Dr Judy Wood files Qui Tam against NIST

[truthseeker john]

^^^ That's it Indubitably, you have shown us that you are not interested in the TRUTH!

[Indubitably]

TruthseekerJohn,

The pancake theory is today widely believed. You don't accept it. Great. In that case, wonder if you can tell us what you believe destroyed these Twin Towers ? I've shared my own view (which is that given by Dr Wood and various others).

2. You agree 'much of the material was turned into dust'. Great !!! Now all we need to agree about is whether dust/disintegration was a very major factor in tower destruction, or not ?

3. Have you ever seen a building destroyed whose upper floors (the vast majority of them) have turned to dust before the lower floors have hit the ground ?

4. The film record shows that most of the building is missing but has definitely not fallen to ground BEFORE the lower floors are destroyed. In other words, the vast mass of the building is already pulverised before destruction reaches the lower floors. Yes ?

5. What method of known demolition can account for these effects ?

6. Yes, nobody can account for all the material. So why do you insist on me providing it ? Better that we stay with what we know, right ?

7. The film record is one of towers being disintegrated. It is not one of floors collapsing.

8. What have you to say of the satellite images ? Of what are these ?

9. Here is a case where things have to be shown to you before you even realise their existence. I was the same. But, having seen these things with my own eyes I am forced by them to agree that they are so.

[truthseeker john]

[Indubitably]

Let's make a deal. You don't need to read anything I write and vice-versa.

The towers are being reduced to dust even before the lower floors are destroyed. Virtually all people who watch the videos can see this. It's just not an argument. Those who can't see it are blind.

How about THAT as a fact ?

Now, can you show us great bits of building (around 70 per cent of the building) falling to Ground Zero during its final seconds ?

No, you can't. Nor can anyone else. And that's because most of the building DIDN'T fall to Ground Zero.

Which part of this message do you not understand ? There are literally dozens of floors being destroyed, pulverised for which there is no debris falling to ground at Ground Zero.

How such a thing happened is a great question. But FIRST we need to accept that it DID happen, right ?

[chek]

[gruts]

hi truthseeker john - I applaud your efforts but sadly, I don't think there's any chance that they're going to dent mr indubitably's tunnel vision. this is a guy who sees a helicopter flying slowly past the wtc and imagines that it's a missile crashing into the wtc. and trying to convince him otherwise - even though what he is saying is totally untrue and obviously ridiculous - is like tying to get blood out of a stone.

mr indubitably - it doesn't surprise me that you've looked at a few photos and jumped to the conclusion that the towers were destroyed by some kind of star wars beam weapon - it's par for the course.

but until you stop repeating the same old nonsense like a malfunctioning robot and at least make some attempt to address the huge backlog of questions you have ducked over and over again in this and so many other threads, or show some signs of coming to terms with the fact that you've been proved wrong about pretty much everything - it will merely confirm (as if it wasn't obvious enough already) that your contempt for the truth has no limits and that you are simply here to waste our time.

btw - do you have any more theories up your sleeve that we haven't covered yet? I'm getting bored....

[Indubitably]

It will already be clear to visitors here that the chief reason for the existence of this forum is one of pretence. It's aim is NOT to arrive at truth but is to pacify and downplay the truth about what really happened in New York on 9/11/2001, this mainly for British and native English speakers outside the USA. Any fair minded visitor can see this clearly. That's why this site was created. And that's what anyone can now see.

But the 'cat's out of the bag'. The Twin Towers of the WTC were destroyed by a combination of things. The vast bulk of these giant towers (i.e. from around the 25th floor upwards) were destroyed by pulverisation - by energy weapons. That is why the solid mass of most of these towers did NOT fall to Ground Zero. But the lower floors (which we see falling to Ground Zero in a photograph already submitted to this thread) were destroyed by other means - i.e. by an act of controlled demolition. And thus, as is typical of illusionists, the criminals and their media slaves falsely portray the entire destruction of these two towers as due to 'controlled demolition'.

It is the criminals who invented and who still dogmatically insist on 'liquid steel in the basements'. It was of course criminals who invented 'planes' at the Twin Towers and whose lying and deceived 'eye witnesses' are nowhere to be found. It is the criminals who have, in fact, presided over 6 years of media fakery on these events. But it's these same criminals who are, today, being gradually exposed. It's now a matter of public record (this admitted only recently) that the NIST report on the Twin Tower destruction was put together by private sub-contractors (at least one of which is involved in developing energy weapons) WITHOUT any study in to the actual moment of destruction of these Twin Towers. But instead of this forum welcoming such a shocking fact there is hardly a reference to it here on this forum.

Ground Zero was sprayed with thousands of tons of imported dirt in the days and weeks that followed that tragedy. Why ? The dirt was spread over fallen debris. Why ? Vital information at the crime scene was hidden, repeatedly. And false stories were created. Fakery continued.

The time will soon arrive when the good officers of the New York Fire Department, the New York Police, the Port Authority and members of the Armed Forces and security services will realise how deeply they and the corporate media had been infiltrated, silenced, manipulated and abused by criminals of 9/11/2001.

It is inevitable (given what we now know) that thousands of brave men and women who worked at Ground Zero in the days that followed that tragedy in September of 2001 will fall sick and die from causes which relate to the true cause of tower destruction. The actual death toll in New York from that tragedy is certain to rise.

You can silence the individual but you will never silence truth. It will assert itself. It will defy evil. Truth always does.

[gruts]

the plight of the first responders who are now suffering is tragic.

mixing it up with your fanatical science fiction drivel is pathetic.

[chek]

[Indubitably]

Well Chek, I think it was Dr Johnson who wrote that knowledge is of two kinds, the sort we read in books and that which we get by asking others who know their stuff.

As far as the record of 9/11 truth forums is concerned let us assume that the establishing of any forum on such a vast subject as this crime involved, in advance, co-operation with others who were doing the same. So traceable links were formed and understandings were reached with others of like mind. In short, the very fact that misinformation was managed (and is still managed) is itself evidence of media collusion.

The problem is, of course, that in this sordid area of disinformation (which I honestly think you are involved in) there is no escape from the fact that as time passes an outline is formed and, eventually, a picture emerges, of the ethos of those who work in this area. So it is with you and with this site.

The message has passed its sell-by date. Your forum has not been abandoned. Your timing is out. You did not expect truth to assert itself. But it has. You got a little drunk on your success. You were unable to think 'out of the box'. And now it shows. As Burns said 'oh, that we could see ourselves as others see us'.

[gruts]

[chek]

[Indubitably]

But Chek,

Have you been reduced to writing, 'Chek says', on your own posts ?

As for credibility, here again you expose yourself. The truth movement is not (unlike organised criminal behaviour) founded on hierarchies or individuals. So the issue of the 'credibility' of one individual or another is not nearly as big a factor in 9/11 research as you suppose. The truth MOVEMENT is nothing less than the sum total of everyone's talents OUTSIDE OF CRIMINALITY. That's the difference between us. The truth movement is in fact virtually all of humanity. And that's its credibility.

We were all fooled, to some extent. By the criminals. But we are not fooled all the time.

[chek]

[Indubitably]

I am disgusted but not surpised that intelligent men and women work, full time, as government employees, and as arbiters/adminstrators in matters of 'truth' but whose real business is to conceal and protect the criminals of 9/11, 7/7 and other false flag operations.

Show me an aspect of the great crimes of 9/11 or the supposed 'war on terror' which does not have and cannot be proved to have 'Jesuit' stamped all through it (like the letters on a stick of seaside rock).

The real threat to the security of the UK (and, in fact, of the USA) comes not from Muslims or manufactured groups of box-cutter carrying terrorists, but from within. The threat has been at public level virtually since 9/11 and it comes from an infested nest of evil misinformants and corrupted individuals who, pleading 'truth', are in actuality in a relationship to the corporate media and to a so-called 'truth movement' that was, like them, long ago exposed as fraudulent.

[gruts]

well thanks for helping us to prove that simon shack is a liar and a fraud and that "september clues" is full of fakery and disinfo.

whether he "comes from an infested nest of evil misinformants and corrupted individuals" or is just a clueless dufus remains to be seen though.

what do you think?

[Indubitably]

There are a number of people involved in the 9/11 truth movement who are devious b******. Whose motives are hidden. Who have access to some truth. But who, in fact, never identify the liars and criminals. Who never call in to question the fake broadcast material and who never expose the fake 'witnesses'. Judge for yourself.

Who is PUBLICLY ACCOUNTABLE ? There's your answer.

[gruts]

are you publically accountable?

[Indubitably]

To the extent that I am prepared to answer for what I say and what I write, yes, I am accountable.

The same cannot be said of many plane 'eyewitnesses', cameramen, media producers, photographers etc. of 9/11/2001. In fact, they are UNACCOUNTABLE. Any argument ? None.

I trust nothing that is not accountable to fair and open scrutiny. That's the difference.

[gruts]

* - you swallowed "september clues" hook, lline and sinker.

and now that you've been shown some examples of how you were fooled, why don't you contact simon shack and ask him to explain some of these proven examples of deliberate deception and fakery in this series of videos? i'd be interested to know his response.

and how do you know that all the people who witnessed the planes are unaccountable? and how are you going to prove that they are all in fact wrong or lying or being mind-controlled by the perps or whatever?

any progress yet?

[chek]

[Indubitably]

It is not my job to demonstrate the types of artificial image fakery that are used by liars and criminals. These are of many kinds and there are experts enough who do this work. It is enough to show beyond reasonable doubt to reasonable men and women that liars and evil men are best condemned by playing back to them them their own words and atittudes.

Simon Shack is accountable for his own works. But the corporate media are not accountable. That is the difference.

The Nazis burned the Reichstag and blamed it on others. False flag terrrorism depends on criminals and agents of misinformation.

The witnessess, you say, are named and identified. Yes. You say they could be identified and subpoened whenever required. Then let them be subpeoned. On what basis ? On the basis that they are eyewitnesses to a crime who, until today, have not been publicly accountable and who, without such a subpoena show no evidence whatsoever of ever being publicly accountable.

[chek]

[John White]

Appeals to authority from Induitably again I see

Well tough luck mate:

It's the people's jury round here, and we ain't buying your dodgy motor

[truthseeker john]

[Indubitably]

OK TruthseekerJohn,

Do we agree that MOST of these buildings are being turned in to dust before the lower floors hit ground level ?

Yes or No ?

If most of the towers was turned in to dust before the lower floors hit Ground Zero these floors did NOT collapse on top of each other, did they ?

If you reply I will ask you a second question. See if you also agree with that.

[truthseeker john]

[Indubitably]

The basement shops of the Twin Towers were not collapsed by the debris from these towers being destroyed. It was so small. There are numerous photographs showing that the quantity of tower debris at Ground Zero is a tiny fraction of the mass of those two towers.

You already accept that these towers were being reduced to dust as they fell. And you fully accept that only the lower floors collapsed at Ground Zero. That leaves you the vast majority of the mass of these towers to account for.

There is also the fact that soil was spread across this debris on the evening and morning of the tragedy before it was carted away. This is typical of a site that has been subjected to some sort of chemical attack. The photographic evidence of wholesale vehicle destruction (this due to advanced weapons) is plain and indisputable.

It doesn't matter if you can't handle the facts. The fact that others will read of them is enough.

[chek]