9/11: The Video That Proves The Official Story Is a Lie
For days now I've been promising the best 9/11 conspiracy video that I've seen. To my eyes there are only two possible explanations here: The video is a fake or the official story of 9/11 is a lie. I have been through a similar set of debates over the UFO stories. I had one friend who was unconvinced so I had him look at the Belgium sightings which I also deem the Best of Show category. The Belgium sightings have it all: Hundreds of witnesses, ground radar, fighter jet radar, instrument readings showing incredible altitude and speed changes, and a picture. There is only two ways that can go: It is one of ours and we have gigantic triangular craft that can hover before moving off at great speeds, or it is an alien craft. My friend examined the evidence, admitted it was quite startling, but as the weeks wore on afterwards, it drifted off his radar and he returned to being very skeptical about UFOs. Even dramatic evidence can be discarded if the person involved does not want to embrace the implications. 9/11 is important because our freedom could be at stake. Please take the time to check this out. The clip only lasts a few seconds.
Look at the squibs on the side of Building 7. Note how they start at the bottom and move up. Note the rhythmic nature of the puffs of smoke and their appearance seemingly before the collapse begins. Note the short duration of the puffs or squibs.
If it's the pressure from the collapsing floors why doesn't it continue? Why does it look more like a quick explosion? The same man who owned Building 7 had just leased the Towers 3 months prior to 9/11. If he is lying about Building 7, then the whole story falls apart. Here's the link. I recommend watching the video many times until it sinks in:
Squibs along southwest corner of WTC-7
posted by Bill McDonald @ 5:28 PM
13 comments
13 Comments:
When I play the video in slow motion by clicking and dragging the button with my mouse I see the 'squibs' forming as the building is collapsing. If you watch the roof line you see it changing before you see the 'squibs' forming from smoke, dust and debris exploding out the windows as each floor collapses.
"these "puffs" is very consistent with squibs from cutting charges of the type used in professional controlled demolitions, {and in fact nothing but small explosive charges could create such an appearance} Really? do you provide any proof of that? The decreasing volume of the building from the collapse itself could not create enough pressure to cause such localized high-velocity effects, and this early in the collapse would have only created a modest overpressure" Modest overpressure my eye, a whole floor collapsing on itself with millions of cubic feet of air with no place to escape would create all kinds of pressure that would blow out the windows and cause a similar effect. The building did implode because it was on fire and the steel frame melted and collapsed. It looks like an implosion because it is an implosion caused from two airliners filled with jet fuel crashing in to the buildings not wired explosives planted before the planes crashed. Why even crash the planes in to the buildings if they are already wired with explosives or why wire the building with explosives if you intend to crash planes in to them?
Remember, this is a 47 story building that's supposed to be gouged out at the bottom - in other words not sealed like an airtight container. To my eye that looks like a series of puffs racing upwards on the very top floors early in the collapse. The center of the roof came down early but that pressure is coming down where as these puffs travel rapidly up.
Every tall building is essentially sealed up floor to floor, fire regulations. Now that doesn't mean air tight, but it does mean that large volumes of air being compressed by collapse will seek the easiest exit (or create it). Glass goes before fire doors do and way before floors or ceilings.
Inherent in these types of conspiracy theories is the idea that there exists a super competent, super secret Govenment. Oh sure. The evidence for its existence is what...JFK's assasination? Let's see maybe the CIA or NSA? Iraq WMDs?
What really drives this stuff is the abhorence of the reality that a bunch of ignorant religious fanatic foreigners could do such a thing, could actually pull it off in the face of AMERICANS.
Let me point out that this was at some point inevitible with the creation of a culture of victimhood by government entities from your local police force to the FBI - don't resist, give them what they want, we'll deal with it. Arrant nonsense. As soon as you acquiese to force, your ability to determine the outcome ends and is in the hands of someone lunatic enough to use the force you've given up to.
For pete's sake, we have a government composed of GWBs, Rummies, Cheneys, Rices, etc, etc. These people are simply clever, in a Machiavellian way, they are not highly competent intellects. They can read Orwell's 1984 and come up with things to do, but they can't write it. Read The New American Century and try to tell me there's real intellect behind it.
Calling the Bush administration incompetent is a winning argument. It doesn't extend to our air defences like NORAD. They had to be neutralized from doing their jobs that morning and the war games that mirrored the attacks accomplished that.
You take the same approach as Time Magazine - we are not able to accept that a small group could pull this off, therefore the conspiracy theories rush in to fill the vaccuum. If the government wanted it could end this debate. I don't believe it wants to. After the midterm elections this particular group can't be hurt by the incompetence allegations anymore. Let's see if they take the opportunity to clear this up, or if they prefer not releasing everything with a real investigation.
I love the way 9/11 has turned everybody into building experts. I suppose it's our right to jump in and give our honest opinion. I try and just use common sense. The theory that these sqibs were created by rushes of air as the floors below compacted in a collapse, makes some sense. If you put pressure on a balloon the air evetually bursts out. My question for the other amateur demoition experts out there is this: Why do these puffs occur so quickly and then just stop. The collapse continues. Why isn't there a continuing stream till the event is over? Did that one little puff relieve the air pressure in an entire collapsing building. The puffs happen quickly and then they stop. Isn't that much more logically the look of an explosvie event that happens quickly and stops? After all the air in the balloon continues rushing out till it is gone. Why didn't a building this big continue feeding these pressure release points much longer?
I build for a living, that doesn't make me a demolitions expert or high rise expert but it does give me access to quite a bit of construction information and a good understanding of the theory behind construction techniques. As for the "squibs" continuation as the building collapsed you have to remember that once the upper floors fell onto the damaged floors the roof/ceilings of those floors became the venting area as the building folded inward. The smoke and dust plume moved out and upward as the collapse continued.
Once the floors pancaked the load forces were transferred from the skeleton directly to the floors below, increasing point loads exponentially. No floor bears the weight of the floors above, all loading is transferred to the skeleton evenly and then continuously downward. Pancaking throws the weight and impact momentum onto the interior skeleton, as it gives way the exterior is drawn inward. Pancaking has occurred several times in the past 10 years during construction, the results are very similar to World Trade Center.
Since I don't read Time their agreement is news to me.
The government has released a lot of information as have the architects. If this seemed real reasonable I would expect some commercial building demolition people to step up and say, "Hey, now."
The Administration is composed of shitheels of the first order, but you're assuming an ability to keep a huge and murderous plot secret in an environment where there are lots of second tier beaurocrats with no political allegience and every reason to not want to get caught up as participants in mass murder or its cover-up (not to mention patriotism). If true this would simply be the biggest single event in world history, bar none.
Whatever else Norad is, it is not geared to a within minutes reaction and solution. Remember that these were civilian aircraft with no known hostile destructive intent.
I willingly concede that this administration has used this tragedy for political gain and for the accrual of power. I will even state that I believe they have criminally abused power. Every official that took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution has violated that oath. At another time they might be lucky to still be alive. I'll also point out that my insistence to the left that the 2nd Amendment is important is daily bolstered by this gang. But to assume criminal insanity of mass murder of American civilians for some degree of political gain is too much. It postulates either absolute lunacy across the administration or a key to quick totalitarianism. Nope, the gains are too minor for the risk and not enough people are insane.
The risk of this stuff is that people take their eye off the incremental erosion of their civil liberties and the destruction of our world reputation to look at a big splashy fiction. Reality sucks bad enough. See, we're debating this instead of working on other issues.
Chuck,
Thanks for your well-written comment. If I take on more of the building stuff, it'll be after a little research.
Especially in the area of pancaking at these speeds.
Although I am not advocating these theories just to be a thorn for the government, I do think there is some benefit to that. This group is always trying to define the issues. Iraq is argued on whether there was a resolution, what it said and the intelligence. Not enough attention is paid to whether it was a good idea.
Now they've defined leaving as cut and run. I think any issue that takes them off their game - that makes people question what this group is about, is positive. And anyone who does plan something dirty in the future will have to say, "You know we'll have 10 million maniacs on the Internet trying to trip us up on this, right?" I like that aspect of it a lot.
I guess my biggest objection to this kind of thing is that it connects its purveyors with loons and discredits their reasonable arguments. This administration scares the pants off me, not for this conspiracy theory, but for the actual known actions they've taken.
Agreed, there are a lot of loons out there who jump at any chance to find a conspiracy in anything. And very few of them know anything about building demolition, especially me.
But the withheld videos speak volumes and fan the distrust. As Bill has said, the government could put an end to all but the most rabid disbelievers in an instant if they released them. (But of course, some would argue that there has been plenty of time to doctor them. You can't win.)
But what I want to know is why a mostly aluminum fuselage could penetrate so far into the Pentagon, but the engines hardly left a scratch. If that is truly what happened, then the explanation is worth a documentary or two. Don't ya think?
Hey Bill,
The agency in charge of security at the WTC complex on 9/11 was securacom. Their contract expired on 9/11. The director of Securacom is Marvin P. Bush, the president’s younger brother. You can draw your own conclusions.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/
911security.html
Oh believe me, I know about that. In fact there is a huge pile of suspicious facts about 9/11 as well as a long history of using false flag operations to stir up the public. There's also the owner of building 7 saying they were going to poll the building. There's also what was located insdie that building and on and on.
I just picked this video because to my eye, it looks like explosive charges moving up the side. I agree with the demolition experts who think so - let's put it that way. How about the contract to clean up the debris. Did you see who got that?
Typo alert: It's 7:30 am Monday morning. When I say "poll" the building, I meant "pull" the building.
I have accused the government of many things, but I never accused them of making Building 7 take a survey.
Post a Comment
<< Home