Posted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 10:25 pm Post subject: if my 6 yr old can ask 'how did the buildings turn 2 dust'..
i was watching the other day a brilliant documentary called The Elephant in the room when my 6 yr old jumped on the sofa next 2 me just as a shot of the first tower falling appeared he looked at me puzzeled and said 'mummy how did that building turn to dust?' i told him the offical story and then told him what i had learned through Blueprint for truth and other documentaries he just looked at me and said 'looks like bombs to me' then promptly ran off to play, it got me thinking if my young 'un can spot somethings not right why are so many adults so resistant
phew first posted topic please be gentle _________________ karyna morris
Joined: 13 Sep 2006 Posts: 2568 Location: One breath from Glory
Posted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 11:01 pm Post subject:
How about
"because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes".
Matthew 11:24-26 _________________ JO911B.
"for we wrestle not against flesh and blood but against principalities, against powers, against rulers of the darkness of this world, against wicked spirits in high places " Eph.6 v 12
Fear, but mostly fear of doing something I guess _________________ 'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'
“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”
i guess fear is a big factor but i'm glad my young 'uns have inherited my distrust of governing bodies
i'd love to know if there are more truthers in cornwall as that is where i am from how would i go about getting to know others? i haven't met a single truther (apart from my mum and grandad)
its hard being a lone voice surrounded by deaf ears _________________ karyna morris
There was an example of this by a Psychology Lecturer. In mid-lecture a man would run in and steal something from the front and run away. The lecturer would say "Does anyone know who that curly hair man is?" and after some discussion later where the existence of the Curly haired man is all agreed upon - the supposed theif turns - not curly haired - it was all staged. Many of the students felt that he must have been wearing a wig since they remembered the curly hair vividly.
Then there is the story from China. "Look at a deer and call it a horse"
People believe Authority. People will follow the the logic of others when in shock - even if the guy is "Harley Davidson Guy". People generally want to cooperate. It is scarey stuff. You have to Think Different.
Same as...
The official story: "The collapse of the Twin Towers" instead of what we saw, the "Twin Tower Explosions". I knew when I saw it live, something was not right. Yet I (and presumably most people) were deceived by the BBC's "How the Towers Collapsed" documentary.
I knew I was being deceived when I finally saw WTC7 fall in 2004 or 2005...
A fuller explanation can be found here (Pyschological Resistance to Alternative Accounts):
he looked at me puzzeled and said 'mummy how did that building turn to dust?'
Wow, he's pretty observant...he got it right first time when he said they turned to dust.
Bombs don't turn buildings to dust though...but bless.
Hilz _________________ "The likelihood of one individual being right increases in direct proportion to the intensity to which others are trying to prove him[her] wrong."
- - Harry Segall
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." Lenin 1917
And people noticed how most of the steel was in convenient lengths, for it to be transported away. Controlled demolition.
Trolling Disinfo again Andrew, tut, tut.
Steel in convenient lengths shipped away according to whom, CNN & AE911? And oh, is there a difference between them?
Steel was dustified, so very little to ship out if any.
Again no argument here, just that the only serious attempt at discussing evidence is again by Dr Judy Wood at www.drjudywood.com
Have a nice day! _________________ "The likelihood of one individual being right increases in direct proportion to the intensity to which others are trying to prove him[her] wrong."
- - Harry Segall
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." Lenin 1917
And people noticed how most of the steel was in convenient lengths, for it to be transported away. Controlled demolition.
Trolling Disinfo again Andrew, tut, tut.
Steel in convenient lengths shipped away according to whom, CNN & AE911? And oh, is there a difference between them?
Steel was dustified, so very little to ship out if any.
Again no argument here, just that the only serious attempt at discussing evidence is again by Dr Judy Wood at www.drjudywood.com
And people noticed how most of the steel was in convenient lengths, for it to be transported away. Controlled demolition.
Trolling Disinfo again Andrew, tut, tut.
Steel in convenient lengths shipped away according to whom, CNN & AE911? And oh, is there a difference between them?
Steel was dustified, so very little to ship out if any.
Gzoinks!
There's no such process as "dustification". You might as well say "it was magic"!
There are no DEW capable of doing the damage and even there was it would be unproven and therefore would not be given any green light by risk-adverse insiders.
There is no "magic" energy and Telsa did not invent the ray gun.
And people noticed how most of the steel was in convenient lengths, for it to be transported away. Controlled demolition.
Trolling Disinfo again Andrew, tut, tut.
Steel in convenient lengths shipped away according to whom, CNN & AE911? And oh, is there a difference between them?
Steel was dustified, so very little to ship out if any.
Again no argument here, just that the only serious attempt at discussing evidence is again by Dr Judy Wood at www.drjudywood.com
Extraordinary pictures of 9/11 relics revealed as they are shipped across world for tenth anniversary memorials
--------------
I agree that the picture you have given shows a pile of steel/rubble, but in respect to the proportion of steel which made-up the complete building before 9/11 is comparatively small. Below the picture is the answer to your claim that steel was shipped out:
"On the afternoon of 9/11/01 the 'rubble pile' left from WTC1 is essentially non-existent. WTC7 can be seen in the distance, revealing the photo was taken before 5:20 PM that day."
http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/StarWarsBeam6.html
Quote from the [i]9/11 Finding the Truth[/]
Quote:
But this is pointless! The Steel Was Quickly Shipped Away!
It seems that various unsubstantiated statements have been made over time to explain the extreme level of absence of debris. One such statement is “The steel was all sold to China and shipped away promptly,
A “Lengthy” Discussion of The Steel in the Debris of the WTC
94
before it could be examined.” However, we have no evidence that such a large-scale operation was undertaken or completed in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. Did anyone report many fleets of trucks, filled with steel girders, driving down the streets of Manhattan to the Docks. and their loads being transferred onto large container vessels? There are no pictures or video of this supposed operation that are readily available, nor have the details of such a major clean-up exercise ever been discussed.
Can We “Count” The Debris?
In Part 1 of “The Overwhelming Implausibility of Using Directed Energy Beams to Demolish the World Trade Center Towers” 63, published online in the Journal of 9/11 Studies64, Dr. Jenkins states:
Some proponents of the „missing debris‟ hypothesis prefer to “count” the debris from photographs. This is an inherently reckless approach to the problem. Photographs offer no way to directly view all the individual steel beams in debris piles or debris occupying sublevel collapses. For instance, any attempt to “count” the beams or “wall sections” in the debris pile of WTC 7 will fall short of accounting for the total mass of the building for the simple reason that the debris is located in a pile and all photographs only show the surface. That does not mean that the rubble pile does not contain the mass of the building. Even if the debris were spread out somewhat, the same problem applies when attempting to “count” the debris.
In this article, I hope to show that, because of the sheer scale of the WTC buildings, there is considerable value in attempting to calculate other figures which illustrate the very large volume of material which should have been visible in the immediate aftermath of the WTC Towers destruction.
Calculating Approximate Total Length of Steel
Vertical Columns
The towers were 415 metres above ground, though some steel pieces would have been below ground level. There were 236 exterior (perimeter) columns and 47 interior (core) steel columns in each building. Total Length of Vertical Steel = 566 x 415 = 234890m
Same picture Andrew, but including the strange bored hole effect at NE of pic. _________________ "The likelihood of one individual being right increases in direct proportion to the intensity to which others are trying to prove him[her] wrong."
- - Harry Segall
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." Lenin 1917
And people noticed how most of the steel was in convenient lengths, for it to be transported away. Controlled demolition.
Trolling Disinfo again Andrew, tut, tut.
Steel in convenient lengths shipped away according to whom, CNN & AE911? And oh, is there a difference between them?
Steel was dustified, so very little to ship out if any.
Gzoinks!
There's no such process as "dustification". You might as well say "it was magic"!
There are no DEW capable of doing the damage and even there was it would be unproven and therefore would not be given any green light by risk-adverse insiders.
There is no "magic" energy and Telsa did not invent the ray gun.
Bizarro!
You're argument is devoid of science contrary to your name. Again you have no evidence, you're just whitewashing evidence. Whose side are you on Scienceplease2?
Link _________________ "The likelihood of one individual being right increases in direct proportion to the intensity to which others are trying to prove him[her] wrong."
- - Harry Segall
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." Lenin 1917
As I asked in a previous thread, What stops the DEW? Surely if it destroys matter, there'd be a nice round tube going right into the Earths core?
Again what stationary object could have aimed so precisely? In fact how many stationary objects do you know hovering within or on the edge of Earths atmosphere? Could you imagine if the beam was fired from the moon how much damage would exist as the beam covers hundreds of miles in seconds? _________________ 'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'
“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”
Joined: 13 Sep 2006 Posts: 2568 Location: One breath from Glory
Posted: Wed Oct 05, 2011 4:49 pm Post subject:
selective observation. Some people see steel in trucks others see dirt.
Marigold said explosives dont turn buildings to dust
Lot of legislation about dust and demolitions (controlled or otherwise)
http://www.london.gov.uk/thelondonplan/guides/bpg/bpg_04.jsp _________________ JO911B.
"for we wrestle not against flesh and blood but against principalities, against powers, against rulers of the darkness of this world, against wicked spirits in high places " Eph.6 v 12
You're argument is devoid of science contrary to your name. Again you have no evidence, you're just whitewashing evidence. Whose side are you on Scienceplease2?
I disagree that my approach is contrary to the scientific approach. You just referenced an article - which is not scientific. Where in the science in antimatter weapons?
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2011 9:25 am Post subject: Re: if my 6 yr old can ask 'how did the buildings turn 2 dus
funkywitch1982 wrote:
i was watching the other day a brilliant documentary called The Elephant in the room when my 6 yr old jumped on the sofa next 2 me just as a shot of the first tower falling appeared he looked at me puzzeled and said 'mummy how did that building turn to dust?' i told him the offical story and then told him what i had learned through Blueprint for truth and other documentaries he just looked at me and said 'looks like bombs to me' then promptly ran off to play, it got me thinking if my young 'un can spot somethings not right why are so many adults so resistant
phew first posted topic please be gentle
Hi Funky,
That's a very "Emperor's new clothes" moment there, your 6 year old may not know exactly what a gravity driven collapse looks like but it surely isn't what he is seeing.
Many reasons why people can't/won't see the truth - it isn't easy to stand out from the crowd. Also 9/11 dealt in a lot of events where there aren't easy comparisons to be found, hence why people come up with gems like "prove that isn't what would happen if a large passenger jet crashed into a skyscraper".
Did you see the cross-cut steel beam in those Daily Mail photos?!
Why would GZ workers cut a steel beam diagonally? It would take longer and would be unstable! However it is a known technique in Controlled Demolition - like a lumberjack cutting a notch in a tree...
"two men install a conventional cutter charge to steel column, preparing for a controlled demolition of the building. Notice the narrow width/size of the explosive cutter charge. From History Channel: “Wrecking ball – Modern marvels "
Marigold
i know he is cute he also asked about the Pentagon when he came back in 'what had happened' i told him the offical story again about a plane flying into it, he looked puzzeled again and asked where the wings were and the engines, i just smiled and said 'thats the question lad'
he's such a clever lad _________________ karyna morris
KP50
i suppose it also goes hand in hand with kids say what they see not so much what is told to them
adults on the other hand have a major problem believing that a government would allow or organize the murder of 3000 people purely for money and power over the people _________________ karyna morris
Scienceplease 2
i waited for weeks after the event for the news to say that bombs or explosives of some sort were found in the debris but when it was flat out denied i knew then something dodgy was going on
i just feel a massive injustice is still going on to the victims that died that day and the first responders who are dying now having been ignored by the government they cleaned up for and peoples apathy pisses me off _________________ karyna morris
Unfortunately 9/11 is just the tip of the Iceberg but welcome aboard
we are the 99% and if not careful thrown into another Global Conflict so that the 1% can continue eating from their pie _________________ 'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'
“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”
Marigold
i know he is cute he also asked about the Pentagon when he came back in 'what had happened' i told him the offical story again about a plane flying into it, he looked puzzeled again and asked where the wings were and the engines, i just smiled and said 'thats the question lad'
he's such a clever lad
Heck, I wish all mothers were as encouraging with their children as this Mostly it's:
"Mum what happened on 9/11?
Mum:- Shut-up, n' eat your chicken nuggets. Bad men wi brown skin and funny clothes that lived in a cave did it...and don't effin ask stupid questions!"
_________________ "The likelihood of one individual being right increases in direct proportion to the intensity to which others are trying to prove him[her] wrong."
- - Harry Segall
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." Lenin 1917
It's all in black and white folks. To those old-hand so-called 'truthers' any denial of the existence of this stuff after looking at these facts and many more ( www.drjudywood.com) can only mean two things:
1) You are not as prepared to look at the truth as you claim to be;
or
2) You are a spook.
You don't need to be the brains of Britain to figure this stuff out.
by Don Slater, Lasers & Electro Optical Systems of The Boeing Company
Lasers in space, lasers in the stratosphere, lasers
on and over the battlefield - we're at the
beginning of an evolutionary new wave of
weaponry. Highly precise, long range and
primarily defensive in application, high energy
lasers are emerging as key components in the
military planner's options for defense against
intercontinental ballistic missiles, theater
ballistic missiles, overland and anti-ship cruise
missiles and short-range rockets.
One of the newest concepts is the Airborne
Tactical Laser (ATL), which is seeking to join
the Space Based Laser (SBL) and the high
altitude Airborne Laser (ABL) in moving from
laboratory technology validation to governmentsponsored
concept demonstration and ultimately
to operational capability.
The ATL places a high-energy laser of moderate
power in a highly maneuverable tactical aircraft. Looking out and down from altitudes of 10,000 feet and
less, the laser can engage and destroy a variety of airborne threats, such as cruise missiles, artillery-type
rockets and unmanned aerial vehicles at horizontal ranges from five to 15 miles. We selected the V-22 for a
point design study.
The technology that allows a weapons-capable laser to fit inside a small aircraft is also adaptable to ground
vehicles for use in short-range air defense roles. A small tactical air defense laser on the ground could be
extremely mobile, or a larger version could be transportable between temporary fixed locations.
High-energy lasers have two characteristics that make them viable as weapons: They're extremely fast and
extremely precise. Whether the beams cross thousands of miles in space, hundreds of miles in the upper
atmosphere or tens of miles in the lower atmosphere, the laser begins its attack within seconds of detecting
its target and completes its destruction a few seconds later. This means the defender has time for multiple
shots if needed to "kill" the target or engage multiple targets. For long-range engagements, early kill means
the debris from the attacking missile falls far short of its target.
The laser beam delivers its energy to a relatively small spot on the target - from a few inches in diameter to
a few feet, depending on the range. The incident intensity is sufficient (similar to a welding torch) to melt
steel, even if the surface is shiny. Typical melt-through times for missile bodies are about 10 seconds. Butif the heated area is under stress from aerodynamic or static pressure loads, catastrophic failure can occur
even sooner. Laser weapons don't deliver as much "killing power" as guns or missiles, but they are
effective against many targets. And, precision delivery makes up for limited delivered power.
The beam can attack specific aimpoints on a missile that are known to be vulnerable; for example,
pressurized fuel tanks or aerodynamic control surfaces. The laser weapon design, therefore, must include
the ability to "see" and identify specific aimpoints, and then put the beam on that aimpoint and hold it for a
few seconds, and finally, to determine when the target has been destroyed.
There's plenty more if you click the link to the DEPS pdf link at the top.
This DEPS doc was found courtesy of a memo sent by Jerry Leapheart (Attorney at Law) to Dr Judy Wood; below.
http://www.drjudywood.com/pdf/jvl_memorandum.pdf
Peace! _________________ "The likelihood of one individual being right increases in direct proportion to the intensity to which others are trying to prove him[her] wrong."
- - Harry Segall
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." Lenin 1917
Laser weapons - sure - look at the size of them and how ineffectual they are. How could you train a laser on WTC for ten seconds and bring the whole building exploding down? I've been to Judy Woods site and it talks about the Hutchison Effect - clearly a hoax.
Joined: 13 Sep 2006 Posts: 2568 Location: One breath from Glory
Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 12:53 pm Post subject:
Problem with a laser theory is the difference in collapse of WTCs 1 and 2 and 7. Assuming a laser from space -destruction of Towers 1 and 2 from top down then how did the laser bring down 7 bottom up.
Now I know the problems of deployment of CD explosives and cutters is an issue but assuming they were used then its just the sequence of detonation that determines top down or bottom up.
I lean on the CD as we at least have observable evidence elsewhere unlike laser/beam theory
Of course there could be a 3rd way--bottom line is they didnt just collapse because of plane impact and fires _________________ JO911B.
"for we wrestle not against flesh and blood but against principalities, against powers, against rulers of the darkness of this world, against wicked spirits in high places " Eph.6 v 12
Marigold
i was raised the same way by my grandad and mum, question everything because you will never learn anything if u dont ask
my grandad told me a story of how my nan (who sadly passed away when my mum was only 9) told my grandad 2 take my mum (who was about to a house that had been abandend near where they lived she was convinced that the couple that had lived there then disappeared were spies, so my mum could fit through the window and unlock the front door so grandad could have a nose, she was then warned off and told to stop prying by the MOD hehe so i guess its just in my DNA, my grandad used 2 tell me his doubts about JFK's assination and Pearl harbour and was fascinated by the info i had gathered about 9/11,
my grandad was a free thinking hero to me _________________ karyna morris
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
