

noobcybot
27-04-2012, 06:46 PM
I've told you: parts of her 'research' are quite clearly incorrect (and have been proven as such). If you're trying to tell me the twin towers collapsed because part of the facade vaguely resembled some tuning forks, I simply can't take that seriously. Wood has zero argument. She seems barely aware of simple logic. How she became a doctor, I shudder to think. Perhaps her doctorate was stuffed in a fortune cookie.

You are sounding like a broken record bere Denton. I get it, you think there is no mystery. Well some of us think there is a mystery. So you have said your piece. Thats fair enough. You may very well be right. But some of us arent finished looking at this and are not ready to take the official explanation.

You are not a hero for trying to convince everyone Woods is a charletan. We are old enough to think for ourselves. If someone wants to buy her book it isnt because she has forced them to.

There are a great many evils in the world why rage against Woods so much?

Anyone would think you have a personal vendetta wih her.