Obama Repeals 5th Amendment
*please go to page 7 if this is not new to you.*
Government calls for inventory of all weopans at V.F.W. Posts including old muskets swords tanks and everything from WWII and Vietnam.
Link to source. www.infowars.com check front page to link to article
0
-
1,270 Architects/Engineers Reveal Hard Evidence of Explosive Demolition at World Trade Center on 9/11
infowars
September 9, 2020
Former US Senator Mike Gravel (D-AK) and Richard Gage, AIA, Founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth Discuss Scientific Findings
National Press Club, Washington DC, 2:00 pm, Thursday, September 9, 2010
On Thursday September 9, 2010, Gravel and Gage will host a central press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, DC, presenting hard evidence that all three WTC skyscrapers on September 11, 2001, in NYC were destroyed by explosive controlled demolition.
Senator Gravel notes, "Critically important evidence has come forward after the original government building reports were completed."
This press conference will be webcast at AE911Truth.org and hosted concurrently in cities throughout the world.* Following the conference, there will be a mock debate during which public statements made by government investigators and other defenders of the official account will be presented and responded to in multimedia format. "They refuse to debate us in person," says Gage, "so we will let their public statements represent them."
Gage will release a media-friendly summary of his organization's findings, which are based on forensic evidence as well as video and eyewitness testimony that were omitted from official reports. He will show evidence that the WTC Twin Towers were not destroyed by jet plane impacts or fires, but by pre-set explosives and incendiaries. The non-profit organization, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, will also call for a grand jury investigation of government report lead engineers Shyam Sunder and John Gross of the National Institute of Standards and Technology. "They were in a position to know the evidence we have been presenting," says Gage.
Also speaking will be Florida State Professor Lance deHaven-Smith, who coined the academic term State Crimes Against Democracy (SCAD). Prof. deHaven-Smith has appeared on Good Morning America, the Today Show, NBC Nightly News with Tom Brokaw, CBS Nightly News with Dan Rather, and other national TV/radio shows.
* For information on satellite press conferences in your area, contact CongressionalOutreachTeam [at] ae911truth.org
Sorry this one was 2 days late but the press conference is on youtube.0 -
Those of us that actually know what it would take to bring down a skyscraper with explosives laugh at this BS. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by steveaustin
1,270 Architects/Engineers Reveal Hard Evidence of Explosive Demolition at World Trade Center on 9/11
Senator Gravel notes, "Critically important evidence has come forward after the original government building reports were completed."
The 9-11 truth movement has been very seriously mislead by the "original government building reports".
What is proven here is that NIST was deceived by FEMA who described the Towers core to NIST as looking like this. Steel core columns.
There is no image from 9-11 showing that core.
NIST never mentions their use of building plans in the forensic analysis of collapse they volenteered to do. Their disclaimer is about as close as can be found to their identifying their sources.
This Ph.D in physics has found a theory that feasibly describes EXACTLY how a building of that size can be brought to the ground as we saw and heard.
http://libertycalling.com/cbrowndemomodel.htm
Apparently the event only required massive secrecy during construction to prepare the buillding for demo years later.
Also, the site the Ph.D links to, details with substance, that a conspiracy exists to mislead and misinform the truth movement into asserting something that, using the misinformation, they can never explain. Instead they approach authority with nonsense like "nano thermite" which inures authority to any info whatsoever.
http://algoxy.com/conc/fema_deception.html
It looks as though the commie tactic of leading a movement to control it may have been very successful.0 -
Your post shows a complete lack of understanding of the core objections to the official conspiracy theory. You offer double talk and groundless,unsubstantiated assertions as basis for your non-argument. You are not even up to speed with the official drivel so you feel compelled to script your own. What I want to know is what motivates you to work so hard to prevent an unbiased investigation. What so threatens you? 0 -
quote:Originally posted by jev1969
Those of us that actually know what it would take to bring down a skyscraper with explosives laugh at this BS.
Laugh all you want at the difficulty of bringing 3 buildings down with controlled demolition but know this, it is infinitely more difficult to accomplish knocking down 3 buildings with 2 planes.0 -
Nit-pick all you want. Building 7 was rigged before the planes hit the towers. This took planning. The Enron Scandal Papers were in that building. 0 -
0 -
You gotta admit that those buildings did look to be rigged with explosives, I know that it sounds off however we are not dealing with benevolent and stable people here. The individuals in our government backed by private and foreign bankers and other so called 'rich elites' of society, yes the ones that really control everything, would do anything and I mean anything to protect their money and their control and way of life and even this alleged conspiracy theory suddenly becomes very plausible in contrast.
Those events set in motion a monster that changed everything in this country and helped make possible some of the things that the gov-beast can do today, without it things may not have gone their way, but don't expect them to either admit knowing about it or having been involved however.
I have never seen any building collapse like that in my life let alone more than one and I have seen several disasters, crashes, explosions you name it and the only time and I mean the only time that I have ever seen ANY building do that was from a controlled demolition.
Why didn't those buildings slant one way or another, why didn't those buildings collapse out instead of straight down, okay lets say one, but ALL of them perfectly straight down and most people don't want to question that and we are told that we know nothing blah blah blah etc...come on.
Yeah you keep just believing that the gov-beast is your friend, what about the rail cars and the fema camps for example, what are those for...okay they don't exist either, why are so many military units including some that I have been in training for civil disturbances to such a degree that they are, don't you anti's find anything strange about that, what will it take to get you to believe...
No one that believes in this mess really wants it to be true you know, we would all much rather be concerned about what color to paint the house this summer or about that next family picnic together, or our kids graduation etc, but not this, isn't it strange that this isn't just isolated to just a handful of people...0 -
Buildings collapsed down because that entire area is built over a major NYC subway transfer link. There is a cavernous junction of two major New York subway systems that junction under ground 0...
When it went down it keep going and going and cratered some other things including the foundations of building 7 with it.0 -
Well I understand physics and the scientific properties associated with it; however like I said this catastrophe is just very strange and even suspicious in the way that this incident occurred as well as how it was handled.
This tragedy cannot simply be dismissed under any circumstances and there is of course alot more to this then they are letting on.0 -
This just in:
steveaustin will believe anything he reads on the internet.
Film at eleven.0 -
I could type a dozen paragraphs here but I don't have the time. Do any of you "truthers" have any idea how long it takes to prep a skyscraper for demolition? Not to mention the amount of people needed? How about the literal MILES of det cord that would be required. Thats when you're doing it in the open with the cords running down the middle of hallways. To do it all hidden with nothing exposed? It's not like hollywood where you just slap an explosive on the wall. There are thousands measurements to be made. Also alot of cutting.
Don't you think it's weird that the collapse of both towers began exactly where the planes impacted? Hmmm? How would the "demo experts" know exactly where the planes would hit?
The only "weird" thing I find in the whole affair is where are the "black boxes"? I find it hard to believe they weren't recovered.0 -
quote:Originally posted by wpage
Buildings collapsed down because that entire area is built over a major NYC subway transfer link. There is a cavernous junction of two major New York subway systems that junction under ground 0...
When it went down it keep going and going and cratered some other things including the foundations of building 7 with it.
Pure fantasy that not even the official coverup artists would try and slip by us.0 -
quote:Originally posted by jev1969
I could type a dozen paragraphs here but I don't have the time. Do any of you "truthers" have any idea how long it takes to prep a skyscraper for demolition? Not to mention the amount of people needed? How about the literal MILES of det cord that would be required. Thats when you're doing it in the open with the cords running down the middle of hallways. To do it all hidden with nothing exposed? It's not like hollywood where you just slap an explosive on the wall. There are thousands measurements to be made. Also alot of cutting.
Don't you think it's weird that the collapse of both towers began exactly where the planes impacted? Hmmm? How would the "demo experts" know exactly where the planes would hit?
The only "weird" thing I find in the whole affair is where are the "black boxes"? I find it hard to believe they weren't recovered.
Jev.....Can you tell me one way it could be done without detcord?0 -
Having been to ground zero be assured its no fantacy that what we saw with our own eyes is what happened. The monday morning quarterbacks and unquiet minds can conjer up false images for gulible minds...
Boeing 747's loaded with real American citizens and full payloads of fuel were delibritly crashed into the towers. The subsequent inferno caused structural failures that crashed it down.
Tremendous physical forces effected underground and nearby structures.
Take a trip to NYC and see for yourself. Its not rocket science.
While you are there take the subway downtown and visit the totally rebuilt station under ground zero. You will begin to understand the scope of the situation. In real time.0 -
[/quote]Jev.....Can you tell me one way it could be done without detcord?
[/quote]
Are you hinting at remote detonation? The logistics (and dangers) would be even more complicated. Even without det cord you would still be required to cut numerous holes in the walls to get to the load bearing supports. Even after that there is more to it then just slapping an explosive to it. There are measurments and each charge would have to be specifically tailored for the individual support it was attached to. Plus, in order to make it somewhat appear as a plane took the building down you would need to know where the EXACT point of impact was going to be. That is where the buildings collapse began. Even with all of that there would be dozens if not hundreds of quite visible explosions as the supports blew BEFORE the building came down. These explosions would be throughout the entire building and on all sides.
Watch a video of a controlled demolition. The entire building just slides down. It doesnt start in the middle the way the twin towers did.0 -
If someone really wants to know if the twin towers were brought down by explosives here is what you do: Find a demo expert who has demolished a skyscraper before. Ask him how many hours and men it would take to bring down two 100 story plus buildings. Then tell him it would have to be done completely in secret. The buildings would be crawling with thousands of people everyday. Nobody could witness the explosives being placed. Nobody could be able to see the explosives after they were placed. There could be no cutting into walls or ceilings. The buildings would have to start collapsing from the middle at a point to be determined 20 minutes before demolition was to begin. Oh yeah and no explosions can be witnessed from outside the building.
After your demo expert responds come tell me if you think explosives brought the twin towers down.[;)]0 -
quote:Originally posted by wpage
Having been to ground zero be assured its no fantacy that what we saw with our own eyes is what happened. The monday morning quarterbacks and unquiet minds can conjer up false images for gulible minds...
Boeing 747's loaded with real American citizens and full payloads of fuel were delibritly crashed into the towers. The subsequent inferno caused structural failures that crashed it down. They were not 747's
Tremendous physical forces effected underground and nearby structures.Bldgs 3,4,5,and 6 were closer and were more severely damaged and yet they did not suffer an abnormal global and symmetrical collapse.
Take a trip to NYC and see for yourself. Its not rocket science.
While you are there take the subway downtown and visit the totally rebuilt station under ground zero. You will begin to understand the scope of the situation. In real time.
I spent 8 days there and my neice was a first responder and I am not satisfied with the official coverup.0 -
I'm gonna take a break till after christmas. Some things you can look up about this topic are Ace Elevator Company who had access to the core columns beginning in march of '01. The security company that posted men on every accessable floor, and who was on the chairman of the board of said security company. Each to his own gentlemen but I for one do not believe that 2 planes took down 3 buildings. Something was afoot that day and it still stinks. 0 -
I am with you on this steve, there are just too many suspicious circumstances surrounding the whole 9/11 towers incident that leaves too many serious un-answered questions.
However if others really want to arbitrarily dismiss them then that's their prerogative although some of us know better and aren't going to settle for another 'warren commission' style bunch of nonsense as the sheeple do.
Its this same tried and true tactic of the gov-beast of course which is how they attempted to smoke screen their way through this and every other suspicious incident explaining it away, including but definitely not limited to such tragedies as twa-800, the USS Liberty and a host of other occurrences.
Another part of this same playbook are the smear campaigns that they run against those that don't get in line with their will; persons such as Gordon Kahl, Randy Weaver, David Koresh as well as others.0 -
quote:Originally posted by StoBtruppen
I am with you on this steve, there are just too many suspicious circumstances surrounding the whole 9/11 towers incident that leaves too many serious un-answered questions.
However if others really want to arbitrarily dismiss them then that's their prerogative although some of us know better and aren't going to settle for another 'warren commission' style bunch of nonsense as the sheeple do.
Its this same tried and true tactic of the gov-beast of course which is how they attempted to smoke screen their way through this and every other suspicious incident explaining it away, including but definitely not limited to such tragedies as twa-800, the USS Liberty and a host of other occurrences.
Another part of this same playbook are the smear campaigns that they run against those that don't get in line with their will; persons such as Gordon Kahl, Randy Weaver, David Koresh as well as others.
Fully understand, StoBtruppen, though also fully disagree regarding the events of 11 September, 2001.
There are many of us with a technical background that seeing upon seeing what you saw, did some research, read the reports, and came to the considered conclusion that it was in fact two 767s flying a 400+ knots with a fuel load that would take them to California that caused the damage to and eventual collapse of the structures in question. The collapse of the two towers is an obvious cause and effect, and the design of the structures dictated the collapse sequence in exactly the manner as determined. Building 7, though entirely different in structure and in the manner in which it collapsed, remained a question in my mind until after the NIST Report. Upon reading that report, there was no longer any questions.
Indeed something was afoot. A failed intelligence system, and an attempt to cover-up the institutional failures is a given. The stench remains regarding the cover up and diversion from this simple fact and the enormous amount of time, money and effort our government invested in the distortion/diversion.0 -
I realize all of that as well as the technicalities and the nomenclature involved here including but not limited to the physics of high impact projectiles, fuels and explosives.
I know that this whole thing seems like and sounds like a stretch of the imagination however so did some of the other occurrences.
I also understand that we have a very underhanded government that will stop at nothing to control, dominate, and manipulate as many as they can and wouldn't put this or anything else past them to twist in a malevolent way to make it look like this was nothing more than a terrorist action.0 -
quote:Originally posted by jev1969
If someone really wants to know if the twin towers were brought down by explosives here is what you do: Find a demo expert who has demolished a skyscraper before. Ask him how many hours and men it would take to bring down two 100 story plus buildings. Then tell him it would have to be done completely in secret. The buildings would be crawling with thousands of people everyday. Nobody could witness the explosives being placed. Nobody could be able to see the explosives after they were placed. There could be no cutting into walls or ceilings. The buildings would have to start collapsing from the middle at a point to be determined 20 minutes before demolition was to begin. Oh yeah and no explosions can be witnessed from outside the building.
After your demo expert responds come tell me if you think explosives brought the twin towers down.[;)]
I have never brought down a skyscraper, but I have used tons of C-4, Flex-X, and thousands of feet of det cord and you are right on. The truth is it is not possible to have brought down those buildings with internally placed charges with out any visible sighs of the material or the process. Not to mention, if there were these 'charges' in place when the planes hit the buildings it would have, in all probability:
1. Detonated on impact or;
2. Disrupted the the demolition to where the charges would malfunction.
Truthers = BS!!![;)]0 -
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by jev1969
If someone really wants to know if the twin towers were brought down by explosives here is what you do: Find a demo expert who has demolished a skyscraper before. Ask him how many hours and men it would take to bring down two 100 story plus buildings. Then tell him it would have to be done completely in secret. The buildings would be crawling with thousands of people everyday. Nobody could witness the explosives being placed. Nobody could be able to see the explosives after they were placed. There could be no cutting into walls or ceilings. The buildings would have to start collapsing from the middle at a point to be determined 20 minutes before demolition was to begin. Oh yeah and no explosions can be witnessed from outside the building.
After your demo expert responds come tell me if you think explosives brought the twin towers down.[;)]
I have never brought down a skyscraper, but I have used tons of C-4, Flex-X, and thousands of feet of det cord and you are right on. The truth is it is not possible to have brought down those buildings with internally placed charges with out any visible sighs of the material or the process. Not to mention, if there were these 'charges' in place when the planes hit the buildings it would have, in all probability:
1. Detonated on impact or;
2. Disrupted the the demolition to where the charges would malfunction.
Truthers = BS!!![;)]
Correct me if I am wrong Jim but IIRC you are also the man who thinks Palin has what it takes? You are on shaky ground to be accusing others of BS.0 -
The 9/11 naysayers also believe that there was no advanced warning of Pearl Harbor, that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone, that the USS Liberty was an accident, that TWA-800 was an accident, that the Clinton Body Count is a coincidence. That we are not in the Middle East for oil, that Gordon Khal, Randy Weaver and David Koresh were not innocent, that the 9/11 terrorist attacks had absolutely no government involvement and that these people acted alone; and this is to name just a few, however all of this couldn't be further from the truth.
These same individuals also believe that they are Patriots to the Constitution and the Republic and that the nra and the government support our rights; that is whats bs.
I believe that HighBall has identified and labeled these individuals enough for all to see and so everyone knows who they really are.0 -
quote:Originally posted by StoBtruppen
The 9/11 naysayers also believe that there was no advanced warning of Pearl Harbor, that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone, that the USS Liberty was an accident, that TWA-800 was an accident, that the Clinton Body Count is a coincidence. That we are not in the Middle East for oil, that Gordon Khal, Randy Weaver and David Koresh were not innocent, that the 9/11 terrorist attacks had absolutely no government involvement and that these people acted alone; and this is to name just a few, however all of this couldn't be further from the truth.
These same individuals also believe that they are Patriots to the Constitution and the Republic and that the nra and the government support our rights; that is whats bs.
I believe that HighBall has identified and labeled these individuals enough for all to see and so everyone knows who they really are.
No,
Probably,
Maybe,
Yes,
Probably,
No,
No,
Yes,
Try to Be,
and,
No.
For anyone to come down on the establishment side of all of or none of the items in your list suggests a predisposition vis-a-vis government that supersedes independent thought, discernment, and analysis of the individual events or concepts.0 -
Hmm, well that is disappointing to say the least, but to each their own I guess... 0 -
quote:Originally posted by StoBtruppen
Hmm, well that is disappointing to say the least, but to each their own I guess...
All I am saying, StoBtruppen, is that I believe you to have painted with too broad a brush. Government is corrupt, and those involved in it are corrupt, but not every result of its actions necessarily corrupt.
What was done to Weaver and Koresh should have resulted in Jail time instead of promotions, Pearl Harbor was expected though not specifically forewarned. TWA-800 was an accident, though would have been prevented had the FAA, TWA, and Boeing insisted upon replacing the fuel pump wiring as was done with AF-1, and thus was also expected, but they all gambled with the lives of citizens, and those citizens lost. The cover up and distortion of the USS Liberty incident, and the cover up of failures leading up to the 11 September, 2001 attacks do not necessarily bestow premeditation by the Israelis or the the U.S. Government respectively, but they do serve to reduce what little trust in government may remain.
Yes, to each his own. To suggest that anyone who does not subscribe in lock-step to one's beliefs is an addle-brained big-government sychophant is missing the mark. Likewise, I would not suggest that a person who has researched all of these incidents and come to conclusions that differ from mine are always blinded by distrust.
My point, I guess, is that an all-or-nothing result generically will suggest a closed mind, though it is certainly not definitive. Skicat, for example is, in my mind, a person who has looked at the results of the 11 September attacks, did his homework, and arrived at a different conclusion than did I. I believe him to be wrong, but I also believe him to have studied the issue. From the tone of your postings to-date, I would assume you to be in that same category.
All the best,
Don0 -
quote:Originally posted by steveaustin
I'm gonna take a break till after christmas. Some things you can look up about this topic are Ace Elevator Company who had access to the core columns beginning in march of '01. The security company that posted men on every accessable floor, and who was on the chairman of the board of said security company. Each to his own gentlemen but I for one do not believe that 2 planes took down 3 buildings. Something was afoot that day and it still stinks.
Steve, enjoy your break and the holidays. Look forward to future posts, those listed here have sparked much debate and forced many to do some research.[;)]0 -
quote:Originally posted by skicat
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by jev1969
If someone really wants to know if the twin towers were brought down by explosives here is what you do: Find a demo expert who has demolished a skyscraper before. Ask him how many hours and men it would take to bring down two 100 story plus buildings. Then tell him it would have to be done completely in secret. The buildings would be crawling with thousands of people everyday. Nobody could witness the explosives being placed. Nobody could be able to see the explosives after they were placed. There could be no cutting into walls or ceilings. The buildings would have to start collapsing from the middle at a point to be determined 20 minutes before demolition was to begin. Oh yeah and no explosions can be witnessed from outside the building.
After your demo expert responds come tell me if you think explosives brought the twin towers down.[;)]
I have never brought down a skyscraper, but I have used tons of C-4, Flex-X, and thousands of feet of det cord and you are right on. The truth is it is not possible to have brought down those buildings with internally placed charges with out any visible sighs of the material or the process. Not to mention, if there were these 'charges' in place when the planes hit the buildings it would have, in all probability:
1. Detonated on impact or;
2. Disrupted the the demolition to where the charges would malfunction.
Truthers = BS!!![;)]
Correct me if I am wrong Jim but IIRC you are also the man who thinks Palin has what it takes? You are on shaky ground to be accusing others of BS.
Do you personally know Palin?????? If not you are the one who who lacks the credibility to comment on any of this!!!! So the BS is from you, not me. How much demolition experience do you have??? Once again, the BS is from you not me.
If I am wrong about your experience in these areas enlighten me please![;)]0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
336 comments